Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
It's more of that they don't care about how much their internet browser take. But some random program taking 200-500 MB or more? Heresy!
They will then go on a crusade to try and fix this. When in reality it won't help with performance.
Say, a person with a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ computer is using a software with an undocumented memory leak. Overtime the bits will stack way too much and the program will crash. The person will either investigate the issue and report the leak or they will think "well my computer sucks so that's why" and make nothing of it.
A person with a high-end or reasonably powerful computer will most likely notice the memory usage that's on ridiculously high levels and report the leak.
Obviously this scenerio assumes that the person with a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ computer doesn't give a ♥♥♥♥ about tech so I'm unsure how well of an argument this is.
i don't care about you though.
btw i "solved" the problem, really it will have to be solved on devs end.
but for now i had to enable "randomize memory allocations (bottom-up ASLR) for it, unfortunately...
What does randomized memory allocation have to do with any of this?
to think that some one is just unaffected, hahaha.