kkirsche

Happy for the team, sad for users. I just don’t believe their work will continue under new ownership

I’d recommend checking out Nick Milo’s ideaverse. The idea is about how to capture in a way that sparks ideas and actions not collects

This has been my experience. Just a bunch of ego stroking

I wish people would stop holding onto compatibility as if it is some amazing feature. It has benefits, but also comes with many drawbacks to innovation and improvement in established ecosystems

I love their software and am happy for the humans behind it all. As a customer who doesn’t believe they won’t force a subscription on me, I wish I had never supported them

Many large companies suffer from the concept of shadow IT. The use of software and services that aren’t blessed by the company to accomplish tasks that are blessed. As someone in security at a large company, I expect this is a matter of not every company has people who follows rules. I know I’ve seen and know, even within security orgs, plenty of people who don’t follow the rules because a few bad rules makes them feel that other important rules are also bad. It’s pretty simple to bypass the software companies use to “enforce” the rules

Broadly speaking, yes, but for some situations like database models with bi-directional relationships that can cause unnecessary maintenance burden simply for the benefit of type checking which this allows you to work around since the cyclical nature is only caused by typing not runtime semantics

I tried to use custom css in vscode but couldn’t figure out how to get it to work.

I think this is where concepts from Rust and Go could come in handy. Things like Go’s race condition detection and rust’s compiler validation approaches can be used to statically analyze code. Sure, it’s a meaningful change from how many Python devs approach the language and challenging problem but not insurmountable given the existing work in the field.

That’s not what that library was in my opinion, it was a compatibility layer not a rewriting tool which is what I referenced. Having a layer in between simply prolongs the issue and creates many types of problems based on adoption or not. On the other hand, when rewriting you can apply that either as an author or as an end user depending on the quality which meaningfully allows for different results.

Seeing so many comments about how hard it is to just break compatibility and upgrade is sad. Instead of just throwing our hands up and saying it’s too hard, we could adopt the model the JavaScript ecosystem has seen more of which is codemods that upgrade the code for us.

If as a community we invest in those tools and make them easier to build, the cost of upgrading goes down and the velocity of high-impact changes can increase.

iPads are amazing for certain professional tasks:

- Artists (still or motion) - Writing (or related tasks like Editing) - Mobile roles (sales, aspects of healthcare such as patient record accessibility, etc)

But, even in these cases with there is good alignment, you still lose productivity over a more traditional setup, usually due to restrictions around file management, keyboard shortcuts (usually due to “less than” applications not that the machine is incapable), security (what happens to data on the device if it’s lost or stolen), and window management (if you end up needing multiple monitors for your iPad is that really the best tool?)

I wish and want the iPad to be a true professional machine, but it’s not. It’s an amazing supplementary machine though as a reference screen, drawing pad, media consumption (e.g., tutorials), etc.

I guess I don’t understand how you end up believing it’ll be the best fit if you’ve used one in the past 3-5 years.