Why is the LinkedIn app almost half a gig?
LinkedIn’s iOS app has grown to nearly half a gigabyte, prompting scrutiny of how large corporate apps accumulate bloat through duplicated libraries, abandoned features, and PM‑driven feature creep rather than deliberate engineering. Commenters contrast this with cases like Uber, where some of the size is justified by complex localization and regional feature sets, and argue that organizational incentives, not the tech stack, are the main drivers of inefficiency. Many note practical downsides for users on constrained devices and see the trend as part of a wider problem of poorly optimized web and mobile software whose size and performance rarely factor into product metrics.
App size and observed bloat
- LinkedIn’s iOS app approaches ~500 MB; some analysis in the thread notes 300 MB+ just in dynamic frameworks/plugins and a Today Extension that grew from <1 MB to ~60 MB despite being deprecated by Apple.
- Many see this as “death by a thousand cuts”: repeated additions of frameworks, plugins, and duplicated assets over time, not a single big feature.
- Several compare this to other bloated apps (banks, email, chat widgets, login SDKs), and to LinkedIn’s own web client, which can hit >1 GB RAM and heavy CPU.
Localization and feature breadth
- Uber is cited as an example where app size partially comes from localization and region-specific logic: translations, currencies, payment SDKs, and different ride types and flows per country or city.
- Some question whether mere strings should be that large; others point out that “localization” here includes feature sets, flows, guides, tax/regulation screens, and region-specific services.
- For LinkedIn, people speculate less about travel-related locale needs and more about bundled global functionality and frameworks.
Organizational and incentive problems
- Multiple comments argue the root cause is organizational, not tech stack:
- Huge teams, PM-driven “feature frenzy,” resume-driven development, and OKR systems that reward shipping visible features, not performance or size.
- Architects and code reviews are described as largely powerless against deadline pressure and politics.
- Perf and size regressions become the new baseline; refactors are postponed with “fix later” tickets that never get done.
User experience, dark patterns, and mobile web
- Many complain that LinkedIn’s mobile web experience is intentionally degraded with nags to install the app, making the app more central despite its bloat.
- Similar behavior is noted on other services (e.g., forced locale changes, cookie-based “personalization” tied to tracking consent).
- Some see this as user-hostile and trust-reducing, and avoid installing such apps entirely.
Impact on users and installs
- Several argue app size does affect installations, especially for users with limited storage or data; others note that stores provide analytics that can reveal this.
- Counterpoint: one view is that storage and bandwidth are cheap enough for most LinkedIn’s target users that a 500 MB app is acceptable.
“Size isn’t the core problem” perspective
- A minority defends large apps: LinkedIn is a complex “super-app” and prioritizing developer velocity over tight optimization is rational.
- They argue install size does not automatically imply bad runtime performance, though others counter with examples where bloat and slowness clearly correlate.