I totally disagree with that kind of argument. As a software developer, it is my job to ship good software as fast as I can. Why on earth would I purposely use a tool that is slowing me in the process ? I want the best tool I can afford so that I can concentrate on delivering, not cursing and patching.
There is tools, metrics and theories available to make sure what you ship is working on slower machines. There is no way I'm compromising my efficiency for something that can be tested otherwise. I don't mean you need to blow out $6k on a Macbook. I'm using a T470 with i5, 500gig SSD, 16 gigs of RAM with Fedora 29 as my daily driver and it's plenty enough to develop stable, fast and low resource cost software.
In my opinion no, unless there is negligence. Companies providing tools should not prevent themselves to release features on the premise the users need a powerful machine (their is limit, yes but in general IDEs use resources decently).
I totally disagree with that kind of argument. As a software developer, it is my job to ship good software as fast as I can. Why on earth would I purposely use a tool that is slowing me in the process ? I want the best tool I can afford so that I can concentrate on delivering, not cursing and patching.
There is tools, metrics and theories available to make sure what you ship is working on slower machines. There is no way I'm compromising my efficiency for something that can be tested otherwise. I don't mean you need to blow out $6k on a Macbook. I'm using a T470 with i5, 500gig SSD, 16 gigs of RAM with Fedora 29 as my daily driver and it's plenty enough to develop stable, fast and low resource cost software.
I am sure the InteliJ and Atom developers share the same opinion.
Exactly, and their target audience is developers, meaning they have even looser performance standards.
So how can you hope to be productive when you need to use those?
Don't you think this is kind of vicious circle, that need to be broken somehow?
In my opinion no, unless there is negligence. Companies providing tools should not prevent themselves to release features on the premise the users need a powerful machine (their is limit, yes but in general IDEs use resources decently).
Sure, it's a positive feedback loop. All I'm saying is they're acting rationally.
More rationally than boycotting them would be for those developers whose productivity in their job would be severely impacted by doing so.