Re:Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up wi...
by charcircuit on Monday April 13, 2026 @10:07AM
(#47752203)
You are failing to consider the opportunity cost of how much more work-years can be saved by making a new feature.
Re:Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up wi...
by jstummbillig on Monday April 13, 2026 @12:51PM
(#47754796)
What world are you living in where the median piece of software has a million users? Or even a hundredth of that?
Re:Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up wi...
by TeMPOraL on Tuesday April 14, 2026 @03:07AM
(#47762238)
It's what many software companies dream of and aim for. But the same argument works with 10k users, or even 1k users.
Re:Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up wi...
by dns_snek on Tuesday April 14, 2026 @04:15AM
(#47762777)
[delayed]
Re:Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up wi...
by shermantanktop on Tuesday April 14, 2026 @10:16PM
(#47773885)
I work on software with millions of users..? Sure, it’s not the median, but it exists and there’s a lot of it.
Unfortunately the number of users and the collective value of their wasted time doesn’t make arguing for efficiency and performance any easier.
Re:Apple's accidental moat: How the "AI Loser" may end up wi...
by herewulf on Wednesday April 15, 2026 @06:16PM
(#47786052)
The one we're in where "software" doesn't just mean an app that someone downloads from a website or an app store. Software includes lots of server side components, etc, etc.
I once noticed my name in the Chromium OS credits due to a patch I had submitted to a library that's on every Chromebook. 1 million would be a small number for Chromebooks alone.
In a 5-year lifecycle that's about 10,000 years of human labour wasted. Yes, I had to quadruple-check this myself.
Does it take 10,000 work-years of effort, per project, to train its developers to write reasonably performant code?
Of course not all of this would translate into actual productivity gains but it doesn't have to.