No, because hardware and storage keep getting better, for cheaper. In the mid '90s, I had an electronic poket organizer (calendar, phone book that could only store something like 256 phone numbers, note pad, calculator, and world map with timezones) that had a whopping 32k of memory. This memory was RAM and ran off of 2 cell batteries. You had to guesstimate when the batteries were low, and then change them quickly, one at a time. If it lost the power fully by having the batteries die or both be out at the same time, all of your data was lost. This wonderful for the time gizmo cost about $100, when minimum wage was less than $5 and my $500,000 house only cost around $60,000. The PCs at the time were mostly 386 processors, a few people had 486s. The RAM of these PCs was usually 2Mb, you would need to upgrade to 4Mb if you wanted to play a new game like "Syndicate". Don't forget to buy a sound card for that PC if you wanted sound. Hard drive? Probably 40 MB on the low end up to 100MB on the high end. The developers of that time had to be VERY aware of how their software was going to be affected by the hardware of their users. If you made something too large, or that required more processing speed or RAM than the average PC owner had, you were limiting the number of potential people who could own your program and make you money. These days, most PCs can handle most of the software out there, and the developers can get stats from places like Steam to see how many users have whatever hardware (or better) that they would require before they write the first line of code. As long as the ability of most of our machines can handle what people are willing to program into them, we won't see developers trying to save space or be very efficient with using up the PC resources.