Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> It reminds me of when, e.g., a 1990s-2000s Windows user needed a small program that does one thing, and in order to get it, the download from Microsoft was an installer with hundreds of megabytes of unneeded binary files. It was not possible to download only the single program, which was no more than 1-2MB in size.

That might have been more to do with how hard publishing code to the web was back then, an internal process problem, which discouraged tiny stand alone exes from being put online.




It has always been possible. Sysinternals was doing it 20 years ago. The catch is you had to build with Win32 and not the framework du jour.


wxWidgets has very low overhead. I think I have done some stuff that's also 1-2MB and much easier to code than plain Win32.


i don't buy it. dpkg was released in 1994, and that was designed to tame the nest of people passing around small executables on the internet.


> i don't buy it. dpkg was released in 1994, and that was designed to tame the nest of people passing around small executables on the internet.

The problem is corporate policy. In the yee old days, publishing content to MSDN was not easy. Bill Gate's rant[0] on this topic gives some insight.

Grabbing small EXEs is now a lot easier. See: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/

[0]http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2008/06/24/full-text-an-...


I knew which rant that was going to be before I even clicked on the link. Great memo. Really refreshing Software companies need leadership who actually dogfood the software they make and who care enough to rant when quality, usability, performance, etc. has gone to shit. Too many seem to simply have their noses in their competitors' feature checklists, so their E-mails are all "Company X has Feature Y. Why can't we have Feature Y??"


designed to facilitate, rather




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: