Why is the LinkedIn app almost half a gig?

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

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.