I can corroborate this. My family was involved in a chemical manufacturing business in India from the 60s onwards. My understanding from what my family tells me is that the 80s and early 90s is when a lot of these base manufacturing inputs became readily available.
I also paid for ST3, but I switched to ST4 for the hardware accelerated rendering. I don't like their licensing policy anymore, so I just dismiss the purchase signs. I want to get my company to pay for it because paying 100 USD _again_ is just absurd for me.
I have no plans to switch off though. This is still a heck of a lot faster than the alternatives
As others have mentioned, this feature is patended. `BetterSnapTool` is $3 is for a lifetime license and does what you'd expect coming from XFCE/windows etc.
I can only speak for myself, so to me this technique is kind of like how they did colour photographs in the 20th century [1] - taking multiple photographs from the same perspective with different filters.
For that reason, I would argue that these are 'true' photographs. Sure, things have been differently exposed, maybe some ultraviolet light has been brought into the visual spectrum; but for all intents and purposes, the light from the subject(s) hit the lens(es) at the same time and the composition is true to what actually happened.
Now, with all that being said, there are many famous photos that are actually composites [2] and what makes 'a true photograph' is still hotly debated.
Digital processing is such an integral part of modern photography that trying to decide what makes a 'true photograph' is bound to get messy.
It's possible that Xbox serves as a loss-leader for introducing/keeping people in the brand.
For kids who may only have chromebooks at school, and macs at home, an Xbox may be the first time they make a Microsoft account. That account then goes on to accumulate digital assets and stays with them until much later when they're ready to make bigger financial commitments.
Anecdotally, for the past few years, gaming has been the only reason for me keep a Windows device around at all.
Don't have much to add, but want to say thanks for sharing those blog posts, they were interesting reads.
The slack CTO's comment about choosing RDBMS because 'familiarity' is interesting. IMO it's a gamble. I've seen it happen with my company when being a latecomer to containerization.
When it came to picking a container management tool, it was a tossup between k8s, Nomad, or just saying to hell with and running those containers ourselves on EC2 instances. Having run our stack on bare metal for year = we were really pretty good at it. There was a surprising amount of automation that could be ported over.
Eventually we picked k8s, and coincidentally, our usage grew more in 6 months than it had in the last 2ish years. So all in all, the gamble paid off.
... but I like to think there's another world where we picked the 'its familiar option' and things still worked out. If our traffic hadn't grown the way it did, we would never have felt the pain of having to manually scale out our systems - or basically write an in-house version of Kubernetes.
So in that sense, I'd guess that maybe some teams have the bad habit of playing the same side of the coin everytime. It may be prudent to stay conservative when picking a Datastore, maybe it's would be smart to pick a risky technology for your app servers? (and vice-versa)
Could someone comment on why exactly this a poor design for their backend? Genuinely curious, I don't have any real world context on systems like this.
- Global agreement and partnership, since you need to decrease temperature globally to make a dent
- Convince everyone that injecting aersols into the atmosphere is the only alternative to catastrophic warming (view in contrast to convincing people of the efficacy of vaccines etc.)
Both of these are incredibly challenging undertakings, even without trying to address the issue of continually acidifying oceans.
And yet, sadly I feel like this is the only most realistic option out of them all.