duhi88

I feel like this is aimed as a similar demographic as the Ridgeline is: people who want a lot of flexibility out of their vehicle, but don't need a dedicated workhorse.

A friend of mine has a Ridgeline, too. The thing is great. Goes off-road, just about anywhere he wants to go, hauls skiing/camping gear for 4 people with room to spare, hauls 2 motorcycles and a dirt bike in the bed.

He's not hauling a horse trailer, or a boat, or following a TRD Pro 4Runner into the desert. If something breaks, he fixes it or rides his second vehicle until he can get it fixed.

People are acting like Tesla needs every farmer and construction worker to replace their diesel truck with the Cybertruck. If they didn't replace it with a Ridgeline (or similar unibody truck), the Cybertruck isn't for them.

The lack of 3D Touch on iPad was due to difficulty getting it to work on the large screen (obviously nobody knows that for sure, but those were the rumors years ago).

The lack of 3D Touch on XR was due to cost, and apparently their plan to ditch it everywhere.

The lack of 3D Touch on iPhone Pro...that's disappointing. It would have been a great "Pro" feature to offer. A "Pro" feature that allows you to be more productive on your phone. Aside for the video features (which I don't see being used by professionals anyway), what makes this device a "Pro" anything?

Screen reader users might disagree with you.

The article mentions one.

This is what I do. If an app doesn't need an internet connection, it can't access the internet.

Your phone will just use its cellular data connection if it doesn't have wifi, which drains your battery more.

You shouldn't be! Microsoft has deprecated it and that should be reason enough to get your users off it.

IE11 isn't much better, though...

Yea, I have a 7+ with no issues. Also a 6 that still works fine after the latest updates.

Why not? I think it is a fair replacement for a lot of image use-cases. If JS is turned off, users still have the ability to view the image and description, without the image hurting your total page weight.

I really wanted to like Atom. I've always felt that with the right attention, web apps can accomplish most things that native apps can.

Atom seemed promising and fast enough (I couldn't perceive any slowness), but once I started adding plugins to match the features I liked out of Sublime, I found Atom got really sluggish. I haven't tried any other electron-based editors, but I doubt it has the plugin ecosystem to compete with Sublime to VS, or any other big players.

I didn't realize how important having a responsive text-editor is, though. We expect a lot to happen with each keystroke, and we expect it all to happen before we press the next key. This is why I don't think that text editors are best done in JS.

That said, if this new text editor doesn't have features that compare with Sublime, then it isn't much better than Atom is to me.

Sounds cool, but W3W solves a few different problems. It's got to sound natural, be easy to recognize by various voice systems, and easy to communicate between people.

"12 character code" might solve the problem from your perspective, but the point is that barcodes and IDs are annoying to read and copy by hand.

voice, sign language, semaphore, etc.

If you can't communicate your service to others, how do you expect others to use it? The best you can do is make it generic and easy to share however people want.

Supporting SMS and/or email means you can share this service in the most basic means available, and as long as Social Network X supports link sharing, Stuff will support Social Network X.

There's a good chance that if you aren't proactive about these issues, they won't get noticed until after you've left the company. Let the next CEO/board/director deal with the repercussions and costs if they ever come up.

Making micro-transactions more profitable would be an unfortunate course of action. There are enough of those apps in the store, and they are clearly profitable enough if they can buy Super Bowl airtime.

Subscriptions for apps should be different, but I see a challenge in drawing the line between Spotify/Netflix and a scam app like "awesome culculator" that charges $5/mo to people who don'didn't realize it was a subscription (there was an article on HN this week about apps like that, targeting kids and the elderly, of course).

If Apple has a stipulation about requiring a website, then maybe subscription-based apps can get a discount on the 30% fee if they also have a web or desktop-based version of their application that provides comparable functionality and takes payments.

I like that analogy.

Sass makes it a lot nicer to write BEM notation. The long class names used to bother me too, but it is actually much nicer than not knowing where a class came from. Is `.right-button` a global button style, or unique to this component?

That's how I felt in the beginning. However, now that they are open to selling data to drug companies...I'm not so sure my data is going to be used strictly to benefit humanity.

I think everyone sees different results based on their hardware and browsing habits. I haven't seen anything recent directly comparing Firefox/Chrome/Safari on Mac to Firefox/Chrome/Edge on PC using the same exact websites.

For me, it isn't always in the "Using significant power" list.

Well this project has pretty much died off. No update in over a year, and nothing significant in 3-4.

This is pretty old, and hasn't seen an update in over a year. I never understand why links links this get posted with no discussion to start it off with.

Also, wouldn't this be better implemented with WASM?

I haven't tried any, but the Chana Masala looks pretty reasonable, and has lots of protein! Put it over some whole grain rice, and I bet it would be pretty filling. (I'm sure you could say that for all of these meals).

https://thebuttermilkco.com/collections/singles/products/cha...

That is certainly not true. The knowledge base you need to even start compiling to WASM is far greater than just JS.

No different from a regular mattress made of the same materials.

I'm not a backer, but your sentiment seems right. It always seemed like a game that wanted to be "the best space sim", and that is going to take a while. All the demos have looked incredible, a the features are extremely ambitious, but cool.

I think that all backers should just feel lucky the project hasn't burned through all their cash and shut down yet.

Vue has all the stuff that made AngularJS so great, and none of the baggage. I've made a few small to medium-sized projects with it, and I see no reason to use Angular[JS] or React anymore. I love how well it plays with regular JS modules, allowing you to share your HTTP code and service libraries across multiple apps (Vue or React, or vanilla JS).

Vue hits a nice balance between opinionated code and flexibility. Throw in their ESLint plugin and I think you will end up with very maintainable code.

It's a common pattern in JS to use many small packages over fewer large ones. Some maintainers might take this too far, breaking their package up so that each function gets its own package. That is how you get 388 dependencies in complex packages.

Exactly this. I sometimes work on projects without all nice tools that I'm used to using, and it works out just fine. I wouldn't choose or suggest to start a new project that way, though.

Reading through Webpack's docs one night was all I needed to start creating my own configs, and I improved upon that config as time went on. It was worth the investment in time.

Front-end developers want more than to just run code, though. We want to be able to use modern JS and CSS without worry. We want live-reloading of styles. We want to minify and clean up our code, and to break it into smaller chunks. We want code-linting to keep ourselves and others in check.

All of those things I see as being essential to building quality code in a reasonable amount of time (and enjoying it), and all of those things are actually really easy to set up in Webpack (it's all in their docs). Webpack was overwhelming before I read through their docs, and their docs are not as nice as VueJS's docs, but it isn't as bad as everybody makes it out to be. Really.

It certainly increases the size of their influence.

You can be dominate and still hold the community back. Look at Internet Explorer. IE11 is the reason most people can't use ES2015+ features natively until the end of 2025.