That was FaceTime that they intended to open source, and it was supposedly a patent troll that forced them to move FaceTime to a more centralized design (it was originally P2P) which in turn made open sourcing more problematic.
That was certainly the excuse. But it is trivial for Apple to buy any patent it needs. I believe the real reason is that FaceTime and iMessage hook people to Apple platform and discourage switching to another one.
The patent troll in the case got a 440M award… and Apple had to spend a bunch of engineering time throwing out the already-working p2p implementation and rebuilding a centralized version… and you’re suggesting that this was all a mere smoke screen?
Rust, Zig, IPv6 in Linux, Wayland, EGL, PulseAudio, PipeWire, and of course BusyBox. Compare and contrast with the fact that the banking industry is still searching for COBOL maintainers.
> "this ORM is just bad, next time we will use a different one"
...pretty sure there are competing abstraction layers to working with DBs other programming paradigms.
> OOP works on low complexity, small projects, but quickly falls apart at certain point,
> More experienced people figured out some way around OOP to make it more robust,
I thought it fell apart?
> "oh, you just doing it wrong: insert excuse and advise here".
Wait til you learn what point-free style is in Haskell! Have fun!
> People who really though it through, and tried different approaches are the ones that hate it and are vocal about it.
So if you happen to like OOP, you just haven't thought it through. Thanks for the constructive comment!
> "oh, you just doing it wrong: insert excuse and advise here".
>> Wait til you learn what point-free style is in Haskell! Have fun!
I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say here. Care to elaborate?
As for ORMs: no, other styles of programming don't have this particular problem nor competing abstracting layers approaching this level of chaos. The ORM addresses a specific mismatch problem between relational databases and objects from OOP. This problem is so messily unique that it has been aptly named "The Vietnam of Computer Science": http://blogs.tedneward.com/post/the-vietnam-of-computer-scie...
OOP encourages writing code in "reusable" way of having bunch of objects referencing each other, which throws out of the window the reality of data having an actual form that has to support efficient computation.
This kind of works (to the point) while the data is entirely in memory, but quickly falls appart when it's a bigger data set in external storage.
I am yet to see a OOP project with ORM that have not fall appart in a way I described in these twitter post:
I think you lost the room when you mentioned Haskell. If someone has to reach point where they understand point-free style in order to form this anti-OOP opinion you won't find many takers.
Do tech support for a hospital and this attitude will very quickly dissipate.
>In my experience, the contrast is stark to another high-paid professional group: lawyers.
Database systems like WestLaw & word processing systems in the 80s and 90s were killer apps for law offices, so if lawyers are tech illiterate it's a recent phenomenon.
So, it's actually supposed to be called tip.69. But, after rejecting my app 7 times for other random things, apple finally pulled this one out and was like, ya, you have to rename your app and change the app icon :p
…That is not, in fact, the (exact) definition of a paid shill. Apple would have to be paying him conditionally, with the sole intent of him advertising / defending / whatever, regardless of his actual personal opinion.
He just has a clear vested interest in the platform as is. Would we all be FOSS shills for making our living with OSS software & continuing to advocate for the conditions that make that possible?
He's referring to the mobile version of Safari, which for some reason labels 'open in new tab' as 'open in background'. If you hit 'open in new window' by mistake you end up with a split screen view that can't be swiped away with a gesture; you have to long-press the tab icon to tell it to merge the tabs in the new window together with the old one.
not to mention that the commands themselves obey absolutely zero *NIX conventions at all. Left a bad taste in my mouth ever since