But in defense of Java, modern Java is actually pretty pleasant.
Virtual threads, records and sealed classes, pattern matching, state-of-the-art garbage collectors, a great standard library etc. (and obviously well-behaved enums).
Not to mention the other languages you get for free with the JVM ecosystem.
It might not be as expressive as Rust, but certainly Java/JVM > Go.
Ah perhaps the app is using bedtime mode for its functionality? Didn't get a chance to try it myself yet, but great that pausing is already implemented.
I use Android's Bedtime mode a lot, and it has a helpful feature that let's you quickly "Pause for 30 minutes" or "Turn off for now" from a notification [1].
I don't think the app needs notifications as such, but it could have quick access to a pause button.
> pharmaceutical and biotechnology sales revenue increased from $534 billion to $775 billion between 2006 and 2015
> worldwide company-reported R&D spending, most of which went to drug development (rather than research) ... $89 billion in 2015 dollars
> During the same period, federal spending, which funded a greater amount of basic research relative to industry, remained stable at around $28 billion
So only ~11% of total revenue was being reinvested, mostly into drug development.
And basic research was funded largely by federal spending.
> this is not a hard problem to solve in idiomatic Go.
Genuinely asking, what would the solution look like in idiomatic Go?
Let's assume for a second that the premise of the article is valid and exactly the behavior we want - "asynchronous execution but to report the results in order, as each becomes available".
I agree. Though to be fair Nintendo's NES is a gaming console (not that they are right, just contrasting the use-cases).
Consider Apple's very own Mac - another general-purpose computing device like the iPhone, only in a different form-factor.
Surely Mac developers must be tripping over themselves to throw 30% of their total revenue at Apple, as reward for their laser focus on privacy and security and for developing a nanny-platform that makes their users feel warm and fuzzy inside?
Surely Mac users must not be allowed to do business with literally any entity in the world without involving Apple as the gatekeeper?
I'm going to reply here to provide a bit more context, since many of the threads are diving too deep into the specifics of linux/foss/openness/ideology, which was unfortunately not the point.
The main crux of my comment is about being able to "own" your own device. A hackable device is better than a closed device, more choice is better than no choice.
Is it so hard to believe that if Microsoft or Apple had a death grip on Windows and MacOs respectively, restricting completely the kinds of things you could do on these platforms unless individually blessed, that there would be a far less interesting ecosystem of apps / capabilities available than what we have today?
As an example, one cannot build AWS on an iPad. Like literally cannot - the tools are either not available or are significantly crippled, since you may use them to circumvent Apple's gatekeeper cut.
That's the main idea, make smartphones and tablets, smartwatches, vr headsets etc. more like traditional desktop devices.
A lot of people are quick to lock themselves into a gatekeeper's walled garden, and throw away the keys.
That Linux has not only survived for so long, but thrived, is a true testament to the will, technical expertise, and product vision of community developers.
FOSS was founded on the principles of openness and collaboration, something that we need now more than ever, as the largest companies of the world have managed to weaken that resolve through slick marketing and anti-competitive practices.
Think of what truly open VR headsets, smartwatches, tablets and smartphones etc. would be capable of, the rich ecosystem of apps and capabilities that could exist - but greed is literally holding us back by decades.
Think of the kids growing up now, forced to be consumers rather than producers. And compare them to the last century, the sense of wonder and expression that the internet and infinitely hackable devices brought.
It was revolutionary, and many of the giants that exist now were built literally on the backs of that openness.
> The burden of proof is on the people requesting the feature.
Fortunately there are other reasons why a business may be forced to do something, and not allowed to be the sole judge/jury/executioner.
One of those is anti-trust action - something that greatly benefits humanity as a whole, even though the alternative may (or may not) be cheaper for the business.
Other examples are employee protections, consumer protections, constitutional amendments etc.
Please do tell us more about why the Photos "app" is unique and wasn't uninstallable to begin with, surely it's not a business decision made explicitly to increase vendor lock-in and introduce friction to consumer choice (like the rest of the Apple suite of "apps").
Oh but we do care. Not every app developer is a dealership, a car is used in a much broader context.
Some may be like Uber, turning the car into a taxi service, or like Turo, allowing it to be rented. Others may be independent mechanics that can work on the car perfectly fine without access to blessed tools.
There is no cost passed on to the customer because the car manufacturer does not enforce a percentage cut of Uber's or Turo's revenue.
That said, there is likely no perfect analogy in cars. We can instead turn to MacOs / Windows / Linux etc., general purpose computing platforms that do not suffer from a gatekeeper's stranglehold.
But a car is used for more things than going to the dealership, and the dealership does not sell me groceries. Perhaps I want to race, or carry ikea furniture, or jump start another car - it is a general-purpose transportation device.
Similarly, I dream of going to Epic's website to download some Fortnite, maybe charge a thousand vbucks to mom's credit card if I'm feeling adventurous, and that has nothing to do with Apple or iOS.
This is how every single general-purpose computing platform (including Apple's MacOs) and the open internet has worked for multiple decades.
Why not? You are presumably less-clothed in a pool, it could take pictures. Or record private conversations. Or both.
But sure, here's another -
You can run any company's software on a MBP, downloaded from the internet, without paying a dime to Apple. Similar situation applies to Windows / Microsoft.
The iOS model is advocating for rent-seeking in MacOs and Windows binaries.
True, though the situation isn't exactly equivalent.
Using another real estate analogy -
Imagine you bought a house from Fruit Builders company. The house came with a pool.
Now unlike every other pool in existence, this is a very special pool that just really cares about your privacy and security a lot.
It won't let you use any random pool toy (it has lasers), no it must be a well-behaved toy that is rigorously tested and officially notarized by Fruit company themselves (= non-employee contractors taking one look to make sure Fruit's cut is not being circumvented).
So you go to the supermarket, purchase a marked-up toy, the toy company reports its earning to Fruit, and Fruit takes their cut.
I agree with your point about Go enums.
But in defense of Java, modern Java is actually pretty pleasant.
Virtual threads, records and sealed classes, pattern matching, state-of-the-art garbage collectors, a great standard library etc. (and obviously well-behaved enums).
Not to mention the other languages you get for free with the JVM ecosystem.
It might not be as expressive as Rust, but certainly Java/JVM > Go.