You’d have thought they’d have learned from losing the browser monopoly they had 15 years ago due to complacency

Putting everything else aside:

Why do they think they have any right to be platformed by Google, a private American company?

Can I demand that anti Putin content be platformed on VK or they have to pay me genuinely absurd fines?

Agree on the application side, but when it comes to the test suite, I’m definitely gonna consider letting an AI get that file started and then I’ll run through, make sure the assertions are all what I would expect and refactor anything that needs it.

I’ve written countless tests in my career and I’m still gonna write countless more, but I’m glad I can at least spend less time on laborious repetition now and more time on the part of the job I actually enjoy which is actually solving problems.

I believe focal length & aperture EXIF metadata do factor into modern lens correction profiles

It’s worth highlighting that the profiles are typically based on the combination of a lens and a body, one lens used on two different camera bodies would result in two different profiles being used

This is super interesting, and a project I’m gonna keep an eye on. Not least of all because I’ve got a good selection of E-mount lenses.

One thing that’s gonna be a struggle is all the specific lens corrections in photo software obviously will not be present for this. I wonder if the body behaves optically similarly enough to an existing Sony camera to be able to reuse those profiles.

I guess you’re expected to set those up in a RAID 5 or 6 (or similar) setup to have redundancy in case of failure.

Rebuilding after a failure would be a few days of squeaky bum time though.

That’s a particularly buried lede

My main use is skipping the blank page problem when writing a new suite of tests—which after about 10 mins of refactoring are often a good starting point

Yeah IIRC you’re right, though I remember you could contact apple and reset it.

It was called FairPlay DRM and they only really got rid of it around a decade after iTunes launched. I’m not 100% but I think I had to pay to upgrade my already paid-for library to DRM free too

Oh I didn’t actually realise that, I thought they’d just gone full Adobe with office 365

Time for another court to finally set the precedent the EULAs and Terms & Conditions are bullshit because it’s expected that no one will read them, and therefore no one has actually agreed to anything

And so the bloodline of windows write is extinguished

This is kinda sad that if you want to do even basic word processing with Microsoft software, your only option now is an ongoing subscription to do so.

Japanese courts have a 99% conviction rate or something. Saying you’ve not lost in a Japanese court is like saying 99% of the time you’ve been to the airport, you got on a plane.

That’s the case for most people

This is getting to the point where it goes to court and rightfully, Nintendo should get slapped and a new bleem-like precedent is set.

I remember thinking twitter was bad before he took over

It’s now a complete shadow of what it was even just a couple of years ago. Just a quarter of its value seems generous

So the party that’s ostensibly supposed to be pro business, sides with shitty anti-business conmen?

It’s hard to see how their guiding ideology isn’t just “be shitty and make things worse” now

One thing you consider is concurrency, it’s always good to have headroom if you can.

It’s kinda nice to not have the internet speeds of every device on your network grind to a halt just because you’re downloading something on your computer, for example. Particularly if you live with anyone else using the connection too

Flat design may be less distracting to you but that also means it’s less clear, because there are fewer obvious demarcation.

I despise flat design, it’s downright awful design, and done for looks rather than functionality.

to you

Flat design dominates for a reason—the less visually busy something is, the easier it is for users to wrap their heads around it. This gets proven again and again in user studies, the more busy and dense you make things, the more users miss stuff and get lost.

People’s opinions on the ribbon specifically are obviously all subjective, but I would say the less distracting design would be the one done less for looks, rather it’s a pretty utilitarian design if you pick it apart. This is an interface for productivity tools, and as such the interface should get out of your way until you need it—the ribbon just does that better IMO.

Microsoft also did this to obfuscate features, which is pretty apparent when you consider new users used to “discover” features via the menu system. I supported Office for MS in the early days, and this was a huge thing at the time. It was discussed heavily when training on new versions.

Why on earth would Microsoft want to obfuscate features? There’s no way that motivation would ever make sense.

IIRC one of the main reasons Microsoft introduced the ribbon was that grouping functionality contextually helped users discover features, because people kept requesting features that already existed, but they just couldn’t find. I remember there being a blog on the Microsoft developer site about the making of it that went into this.

Weirdly as someone who has used both styles heavily, I’d say the ribbon is more practical than the old toolbars. There’s more contextual grouping and more functional given the tabs and search, plus the modern flat design is less distracting, which is what I’d want from a productivity application. Also for me two rows of toolbars & a menu is about the same height as the ribbon anyway, and you can collapse the ribbon if you want to use the space

Now now, AJ may not know everything, but he’ll learn