When people make a big stink about Apple not implementing RCS I always bring this up. RCS has an open core sure - but it’s lacking plenty of features that people refer to when talking about RCS. Furthermore, the gateways used for Google’s RCS implementation are made by a company Google acquired. Would we be happy with Apple charging cell providers money to install iMessage gateways at whatever cost they wanted, because they hold the patents? No, so why would we give Google a pass?
If we want to fix this issue, force Google to relinquish their control of RCS and open the standard unencumbered with patents. Require telecoms to implement the standard in full and without deviation or be fined. Give phone manufacturers a few more years to comply and then it’s done.
I appreciate that they try, and as much as I dislike some of snap’s design choices I think it has a place. Flatpak appears to be the winner in this race however, and I feel like this is Unity all over. Just as the project gets good they abandon it for the prevailing winds. I’ve been told the snap server isn’t open source, which is a big concern?
I worked as a DOD contractor for several years. The downfall of Boeing is a case study in toxic leadership. Boeing was once known as the juggernaut in the industry, capable of engineering amazing feats that only someone as large as them could pull off. Over the past decade, that reputation has become inverted. They are of the butt of many jokes. Their merger with Douglas brought out the worst in Douglas and drove out the best in Boeing. I worked for a competing firm, but in many situations we have to cooperate with competing firms in order to deliver on contracts. When I say that interactions with Boeing have left me bewildered, I am speaking conservatively. Management has become overrun with penny pinchers and career MBAs. Engineers are no longer leading the company, and it shows. The quality of components coming out of Boeing these days is frankly terrifying. I book flights with Delta and unfortunately, they have opted to contract for several Boeing MAX airliners. I will cancel my flight if my itinerary shows that I will be flying on such an aircraft. The odds of an incident are incredibly slim, but having worked in aerospace, I will not take the risk. Vote with your wallet and do the same.
When people make a big stink about Apple not implementing RCS I always bring this up. RCS has an open core sure - but it’s lacking plenty of features that people refer to when talking about RCS. Furthermore, the gateways used for Google’s RCS implementation are made by a company Google acquired. Would we be happy with Apple charging cell providers money to install iMessage gateways at whatever cost they wanted, because they hold the patents? No, so why would we give Google a pass?
If we want to fix this issue, force Google to relinquish their control of RCS and open the standard unencumbered with patents. Require telecoms to implement the standard in full and without deviation or be fined. Give phone manufacturers a few more years to comply and then it’s done.
IIRC Microsoft’s woes in the ARM space is two-fold. First is the crushing legacy compatibility and inability to muster developers around anything newer than win32, and second was signing a deal to make Qualcomm the exclusive ARM processors for Windows for who knows how long.
Unfortunately, airliners are left with little choice. Nobody wants to be beholden to a single air frame manufacturer. Even the more conservative airlines have been purchasing Boeing, simply so they are not beholden to a single manufacturer (AeroBus). Everyone in the industry is aware of where we stand, but the United States has let their defense industrial base to merge from dozens of companies to less than a dozen. It’s a real problem.
If it’s any consolation, the odds of your flight ending in an air incident, or even a hull loss is incredibly slim. You have greater odds of being attacked by a polar bear, and a regular bear on the same day. I understand your apprehension, though and it says a lot about the state of Boeing.
Yes, it’s not just a DE and default package set but actual system improvements other distros aren’t offering. Kudos to the Asahi team for making this possible!
Ironically this may serve to further them from their goals regarding Taiwan. The further they become politically and socially, the more difficult assimilation becomes. I think in 25 years it won’t be possible anymore. By then we are likely to see not an event like Hong Kong, but outright war before such a thing occurs. Geographically, any such imposition would appear as an invasion. That’s why we see China doing their best to meddle with their elections. Assuming TSMC maintains its relevance, and they gain recognition from some western powers. Not that far off if you can believe it.
Absolutely, and I think that’s why snap has a future at all. Immutability is the future, as well as self-contained apps. We saw the explosive growth of Docker as indication that this was the way. If they can make their tooling as easy as a Dockerfile they will win just by reducing the work needed to support it.
GNOME’s mantra is pretty much remove functionality if the maintenance burden is anything beyond lifting a finger. This might end up biting them however as it’s caused them to fall behind in supporting the features enterprises and consumers want out of a Linux desktop. Combine this with their weird obsession of making a pseudo-touch interface and it’s just not working.