Hiring a competent admin can prove more expensive than hiring who's available to you in your city, especially in low-cost-of-living parts of the country or world where time costs an employer far less than 100 USD per hour. The cost to license proprietary software for these 100 machines can also prove substantial.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever with stating that the keyboard-detection failed, please plug in a keyboard, and then press F1 as a positive-verification test.
If the hardware cannot handle keyboard hot-plugging, it's a very bad idea for an error message to encourage keyboard hot-plugging. A lot of implementations of the AT and PS/2 keyboard interface did not support hot-plugging; doing so would cause them to permanently stop working.
Keyboard dependence also discourages use of a machine with input devices other than a keyboard, such as headless servers or joystick-driven video game players.
How does it not follow? I speculate that lawmakers would consider drawing a distinction between the obscure language of the Native American code talkers and something as intricate as OpenPGP in that the former is practical without electronic assistance and the latter is not.
In some countries, Bayer still owns trademarks on "Aspirin" and "Milk of Magnesia". In these countries, the generic name for liquid magnesium hydroxide suspension is "cream of magnesia".
"WebKit" and "WebKit derived" are very, very different things. You begin to notice this once a web application displays an incompatibility error message instead of loading because Apple WebKit fails to implement a particular web platform API, unlike the Blink engine that was originally forked from Apple WebKit. Or can every single feature missing from Apple WebKit be efficiently polyfilled?
In the real world, C is prone to all sorts of all-too-common human errors, including bugs that results from code not matching the semantics implied by indentation.
If you regularly collaborate over lossy channels that modify whitespace, set up a pre-commit hook in your version control system that checks and repairs indentation. This is possible for C, PHP, Java, C++, Pascal, or JavaScript, but not for Python.
Having to download and run two installers to run a single application causes a greater fraction of abandoned installations than having to download and run only one installer. Electron applications require one; Java applications require two: JRE and the application itself. Web applications require zero.
I concede that Edge is not free software, unlike Chromium and Firefox. I concede that acquiring an Edge license is not without charge, unlike Google Chrome and Firefox. But the fraction of PCs worldwide that are already licensed to run Edge is far greater than the fraction of PCs worldwide that are already licensed to run recent Safari. The Edge fraction is above the threshold, the Safari fraction not so much.
In addition, compiled, native C/C++ runs a lot better than interpreted javascript garbage
How efficiently does a program written in C or C++ and compiled to x86-64 native code run on an ARM device or vice versa?
running inside what's basically another framework that sits on top of the OS.
In order to make a single program written in C++ run on Windows, macOS, and X11/Linux, you need something like Qt, which is also "another framework that sits on top of the OS."
And the most ideal solution, not abusing the web to run applocations in the mother of all inner-platform effect software design anti-patterns
What would you recommend instead? Writing the applications in Java and requiring everyone to download a Java VM? Writing the applications in Python and requiring everyone to download a Python interpreter? Writing the applications in Swift or Objective-C and requiring everyone to buy a Mac?
Almost everybody on mobile uses Chrome, which is not stuck with Webkit.
As I understand SuperKendall's posting history, he's referring to the "sheer number of mobile devices as well that" are "stuck with WebKit". StatCounter claims that Safari and other WebKit wrappers made up half of all mobile page views in the United States over the past month: 50.84% Safari, 41.63% Chrome, 4.88% Samsung Internet, and less than 1% each for Puffin, Firefox, UC Browser, Opera, etc.
Chrome for Chrome OS, X11/Linux, Windows desktop, and macOS isn't based on WebKit. Chrome for iOS is still based on WebKit, as is every single other browser that runs on iOS.
If your website doesn't work on WebKit, it's probably because you're using new standards that WebKit either never bothered implementing
Correct. Web developers are complaining that WebKit "never bothered implementing" things that Firefox and Chrome have long supported. It was last to get WebGL, for example. It still doesn't play WebM, as far as I'm aware. Even something as old as <input type="file"> was completely unsupported in Safari for iOS for five years.
What else is the browser supposed to do visually when the user has closed the last tab? Keep the window open with no tabs in it? Keep the application open with no windows open? Other than macOS, does any major PC GUI operating system even have a concept of an application remaining open after its last window is closed?
Safari costs $499 (source: Best Buy). Most people (except professional web developers) aren't willing to buy a second computer or second phone just to run a web browser. These comparisons include Edge despite it being exclusive to Windows 10 because Windows 10 has a much larger installed base than macOS and X11/Linux.
Because far fewer users of Windows applications have Python installed than have a web browser installed, either each end user would have to locate, download, and install the Python interpreter, or the developer would need to convert the script to a stand-alone application by bundling a copy of the interpreter with the application. Which of these two were you anticipating?
When I tried to convert a small Python+Pygame application that I developed to a stand-alone executable, it was 21 MB. In addition, Windows SmartScreen produces the "Windows protected your PC / Don't run" interstitial if not a lot of people have already downloaded and run the executable. What fraction of users would consider this an acceptable tradeoff?
Attempting to swing it back on topic: One might blocklist hostnames that serve unwanted scripts as a means of recovering the 10-13 percent of RAM that Chrome's Site Isolation is using.
At the same time doing in Cygwin bash what his app is purporting to be doing hardly takes more than 5 minutes.
Would there be merit in building the blocklist builder tool that I sketched in this article?
And on top of that, if you are doing [DNS blocklisting] per machine, you are doing it wrong.
The operator of a LAN could apply changes to devices on the LAN by configuring its DHCP server to point DNS at a local Pi-hole instance. But when you're out in public using your laptop on public Wi-Fi, you need a local blocklist if you're not running all of your laptop's DNS traffic through your Pi-hole at home.
Then don't give Google your credit card. Instead, give Google your debit card. Were you expecting to be able to instead pay by paper check or money order?
Let's say an application developer owns a Mac. He can choose to develop an application as a Mac application or as a web application. If he develops the application as a web application, then any user with a web browser can run it. But if he develops the application as a Mac application, then only those users whose computer happens to be a Mac can run it. Would you prefer to have to buy a Mac to run one application and buy a Windows PC[1] to run a second application?
[1] Yes, it's possible to virtualize Windows on a Mac, but only if you thought ahead and paid extra to order your Mac with enough RAM to run both macOS and Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Hiring a competent admin can prove more expensive than hiring who's available to you in your city, especially in low-cost-of-living parts of the country or world where time costs an employer far less than 100 USD per hour. The cost to license proprietary software for these 100 machines can also prove substantial.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever with stating that the keyboard-detection failed, please plug in a keyboard, and then press F1 as a positive-verification test.
If the hardware cannot handle keyboard hot-plugging, it's a very bad idea for an error message to encourage keyboard hot-plugging. A lot of implementations of the AT and PS/2 keyboard interface did not support hot-plugging; doing so would cause them to permanently stop working.
Keyboard dependence also discourages use of a machine with input devices other than a keyboard, such as headless servers or joystick-driven video game players.
How does it not follow? I speculate that lawmakers would consider drawing a distinction between the obscure language of the Native American code talkers and something as intricate as OpenPGP in that the former is practical without electronic assistance and the latter is not.
Can you interpret your language in real time without electronic assistance?
In some countries, Bayer still owns trademarks on "Aspirin" and "Milk of Magnesia". In these countries, the generic name for liquid magnesium hydroxide suspension is "cream of magnesia".
The real problem is that a single manufacturer isn't allowed to build both phones with Google Apps and phones with only AOSP.
"WebKit" and "WebKit derived" are very, very different things. You begin to notice this once a web application displays an incompatibility error message instead of loading because Apple WebKit fails to implement a particular web platform API, unlike the Blink engine that was originally forked from Apple WebKit. Or can every single feature missing from Apple WebKit be efficiently polyfilled?
It's what people use to make the apps you run on your iPad.
In the real world, C is prone to all sorts of all-too-common human errors, including bugs that results from code not matching the semantics implied by indentation.
If you regularly collaborate over lossy channels that modify whitespace, set up a pre-commit hook in your version control system that checks and repairs indentation. This is possible for C, PHP, Java, C++, Pascal, or JavaScript, but not for Python.
In other words, "4G LTE" is really 4G Lite. I don't know when the "i" got dropped.
Phone has monthly fees and per-minute fees on top of what you already pay for Internet.
Having to download and run two installers to run a single application causes a greater fraction of abandoned installations than having to download and run only one installer. Electron applications require one; Java applications require two: JRE and the application itself. Web applications require zero.
I concede that Edge is not free software, unlike Chromium and Firefox. I concede that acquiring an Edge license is not without charge, unlike Google Chrome and Firefox. But the fraction of PCs worldwide that are already licensed to run Edge is far greater than the fraction of PCs worldwide that are already licensed to run recent Safari. The Edge fraction is above the threshold, the Safari fraction not so much.
In addition, compiled, native C/C++ runs a lot better than interpreted javascript garbage
How efficiently does a program written in C or C++ and compiled to x86-64 native code run on an ARM device or vice versa?
running inside what's basically another framework that sits on top of the OS.
In order to make a single program written in C++ run on Windows, macOS, and X11/Linux, you need something like Qt, which is also "another framework that sits on top of the OS."
With widescreeen monitors (at least on desktops/laptops), tabs on the side makes much more sense.
Not if you're splitting your 1920x1080p display down the middle to show two 960px-wide windows.
And the most ideal solution, not abusing the web to run applocations in the mother of all inner-platform effect software design anti-patterns
What would you recommend instead? Writing the applications in Java and requiring everyone to download a Java VM? Writing the applications in Python and requiring everyone to download a Python interpreter? Writing the applications in Swift or Objective-C and requiring everyone to buy a Mac?
Almost everybody on mobile uses Chrome, which is not stuck with Webkit.
As I understand SuperKendall's posting history, he's referring to the "sheer number of mobile devices as well that" are "stuck with WebKit". StatCounter claims that Safari and other WebKit wrappers made up half of all mobile page views in the United States over the past month: 50.84% Safari, 41.63% Chrome, 4.88% Samsung Internet, and less than 1% each for Puffin, Firefox, UC Browser, Opera, etc.
Chrome isn't based on WebKit any more
Chrome for Chrome OS, X11/Linux, Windows desktop, and macOS isn't based on WebKit. Chrome for iOS is still based on WebKit, as is every single other browser that runs on iOS.
If your website doesn't work on WebKit, it's probably because you're using new standards that WebKit either never bothered implementing
Correct. Web developers are complaining that WebKit "never bothered implementing" things that Firefox and Chrome have long supported. It was last to get WebGL, for example. It still doesn't play WebM, as far as I'm aware. Even something as old as <input type="file"> was completely unsupported in Safari for iOS for five years.
What else is the browser supposed to do visually when the user has closed the last tab? Keep the window open with no tabs in it? Keep the application open with no windows open? Other than macOS, does any major PC GUI operating system even have a concept of an application remaining open after its last window is closed?
Safari costs $499 (source: Best Buy). Most people (except professional web developers) aren't willing to buy a second computer or second phone just to run a web browser. These comparisons include Edge despite it being exclusive to Windows 10 because Windows 10 has a much larger installed base than macOS and X11/Linux.
Can Lazarus cross-compile, or do you need to own a sufficiently recent Mac in order to ship for Mac?
They could write their app in java
Since when is Java less bad than JavaScript?
or some desktop script language like python
Because far fewer users of Windows applications have Python installed than have a web browser installed, either each end user would have to locate, download, and install the Python interpreter, or the developer would need to convert the script to a stand-alone application by bundling a copy of the interpreter with the application. Which of these two were you anticipating?
When I tried to convert a small Python+Pygame application that I developed to a stand-alone executable, it was 21 MB. In addition, Windows SmartScreen produces the "Windows protected your PC / Don't run" interstitial if not a lot of people have already downloaded and run the executable. What fraction of users would consider this an acceptable tradeoff?
Attempting to swing it back on topic: One might blocklist hostnames that serve unwanted scripts as a means of recovering the 10-13 percent of RAM that Chrome's Site Isolation is using.
At the same time doing in Cygwin bash what his app is purporting to be doing hardly takes more than 5 minutes.
Would there be merit in building the blocklist builder tool that I sketched in this article?
And on top of that, if you are doing [DNS blocklisting] per machine, you are doing it wrong.
The operator of a LAN could apply changes to devices on the LAN by configuring its DHCP server to point DNS at a local Pi-hole instance. But when you're out in public using your laptop on public Wi-Fi, you need a local blocklist if you're not running all of your laptop's DNS traffic through your Pi-hole at home.
Then don't give Google your credit card. Instead, give Google your debit card. Were you expecting to be able to instead pay by paper check or money order?
Let's say an application developer owns a Mac. He can choose to develop an application as a Mac application or as a web application. If he develops the application as a web application, then any user with a web browser can run it. But if he develops the application as a Mac application, then only those users whose computer happens to be a Mac can run it. Would you prefer to have to buy a Mac to run one application and buy a Windows PC[1] to run a second application?
[1] Yes, it's possible to virtualize Windows on a Mac, but only if you thought ahead and paid extra to order your Mac with enough RAM to run both macOS and Windows.