Nowadays, I see Java developers (and JavaScript) release *GIGANTIC* modules simply because "we all have broadband and 16GB of RAM". It's pathetic.
To be fair, developer time is more expensive than machine time, so it's a commercial decision.
It's also about the customer's time though, time spent to load things, time shopping for and installing more memory when increasing demands of new software cause problems with an otherwise-good computer, etc.. I do wish the developers would be more considerate.
I love the 6502 but I don't think I'd give up being able to write a piece of code in Ruby to iron out the bugs first before porting it to 6502 assembly.
I try things out interactively in Forth on my 6502
workbench computer. When the concept is proven, I can re-write things in assembly and try again, without having to change any of the software that uses it.
I have benefited a ton from being able to process pictures on the computer and incorporate them in emails, watch YouTube videos on computer history, aircraft, science, health, etc.; but as long as I can still see more optimization to be had on the 8-bitters in both hardware and software, I'm committed to the little guys, and I'll leave the 32- and 64-bit stuff for someone else and ask them to make more efficient use of the resources and not expect us all to have this year's latest computer like their bosses give them since it's their living and they can't be wasting time. They forget that.
I remember many years ago (late 1980's?) when a new technology was introduced that improved memory prices and speed a lot in one step, and immediately Microsoft was saying, "This is great because now we don't have to be as careful and we can get new software out faster," and what happened is that the user never got the benefit. Boot-up times made no net improvement, the "disc full" messages came up just as often, and there were just as many bugs.
Today's technology has brought about a lot of conveniences, but I have to say it has not improved the "happiness factor" of life.