Those semantics hide that game studios keep using Windows workstations, developing Windows games, creating kernel drivers, targeting Windows users as customers, and it is up to Valve to make those games run on SteamOS.
Seems like you moved the goalposts pretty far... Consumers using Linux has shot up pretty dramatically this year, at least in my social circles. I count at least a dozen, non technical friends who decided to drop windows. That number has been zero a year for decades.
Game devs working in Linux is always a lagging indicator. Once there's a market share, they'll go there. Once it's the preferred os for people, you'll be able to develop on it. Games is already an incredibly risky market sector.
Instead, I encourage you to look at blender. It's gone through a "cute hobbyist/prosumer tool" phase and is now in the mega million dollar movies and games use it as their primary tool. Desktop Linux is on a similar curve thanks to Valve. If enough people start using it at home, industry will flip over.
Nope, they are still on the same spot, Proton isn't Linux gaming, is making Windows ecosystem available on Linux, because Valve has failed to provide enough value for game studios to target SteamOS natively.
Blender was a commercial product that became FOSS, with an existing customer base.
People using Linux as their desktop OS are using desktop Linux. What binaries they run on that OS doesn't change what OS they are running.
You've developed a "No true Scotsman" definition for desktop Linux that seems far from the common understanding that "if you use Linux as your OS on your desktop, you are a desktop Linux user".
If you feel your definition of purity tested "only Linux binaries or it doesn't count as a Linux desktop" is better, I'm not going to tell you you are wrong, just expect that you have a definition significantly out of the norm and will have a challenging uphill battle in getting others to adopt it.
Does most of the work to keep a Linux desktop developed? That's an incredible claim and needs a source. You might be able to convince me that most kernel developer impact comes from that community, but not the OS.
How!? Mine is full of ads, and that's after buying a "Pro" copy of Windows, registry hacks, declining every ToS I can find, rejecting all the "free" trials, etc.
Do you have an enterprise install managed on a Windows domain where your admin has disabled all this stuff by any chance?
The installer has 3 free trials in it (photos sync, xbox, office 365), and then re-runs that part of the installer periodically.
The start menu shows sponsored articles in it IIRC, although this was something I turned off as soon as I could. It also pushes apps like Candy Crush.
The lock screen has ads literally "dotted" around, again pushing cloud services etc.
I keep being prompted to turn on Copilot, and essentially the only options are "Yes" or "Not yet". Opt-outs aren't respected.
I don't use Edge but the OS keeps advertising Edge, keeps telling me in various places and at various times that Edge is better and that Chrome is dangerous.
These are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head, but it's truly pervasive throughout the whole product. Even just looking through Settings it's not hard to find upsells.
I made my usb install media with Rufus and I it had some option to remove a bunch of frustrating behavior (this option was on by default). For instance it allowed me to create a local account. That seems to have completely removed advertising you mentioned. I had a lot of it in windows 10. Maybe the person you are replying to used Rufus (which is recommended if you want to make the install media from Linux or Mac) and didn’t realize it made changes.
They completely removed it from the installer GUI, yes.
But local-only Windows 11 still works with minimal interference. The most common ways are creating the install medium with Rufus (which has an option to create a local-only installation medium), or by manually dropping into the Windows Command Prompt during setup and running a single command ("ms-cxh:localonly")
> The installer has 3 free trials in it (photos sync, xbox, office 365), and then re-runs that part of the installer periodically.
This is all I see and everything I disabled/uninstalled was done from the Windows settings UI (Windows 11 Pro).
> Even just looking through Settings it's not hard to find upsells.
I guess I see this too? Just a little box saying to get Microsoft 365 or install OneDrive on the home page of the settings UI. There's basically nothing of value there though so it's easily missed.
and despite the fact you can install AND uninstall numerous web browsers, for some reason Edge is (supposedly) built into the OS and core functionality and it can't be removed - and is the default app for countless file types.
It actually is built in as WebView2. It's like that so apps can use web views without shipping their own browser (Electron) and then it is kept up to date with the system.
Internet Explorer (MSHTML) also still lives on in Windows 11 because older software depends on it to embed browsers in their UI. It'll probably stay there for a long time to preserve backwards compatibility.
Is that really an example of not caring about the community? The business failed, and they refunded everyone who had pledged. The sale to Fitbit was probably the way they funded those refunds. That seems like an unfortunate ending but one that indicated some amount of care for the community.
Not cool. I can't help but think this must be pretty self-defeating. The market for the Pebble watches is not general consumers who will never see things like this going on in the background, it's relatively technical people who know a lot about the devices they are using, almost by definition. I can only assume that this will be widely known quickly in the customer base.
There may be another side to this story, but it's so far not a good look for Pebble/Core, and this post is well reasoned and written enough that I doubt there are many places for alternate explanations to hide.
I can't edit this comment anymore, but I think there is another side to this that is worth hearing. I stand by my point that openness is likely core to the Pebble customer base, but it's less clear to me now that Rebble are living up to that.
Doing one thing well means you need a lot more tools to achieve outcomes, and more tools means more context and potentially more understanding of how to string them together.
I suspect the sweet spot for LLMs is somewhere in the middle, not quite as small as some traditional unix tools.
I have looked at MTurk many times throughout my career. In particular my previous company had a lot of data cleaning, scraping, product tagging, image description, and machine learning built on these. This was all pre-LLM. MTurk always felt like it would be a great solution.
But every time I looked at it I persuaded myself out of it. The docs really down played the level of critical thinking that we could expect, they made it clear that you couldn't trust any result to even human-error levels, you needed to test 3-5 times and "vote". You couldn't really get good results for unstructured outputs instead it was designed around classification across a small number of options. The bidding also made pricing it out hard to estimate.
In the end we hired a company that sat somewhere between MTurk and fully skilled outsourcing. We trained the team in our specific needs and they would work through data processing when available, asking clarifying questions on Slack, and would reference a huge Google doc that we had with various disambiguations and edge cases documented. They were excellent. More expensive that MTurk on the surface, but likely cheaper in the long run because the results were essentially as correct as anyone could get them and we didn't need to check their work much.
In this way I wonder if MTurk never found great product market fit. It languished in AWS's portfolio for most of 20 years. Maybe it was just too limited?
Prepping for interviews has been a big deal forever in most other industries though. It's considered normal to read extensively about a company, understand their business, sales strategies, finances, things like that, for any sort of business role.
What you're describing sounds to me like just caring for the place we'll be spending half a decade or more and will have the most impact on our health, financial and social life.
I'd advise anyone to read the available financial reports on any company they're intending to join, execpt if it's an internship. You'll spend hours interviewing and years dealing with these people, you could as well take an hour or two to understand if the company is sinking or a scam in the first place.
Why should anyone do that in a world where fundamentals don't make sense? Yes, knowing how the company makes money is important (though that often is incomplete or unclear from what's publicly available), but knowing their 10-K or earnings reports? Too much.
"Is the company consistently profitable or not?" and "Are revenue and profits growing over time, stable, or declining?" are very important questions to answer, particularly if stock grants are part of the compensation package.
For developers who work on products, getting a sense of whether the product of the team you'd be joining is a core part of the business versus speculative (i.e. stable vs likely to have layoffs) and how successful the product is in the marketplace (teams for products that are failing also are likely to be victims of layoffs) are also very important to understand.
And if your team is far from the money, what often matters much much more is how much political capital your skip level manager has and to what extent it can be deployed when the company needs to re-org or cut. Shoot, this can matter even if you're close to the money (if you're joining a team that's in the critical path of the profit center vs a capex moonshot project funded by said profit center).
This is one thing I really like about sales engineering. Sales orgs carry (relatively) very low-BS politically.
It matters a lot whether the organization is growing. If you get assigned to a toxic manager in a static organization then you're likely to be stuck there indefinitely. In a growing organization there will be opportunities to move up and out to other internal teams.
I remember being told this during my interview prep classes in college in 2008. Interviewing was so much more formal even then (in the NYC area): business casual attire, (p)leather-bound resume folios, expectations of knowing the company, etc. I definitely don't miss any of that nonsense.
I recently showed up to a new startup interview, with a similar folio (with printed copies of my resume, and a tablet of graph paper), and it paid off.
I was in a small conference room with the two co-founders, and of them hadn't seen my resume, and was trying to read it on his phone while we were talking.
Bam. I whipped out printed copies for both of them, from my interview folio.
It was good standard advice even for programmers to know at least a little about the company going in. And you should avoid typos and spellos on your resume.
But no "prep" like months of LeetCode grinding, memorizing the "design interview" recital, practicing all the tips for disingenuous "behavioral" passing, etc.
Furthermore, many engineers at Google work on Macs, some even on Windows, but the actual code runs on a Linux box in a datacenter. I use a Mac, my editor is local, my terminal is local, but it's all SSH/remote to the linux box, so I've never needed jj to run on my Mac. This, or a high powered Linux desktop, are the norm.
The main exceptions to this are devs who work on iOS or macOS software, who will sometimes do local builds on their physical machine. They would benefit from jj support, but there are more hoops to jump through, and the jj port will most likely be less about running on macOS and more about jj supporting the weird ways in which source is accessed.
Using this free desktop app requires Canva sign-in, ok fine, I can stomach that, it's free after all.
Signing in launches a browser to complete the sign-in process, but on macOS it launches Safari, not my OS default browser – this takes extra work to do over just using the `openUrl` call on macOS. Safari is blocked.
Thankfully something on my system redirects the URL opening to pass it to my orgs enforced browser, I sign-in, and then nothing happens. The page says it has launched Affinity, but Affinity is sitting there doing nothing waiting for me to log in.
I realise I'm on a somewhat non-standard setup, but an OAuth login flow is not hard to get right. I've built dozens of these flows in my career and messing it up this much is hard.
Edit:
> To report a bug within the application, click the "?" button in the top-right corner of the workspace. From the panel, select "Report a Bug".
This menu is not accessible until you have signed in. No other method of bug reporting is provided.
I've had good experience contacting canva support in the past who've checked things with engineering teams, you should be able to contact them about their new affinity sign-in
reply