In what way has Mate become the main Linux shell? It’s not the DE of choice for the most popular distributions so it likely doesn’t have a lot of exposure among Linux environments.
When you think about how many people use Johnny No Good Hacker’s lastest ROM because it’s largely the OEM supported Android x with one or two Android ++x supported features, it really sounds like a good idea.
It would be nice if there were a safe way to bypass that “immobilizer,” though for people that trust their ROM origin and the software on their phone.
> Chromium is awesome, it really is. But not for embedders.
> the API is currently available for C++ only and requires Direct3D 11 on Windows and Metal on macOS.
“Embedders” here seems to mean “people who want to embed a web UI in a desktop application.” This confused me at first because I wondered why an embedded systems UI framework only supported Windows and macOS instead of Windows and small Unixes.
They recruited heavily from the IT program at my university in Arkansas to the point that everyone pretty much knew the recruiter.
Somewhere during my time there I walked up to this recruiter expecting them to be recruiting for Acxiom and was surprised to see them recruiting for someone else. The whole thing (including details I’m omitting) seemed odd to me, but this might explain it.
You could argue that the art of cave painting or tablet engraving was lost to make way for manuscripts written on papyrus and that was lost to make way for the printing press and so on.
Losing craft for efficiency will happen as civilizations advance, but one thing to keep in mind is the amount of craft that went into sending an email. It can be at the level of writing an email server with a high uptime and a client that reads them reliably. It can go down to bits and byte. And that doesn’t account for the crafting of the hardware that those software run on or the effort that went into the infrastructure to carry those signals.
The trend is that each individual that has an idea to share has to put less effort into sharing their own idea, but that doesn’t mean that what we built no longer requires craft. The tragedy is that we don’t see and appreciate the monumental craft that went into making email work in the first place. I’d argue that whole process requires more craft, but the sender and recipient of the emails don’t have to understand it.
I think the article opens by stating a pretty strong disadvantage:
Flutter apps run as Android apps and so are less "native" than something like a PWA or react app, which would just run in the browser.
The article doesn't address my concern at all and I was hoping to have some constructive feedback about that concern, which did not happen.