I seem to be the only one here that didn't have a good experience with TiVo. My parents cut the cord in 2013 and got a Roamio with a couple of the smaller streaming boxes. It was fairly easy to set up, but the UI was slow and not being able to transfer the recordings was a huge pain. Those stream boxes though, God those were terrible. If you had to reboot them it would take at least 20 minutes, if they didn't hang in the process.
I had a much better experience integrating a PC with a couple of PCIe Hauppauge tuners running Windows Media Center with a couple of Xbox 360s as streaming devices.
It will _never_ get to that point unless they port the original codebase to WASM or something. Or another product comes around that's so market upsetting that it takes the crown. The same can be said for Adobe products.
The fragmentation is a huge reason the desktop experience is broken. The only UI that's actually consistent across all distros and works pretty damn well is the TUI.
Its not fragmentation, you (and others) just do not grasp the very basics of Linux.
Its open source.
We will never, and I mean never, have one desktop to rule them all. That's impossible. Not improbable, impossible. You just can't make that happen on Linux.
What you want is a closed-down ecosystem in which one actor controls it with an iron fist. Which is fine - more power.
But we already have that. That's windows and mac os. If Linux tried that, it would destroy it.
For some behind the scenes on Microsoft's QA and Dev I recommend people read "Showstopper!: The Breakneck Race to Create Windows NT and the Next Generation at Microsoft". These days it's almost an ancient text, but it highlights a time in which computing was more fragile and the monumental challenge that comes with writing an operating system.
I think MS should be more transparent about their QA process, as I can only imagine how complicated it can be. I think we're past the era (mostly due to the high level of abstraction that exists between hardware and most end user facing software these days) where hardware variation has THAT amount of effect on the overall stability of a system, but we're also in an age where automation and reporting is actually mature.
So many of these controversies come from anecdotal scenarios that really should be treated woth
I have been a .NET dev for the past 8 years and have switched fully to Rider. The only thing I miss from VS is the quick nav to see all the properties and methods in a file on the top bar. Everything else is vastly better:
- Auto complete is a bit smarter (even the free AI suggestions are better)
- Refactoring across files is often faster
- Package management is undoubtedly the latest performance difference. I would go from taking 1-2 minutes from using VS's "Manage packages for solution" to under 10 seconds in Rider.
- In VS there's always a noticeable delay when the debugger hits a breakpoint / exception and the IDE takes a few seconds to actually display. This is about halved in Rider.
- The built in terminal is vastly better than VS's, though not as good as Windows Terminal
> Then there is the issue they seem to be shoting into all directions, with GUI frameworks, Web, Blazor, Aspire, to see what sticks.
... what?
They could do a better job with the native frameworks, but the rest of these are completely unrelated. For web, MVC is pretty much dead and you might want to use Blazor SSR instead. Web API via controllers is still supported, but minimal API endpoints are the hot thing. Blazor is being treated as a first class product. Aspire is there to assist in local orchestration of distributed applications... and is built on Blazor.
Exactly that, now try to pick the best one of all of those on enterprise projects, depending on the version they are using, and there is no budget for updates.
I don't know how absolute terrible the database must be, that you are talking about, but I think that managing 10k entries of whatever shouldn't be any problem at all for anything with a CPU and like 640KB of RAM.
I was too young to get in on the early (and tbh me exciting) age of MMOs, only opting for RuneScape because it had a free tier.
I just finished Jason Schreier's book that covered 38 Studio's implosion and then his next book that covered Blizzard. It was a nice trip down memory lane where I remember crawling through the latest PC Gamer issue to read about MMO experiences or watching G4's Portal act out skits in these massive games.
While there's private servers out there, I'm not sure you could recreate the hype around that era.
I should read that book, but I was pretty close to it.
Kurt was a huge EQ fan, and ended up trying to staff his company by making offers to a bunch of people at SOE (which included both me and my team).
I was not convinced. He spent time around the office and when I met him in person he always came across as a BS artist. I don’t think he got anyone from any engineering team, he certainly didn’t get any from mine (I was TD on EQ2 at the time)
The best talent he did get was Jason Roberts, who was my design partner on EQ2 at the time.
I remember some of us being very confused that Smed let him do that kind of recruiting. I think he an actually held some interviews literally in the SOE office. It really felt like Kurt was taking advantage of him.
I had a much better experience integrating a PC with a couple of PCIe Hauppauge tuners running Windows Media Center with a couple of Xbox 360s as streaming devices.
reply