It definitely feels like it was edited with AI, structure and tone seem like the usual AI "polish".
Lately I've been working on an embedded system with limited access to std lib/libc and this was very interesting but I was hoping to see more information, like how can I tell if something will be supported? what are alternatives? what does implementation specific mean?
I guess I am used to HN having more in-depth articles.
yeah! there are a few for the quest, heck, there is even a port of cities skylines!.
But all of them run into the fact that making a good simulation (VR or not) requires time and money, and that's something VR games rarely have in abundance.
I think the main point is not emphasized enough: VR is physically exhausting.
Unless you are playing with stick control (which is nice but nauseating) you will be moving a lot, I am a big guy that can barely kneel and you expect me to do super soldier stuff? yeah, no
I find the best experiences for me are those that require less "getting your VR legs": puzzling places, zombieland or that kayak infiltration game.
Of course everybody has different preferences, but to the author's point: not everyone wants (or can) play high intensity action games (which is what AAA focuses on).
As an aside: the other big one are sports games (usually racquet), playing ping pong or tennis feels realistic and its a good exercise.
I work on a project with a decent ratio of engineers:designers. A good designer is not just "ideas people", they are fairly technical without getting into the nitty gritty.
If one side gets too much power then it can land in situations like you describe (design makes unrealistic requests, or engineering over constraints the product). When the balance is right then working becomes quite amazing, nothing better than seeing my work (engineering) used to make stuff I couldn't even think of and I can see the appreciation of helping design make their vision come true.
This is basically what I say every time someone brings up "AI will destroy the world". It seems this cycle will be longer thanks to cloud and people having access to the tools directly in their pockets, so it will take a while to become obvious that there are limitations that cannot be easily solved.
It also seems we are seeing the specific applications in the wild, and as the author points out they are still staunchly called AI. I am talking about Adobe's use in Photoshop or phones using AI to enhance pictures; concise and commercially viable uses that are very far from the doom and gloom (or castle in the sky) predictions.
This seems like goal post moving. The question was if the migration was complicated, the answer is yes.
Whether or not APFS is revolutionary or the best option is not the discussion. The core fact is that Apple needed to move away from HFS+ and they decided to move to their own FS, which brought in a bunch of changes that are standard in other OSs.
And they did it in a smooth and fairly uneventful way, so that's remarkable.
I didn't realize this was so common.
In my crazy days I wrote a SSG using only XSLT, so you wrote a big xml with the content and it would output a full site ready to upload.
It needed a specific XSLT processor as most couldn't generate individual files, but it was nice that it worked with off the shelf software, so technically I didn't write a single line of code.
The problem is not stealing the design, the problem is stealing the design, getting a patent based on it then suing you.
Even if its obviously a bogus patent the cost and time required to fight it off can kill your company.
Lately I've been working on an embedded system with limited access to std lib/libc and this was very interesting but I was hoping to see more information, like how can I tell if something will be supported? what are alternatives? what does implementation specific mean?
I guess I am used to HN having more in-depth articles.