Reading from Wikipedia Spirit sounds like a horrible low-cost Airline like Ryanair. Why should we rescue something which hurts employees and passengers?
If it would be TWA or PanAm my reaction would be positive.
The "low cost" in Ultra-Low-Cost-Carrier refers to the operating costs to the company, not the cost they charge for goods and services. Though they usually come in tandem.
No. It is using a central “well known server” and requires internet.
Test:
* Does it work in an airplane?
* Does it work in a submarine?
* Does it work in the mountains, when a thunderstorm is approach and you need to share the GPX?
Basically my Garmin Edge and iPhone can do this. Magic-Wormhole fails in all test cases.
Implementation shall be able to negoiate a connection locally (e.g. Bluetooth) and upgrade to peer-to-peer WiFi if need (Garmin doesn’t need that part, GPX are usually smaller than 1024 KB).
Modifications can be made to do that minimal peer exchange over BT. They may already exist, but I haven't used that part yet.
It seems like a lot of extra work to reinvent the wheel and get the security wrong instead of extending a well established protocol with many other tools built on top of it.
I think the author meant that she was just trying to work on her slides, and was hoping that by quitting/restarting, the bug would temporarily go away, so she could continue working on what she actually wanted to work on, and not go down a debugging rabbit hole.
Certainly the determinism made it easier to fix, but the determinism also meant that she had to stop what she was doing and fix it right now, which is... "sadly".
I suffered with Java from
Any, Maven and Gradle (the oldest is the the best). After reading about GNU Autotools I was wondering why the C/C++ folks still suffer? Right at that time Meson appeared and I skipped the suffering.
* No XML
* Simple to read and understand
* Simple to manage dependencies
* Simple to use options
Meson merges the crappy state of C/C++ tooling with something like Cargo in the worst way possible: by forcing you to handle the complexity of both. Nothing about Meson is simple, unless you're using it in Rust, in which case you're better off with Cargo.
In C++ you don't get lockfiles, you don't get automatic dependency install, you don't get local dependencies, there's no package registry, no version support, no dependency-wide feature flags (this is an incoherent mess in Meson), no notion of workspaces, etc.
Compared to Cargo, Meson isn't even in the same galaxy. And even compared to CMake, Meson is yet another incompatible incremental "improvement" that offers basically nothing other than cute syntax (which in an era when AI writes all of your build system anyway, doesn't even matter). I'd much rather just pick CMake and move on.
Build system generators (like Meson, autotools, CMake or any other one) can't solve programming language module and packaging problems, even in principle. So, it's not clear what your argument is here.
> I’m still surprised how people ignore Meson. Please test it :)
I did just that a few years ago and found it rather inconvenient and inflexible, so I went back to ignoring it. But YMMV I suppose.
Meson is indeed nice, but has very poor support for GPU compilation compared to CMake. I've had a lot of success adopting the practices described in this talk, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5Kg8TOTKjU. I thought I knew a lot of CMake, but file sets definitely make things a
lot simpler.
The last competitor remaining is Lenovo with the ThinkPads and pre-installed Linux [1].
But even Lenovo cripples them:
* You need to be very careful. Select alwaysCTO build with the best available display. But even then, Lenovo *removed* the HiDPI display from the X13. The only actual competitor to the MacBook Air is the ThinkPad X13.
* Lenovo added useless camera humps protruding out of the panel. There is a thick bezel and enough space for a much better camera. And for opening the laptop used to be a dent in the (round!) palmrest, nothing protruding.
* AMD, Intel and Lenovo fail to ship a fanless X13 and T14. I would happily keep same performance for two years, just getting rid of it.
* Lenovo is drowning us in Yogas, Z13 or whatever Legion.
They still have huge advantages (keyboard, maintenance manual, replacement parts, Linux compatibility, much more ports in case of the X14 and T14). Apples keyboards are nowadays “acceptable” but not even comparable to a good ThinkPad keyboard.
[1] By the love of god. Don’t order them with Windows! You are putting 80 to 130 euro right into Microsoft’s stock owners. And they will use it to harm Linux. And of course, making Windows even worse. They use it to harm you. Select Linux. Donate the rest (Fasst, GNOME, KDE…) or use it for the better display.
Lenovo's website is a disaster. Not only do they appear to have 100 sku's but on a 27" 5K Apple Studio Display I can see four laptops in the grid[1], which are actually cut off with their prices below the fold. Every single grid item has a "Katapult" lease to own offer, a "My Lenovo Rewards" offer (who the fuck is collecting rewards points from Lenovo, and what customer prioritizes the rewards they might earn over literally every other piece of information about the laptop?). There are 30 copies of the "®" symbol on the page. It's honestly a lesson in how not to design an e-commerce site.
I know Lenovo has their issues, but out of all the non-Apple laptop companies, they are by far the best out there. And to their credit, they do try to listen to customer feedback.
Also, AFAIK, Lenovo still has their ThinkPad designs developed by a design think-tank lab in Japan that they own (and IBM still has a bit of influence here as well) so I know Lenovo still gives somewhat of a damn in trying to develop a solid laptop.
Only the T and X series benefit from the Japanese design studios though and have the build quality to match. The E and L series are indistinguishable from a myriad of bargain bin business laptops, including Lenovo's own ideapads.
Even just within the Thinkpad lineup, their website is a mess. Let's even restrict ourselves to just T series Thinkpads.
First, the page looks like it misrenders with garish, inverse-color boxes breaking the apparent margin of the page. Then we get to the models:
* ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 (14" Snapdragon) Laptop
* ThinkPad T16g Gen 3 (16" Intel) Laptop
* ThinkPad T1g Gen 8 (16" Intel) Laptop
* ThinkPad T14 Gen 6 (14" AMD) Laptop
* ThinkPad T14s 2-in-1 (14" Intel) Laptop
… that's just the first row. There are 17 items shown. Mostly it's just a poor presentation: there's ~3-4 actual lines, and the rest of what's show is combinatorical complexity of the various ways you can customize them. It's a crapshoot of a presentation.
The builds themselves seem worse now than they have before: they're overall more expensive for what you're getting vs. a few years ago. E.g., the GPU is … gone? They're all iGPUs now. They include a "45%NTSC" screen by default, which is something I've never heard of, and I thought sRGB was the literal bottom of the barrel, but I guess we can go deeper. The warranty is pathetic, but so too is Apple's.
You are right, you can get them without Windows now.
Tenth of millions of devices were sold (somewhere between 20 to 35 Million?). You could build multiple plants for it, with government funding in Europe.
The MBAs at Apple noticed:
* Big size is a status symbol in Asia. And TV replacement. Their a lot of people in Asia.
* Due to vendor lock-in people need to purchase anyway. So just sell them the standard phone.
They got the sales anyway. We don’t have a “functional market”. But Apples marketing was weird. They named it Mini instead of Compact or Air. And launched it against the SE? A lot people already refused to move from the SE 1st Gen to the Mini, to due the increased size and missing TouchID.
So Apple assumed people want even bigger Max or Air. The Air which is actually much thicker most other phones. Both seem to fail.
It's a bit of a shame that the 10a introduction price was pretty much the same as the Pixel 10 by that time. The Pixel 10 has a much better SoC and PixelSnap.
10a will be worth it when the price drops down to 350 Euro.
What I don’t like about FaceID is the premature unlocking. If you pass your phone to someone else it can unlock, especially for taking photos. And to allow strangers to make photos is intentional that’s why the camera app doesn’t need an unlock.
Aside from that all the gestures, positions and holding points are annoying. The usage of TouchID is simpler.
Apple could at least fix the security issue by unlocking only after swiping up. FaceID? Isn’t fast enough? Well. Than TouchID is better.
* Are simple to grasp for uses * Efficient to use (not just resource wise) * Look nice on nice terminals
Notcurses (C++) and Ratatui (Rust) did help ncurses (C) a lot.
reply