How long did you use the new phone for? I was a mini advocate for a very long time, then changed to a 17 pro for work, it took me around solid 2 months to get used to it. Now the mini feels comically small. iOS26 did a lot to eliminate the need to reach for the top in most places, but there’s still a lot to improve.
Edit: as others have pointed out it’s extremely hard to go back to the lightning connector too.
For me it’s just as unbelievable that the second hand book stores would sell rare or irreplaceable books at bulk prices.
If they do they are really not good at what they are doing and I wouldn’t blame any startup big or small to destroy it, especially after preserving it digitally.
> If they do they are really not good at what they are doing and I wouldn’t blame any startup big or small to destroy it, especially after preserving it digitally.
1. That's fucking bizarre logic. "It's ok to do bad thing if someone didn't stop you."
2. These startups aren't "preserving" it digitally. The destroyed physical copies would have likely outlived whatever datasets they're creating.
Rarity equating monetary value is a common logical fallacy often found with stamps and other collectable cultural artifacts (details would disgress too much here, see Pokemon cards or whatever).
And rarity vs quality ir utility is even harder.
But value is 1) not determined by scarcity and 2) neither by "unique information content" (because that's by definition not measurable without a panopticon) and 3) nor by "creative value" per se 4) it is indeterminate whether some detail in a work might prove useful later, in general. Even for scientific papers.
They just can bet on all fronts and for training material it's 100% rational to do it.
Apart from that, to briefly disgress into the discussion of "cultural value": many cultural works we hold as very important today were sold for cheap, if at all, when the author died.
Music scores are good examples.
But back to the broader "value"/rarity angle:
The historical value of some odd self-help or DIY instructions book from the 80s is hard to determine! It might happen to be able to provide a secondary source for something, or even act as primary source for some other fact of the time that is tangential to its subject.
None of the qualities that make trivial literature interesting to, for example, researchers, must correlate with market value (at the time of writing or at the time of research?).
Sure, there are truckloads of "unique" books from even 200 years ago that are neither culturally valuable nor sellable right now.
But these things can change quickly.
Imagine you want research details about old retail products.
Or the usual street price of something in some city at a specific time.
Or the inhabitant of a certain rentable space at a certain time.
Or some specific detail about replacing the parts of a certain type of car that's no longer around (is this valuable then?).
Humans create endless complexities, and monetary or evolutionary value is not coupled anymore to step-changes such as "how to light a fire using X,Y,Z".
We're deep down the rabbit-holes of our own ephemeral shaping of our world.
What word was commonly used to describe a sandwich in 1925 in Hungary.
Or what problems did people commonly encounter when repairing car doors in the 1940s in England?
Whatever. I can't make up a good example right now, but market value does not imply quality; and even quality (according to some cultural norm) is not universally measurable.
I think a truly open source OS and phone is what both Facebook, OpenAI, Amazon, Netflix, Epic, Microsoft, Spotify and many others need to get out of the grips of Apple.
It’s quite ironic that all these companies pour billions in failed attempts of stores, hardware, platforms, lawsuits yet fail to collaborate in any meaningful way to establish a new standard that is truly better.
It implicitly also proves that their problem is not with the app stores being closed, but that they don’t own it.
There’s nothing wrong with the phone, we don’t need glasses, hockeypucks or new contrived ways to interact with the digital world, we need a truly open hardware and software stack for the benefit of humanity, no lockdown, no one company in control, just a healthy platform where apps can thrive in a fair competition.
Same here, but Liquid Glass has been a headache lately. Google really dropped the ball here, but to their credit it almost feels like Liquid Glass was an intentional move by Apple to cause as much friction for cross platform frameworks as possible.
I’ve worked on some award winning apps in the past, our experience with SwiftUI is it makes it really easy to develop a basic average looking app. As soon as you need something non-standard, you have to drop down to UIKit and figure out how to play nice between the two, which is often non trivial and hard to estimate. You file radars, which at best will be fixed in the next OS release and rarely back ported if at all.
In the end some of the more complicated apps just ditched SwiftUI altogether or applied a myriad of workarounds.
I think open source is the right move here. The great thing about Flutter is you get the declarative UI to build a lot of standard screens easily but you can always drop down to lower levels, inspect the standard components, mix and match with your custom implementation.
You can mix UKit and SwiftUI but there’s way more friction due to the closed nature of the SDK.
Fully agree (been an early Flutter adopter!). It's always the right too for the right job, declarativness makes a lot of sense for most UIs. UIs are surprisingly more complicated than one might think, there is accessibility/ theming/ keyboard traversal etc., just declaring UI and letting the framework figure out the rest has held up pretty well.
And because of the open source nature you can always drop down in layers, just a few weeks ago I made a very specific engine optimization, all while the application code on-top can stay declarative!
Perhaps. Certainly source visibility makes life easier as a dev who has to live with these frameworks on a daily basis. That said, I think frameworks should strive to have a wide and deep enough set of widgets that in most cases, devs won't need to resort to custom implementations to do what they need to.
It also doesn't fix problems inherent to declarative UI, like readability breaking down easily and certain things that would be a cinch in an imperative framework being extremely awkward to implement.
Native apps suck too. i cannot list 10 native mac apps that are truly great, including Apple’s own.
To me these days native on desktop means web, not Appkit. I can resize the whole interface with a common shortcut, I can select text trivially, native Mac apps constantly fail to do both.
Developing native apps for the Mac is a mess, with immature SwiftUI, the absolute garbage liquid glass is on the desktop, the outdated Appkit framework and iOS based Mac Catalyst.
Electron is a sane choice and good enough for Figma, Slack, Notion, leading apps in their respective categories.
Have both and none is falling apart. Both have their advantages, the Sample is a more robust and also just bland, KO2 is more fun and interesting.
It’s comparable to Nintendo vs Sony, both excellent in their own way.
Unfortunately a very large part of the population is living their digital life inside closed platforms nowadays and this is getting even worse with younger generations who literally think tiktok and instagram is _the_ internet.
On these platforms influencers like Tate can gain popularity extremely quickly if they resonate with your interests, fears, ideology.
Tate is/was really popular with men of all ages, representing a mix of hustle mindset, ambition, materialistic goals, working out, mixed in with ponzi scheme like courses on how to make it in today’s world.
It gives a simplistic answer to a lot of people, similar to the cults of yesterday.
I think Ive deserves some respect. His portfolio makes it clear what type of car he will design, same with Newson. It’s Ferrari’s leadership that has to be held accountable for the decision, my guess is they wanted to break into a brand new demographic. Many say it should have been a sub-brand, for some reason they didn’t use that option.
I don’t lien the car’s look, but also don’t hate it. Let’s see it on the road, get some review on the comfort etc.
I honestly think it will be all fine, once the current wave of criticism blows over.
Edit: as others have pointed out it’s extremely hard to go back to the lightning connector too.