No, sorry, but it is unreasonable.. Why should I need an apple device to compile my code for an apple device?
You can build Android apps on an Apple device, no problem. You can build Linux apps on an Apple device, no problem. etc... But the reverse isn't true. Its just more of Apple financially gate keeping their ecosystem so they make more money in as many channels as they possibly can.
Testing on real hardware is the ONLY time I would say that owning, or at least having access to the hardware has real tangible benefits, and I would argue that that you NEED or SHOULD do this.. But to block compiling to that ecosystem? Sorry but I fundamentally disagree.
Blocking compiling, means requiring xcode, which requires a mac, which requires you to give more money to Apple, and is no different IMHO than giving Apple $100 a year, because now you're giving them a lot more of that every X years (where x is how many years that laptop gets updates)
I hate ad companies and ads as much as the next person. But this was one of the moments where I felt like people didn't see what I saw with services era apple. I pointed out that all apple is doing is locking down their phones even further. That they're not eliminating all ads on your phone... Nope they're eliminating their competition.
It's just nuts peoples hatred of ads clouds their vision of this.
I cannot understand the idea of using JavaScript that compiles into "native code".
At what point do JavaScript developers need to realise that this is all convoluted, and begin to use languages better suited for the job.
You want something that can compile into a binary with multiple architectures, multithreading, types, etc? Please use a different language that's built from the ground up to achieve that.
You want something that was designed to add some sugar onto a website? Then yes JavaScript is probably best there.
Not everything needs to be written in this one language that's not designed for it. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Actually TypeScript is an excellent language (in my view) for targeting native code. It reads cleaner than Java, C# and even golang in many cases - at least to me.
For example, JS/TS's file-path based imports are more intuitive; several languages do it via explicit namespaces when well-written code is already organized into directories. Of course, all of these design choices are subjective. In fact, disagreement with a few people in the C# user community is one of the reasons I started this project.
Another example - top level functions, being able to export them trivially etc.
> At what point do JavaScript developers need to realise that this is all convoluted, and begin to use languages better suited for the job.
The comment was especially about TypeScript. Unlike the ancient JavaScript versions best used for web sugar you're possibly thinking of, it's a highly pragmatic and well designed general purpose programming language with an unique and very powerful type system.
If I remember correctly. The system got broken into trivially. There was supposed to be some random value. But for some reason it was always the same value. 7 or something.
Nobody tried to hack it, everyone assumed it was impossible. But when they removed Linux, then people tried, and it was broken very quickly.
Exactly. Meta also decided to do some changes, from what I understand they cut staff, and have signalled the hardware will live longer between models. They also seem to signal that the next model will prioritise gaming. Which seems the most logical choice for VR/AR.
Spacial computing, just doesn't seem like something that's solving a problem.
Just to add to this, I would personally use ABS/ASA, or a fibre variant of those, like Carbon or Glass (if you don't have an enclosed printer). PA (like PA612) is also a good option. Basically anything that can handle higher temps.
PETG starts to deform at ~75-85'c. The upper end of that should be fine, but the lower end.. certain things can get close to that temp. So if you've got good airflow, and nothing is passively getting to that temps you're probably good.
The best thing might be a design that has some core that holds the components.. print that in a higher temp filament, and print the outer shells in something a little more aesthetically pleasing.
Also.. remember to check if the filament you're using has any electrical conductivity.
Yes, I would have loved to use a 'better' material, but my printer is not enclosed and I'm not sure it can print CF filaments (I think I would need to change the hot end at least). But soon I will hopefully get my hands on a new BambuLab printer which should let me play with those materials!
Actually you can. You'd need a hardened steel nozzle and that's about it. CF/GF filaments are designed to be easier to print, even on an open printer. It's almost the main reason they're popular.
You can build Android apps on an Apple device, no problem. You can build Linux apps on an Apple device, no problem. etc... But the reverse isn't true. Its just more of Apple financially gate keeping their ecosystem so they make more money in as many channels as they possibly can.
Testing on real hardware is the ONLY time I would say that owning, or at least having access to the hardware has real tangible benefits, and I would argue that that you NEED or SHOULD do this.. But to block compiling to that ecosystem? Sorry but I fundamentally disagree.
Blocking compiling, means requiring xcode, which requires a mac, which requires you to give more money to Apple, and is no different IMHO than giving Apple $100 a year, because now you're giving them a lot more of that every X years (where x is how many years that laptop gets updates)
reply