NY Times Says No To Useful App Rather Than Improving Memory
from the backwards-thinking dept
I have to admit that, while I became a fan of Twitter a while back, it jumped up to a new level when I started using a client-side app called Tweetdeck. While the app has many problems (it is still beta), it allows you to make use of Twitter in a very different way -- laying out a series of groups and searches in near real time, such that it turns the stream of information into a series of very useful flows. From the perspective of trying to stay up on certain types of news, it's become the most important app on my desktop. There are many, many things I wish they would improve upon, with a big one being memory management. It sucks up memory like crazy. However, my solution was to go out and buy some more memory for my laptop. Apparently, the NY Times has gone in the other direction. Mathew Ingram points to an internal memo at the NY Times where it says that due to Tweetdeck's memory issues, the paper is asking employees not to use it anymore -- though, to their credit, it doesn't appear to be a demand, but a request. On top of that, the NY Times suggests that other apps can do the job. That may be true, but I've tested a bunch of different competing apps (hoping they could get over Tweetdeck's other shortcomings) but I'm back on Tweetdeck because those other apps have even more problems, but Ingram again explains the better solution: "I agree that Tweetdeck can be a memory hog, and can sympathize with the NYT-- but the solution is buy more RAM, not exclude Tweetdeck."Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: apps, memory, tweetdeck
Companies: ny times, tweetdeck
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's not bad software, you need more CPU.
It's not a memory hog, you need more ram.
Write more efficient code, and neither is required.
This is the same complaint made often about Microsoft. What the heck is up Mike, this is like two or three times you toss up things that are just not very bright at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Don't support poor quality software
I'm not going to buy ram because some jerkoff programmer can't develop properly.
Don't encourage crappy software.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yeah, don't support poor memory management!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Don't support poor quality software
I just DL'ed the app. Is it true the app is just a Shockwave file? Of course it's going to leak. Gawd. Get rid of it! Shockwave wasn't made for that..!
It's Free, but is it Open Source? If so, fork the source and let's start over!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I Love The Smell Of Garbage-Collection In The Morning
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What's Adobe Air?
I wonder what "Adobe Air" smells like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We have about 80 PCs where I work, and we're not really that big (I don't know how many NYT has). And right now, there's no budget for me to get overtime installing extra memory in 80 machines.
Sorry, but this article is very poorly thought out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Usually I can't stand it when I see people type what I am about to, but it seems to be warranted...
Idiot
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I can't disagree more
A large IT department can't upgrade all clients just because an app is poorly designed. The cost in manpower alone going to each computer and installing memory would be ridiculous just so employees can have a third party social app.
When the developer fixes his app then they could use the app. It's lazy programming to say just upgrade your computer because I don't want to fix my program just yet.
Regards,
Crash
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That's the better solution?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alternate solution
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I can't disagree more
To be clear, I agree that the programmer should fix the app -- absolutely. In fact I've publicly complained that the memory leak on Tweetdeck is a huge pain.
But that doesn't mean the NYT should ban it. For many reporters an app like Tweetdeck *is* an essential tool these days. Telling them they can't use it because of a memory leak is the wrong way to go about it.
No, it's not great that the app is poorly programmed, but that doesn't make the app any less *useful*.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who sent this?
I can't fault the IT guys for not wanting to spend god-awful amounts of money to deal with this silly app.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
More like a heads-up than a heads up their...
Basically, they say it's okay to use - just don't expect them to upgrade your machine when it slows down, which it will.
I have to agree with others here. It sounds like Tweetdeck should be treated like a proof of concept and rewritten for better performance. I'm sure the NY Times has a hardware upgrade cycle like any other prudent IT shop. You don't just go upgrade crazy because of one badly written app. UNLESS of course you're ready to take out an ill-advised loan that can't be supported by your current business model - no wait, Mike you were against that, too.
Besides, open source development moves FAST. Give it a few weeks. Someone will have a better rendition sooner than you think.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I can't disagree more
And this is the part where Mike backpedals on his implied assertion "But that doesn't mean the NYT should ban it," and says, yes, and I already said as much in my post.
We know, Mike, and even so, it's not just what you say. It's also how you say it. I'm still totally with you in general - just trying to help keep it real on this one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I wonder...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I wonder...
I wonder if it will run any better on a more compact, efficient kernel such as Linux, Unix (read: Mac) than the usual Commodity-Based Operating System.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pros and Cons
Con: it's beta software. It costs money to support unpredictable software that is by definition not ready for release. IT staff have to spend man-hours learning what the software is and does, how to work around its issues. Have you seen the NY Times stock price?
Con: it's *seriously flawed* beta software. With a known memory leak. It costs money to staff a help desk that reacts to help desk tickets that are *absolutely inevitable* with the use of this software. Have you seen the NY Times stock price?
Con: it's a memory hog. So let's say it comes out of beta but still requires 1GB or so to run. Are you seriously advocating spending 50K or so upgrading the entire newsroom to accommodate running this one app? What's the ROI on that one? And what about the next beta app the editors insists on? Do you just keep caving regardless of the cost?
Your personal decision to upgrade your memory has nothing at all to do with the realities of managing technology in a large company.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I can't disagree more
Second, a poorly programmed app is by defition less useful. I personally find apps more useful when they don't choke my machine into a near-unusable state.
Just sayin.'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Adobe Air
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I can't disagree more
And if it was found that this application was consuming enough extra resources that it was preventing any other work-related applications from running, resulting in lost productivity and an increased drain on IT tech support, then they most certainly should ban it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TweetDeck
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Other clients do the same...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Adobe Air
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Resources
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I do agree, more ram is not the solution to software that's not (yet) written correctly. The most you can do is report the bug (but I'm sure they know about it already) and hope they fix it in the next release.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So you expect the entire organization to invest in new ram for each computer using the software just because of a memory bug? That's an EXPENSIVE move.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Minimem
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Minimem looks pretty cool
Isn't that like using a military flamethrower to put out a kitchen frying pan fire by burning the house down around it so no one cares anymore?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hardware Costs
As others have mentioned it is not a simple or cheap task to add RAM to hundreds or possibly even thousands of PC's. Depending on the specific hardware and it's age it may well not even be possible to upgrade the RAM. My main PC at home is less then 3 years old and can not take more the 2GB of RAM. So if I wanted to upgrade to 4GB I would have to get a whole new motherboard, CPU, and RAM. I wouldn't be surprised if the NYT is in a similar situation with thier PCs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tweetdeck is awesome
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Adobe Air
In that case, the fault still lies with TweetDeck for using Air.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Then maybe the NY Times should be telling people not to be loading a bunch of buggy, pre-release beta crap on their work computers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I can't disagree more
[ link to this | view in thread ]