This is quibbling over details - both numbers are already low enough that many developers won't even bother to test on FF not to mention fix non-trivial issues, and for both stats the trend is clearly downwards.
It's great that you mention the climate impact of Electron apps, because those bloated monsters truly are a huge problem; though I think you underestimate how much the Tauri team's focus has been on shrinking app size to alleviate the environmental impact made by the download of said huge Electron apps.
One of the things that actually made me interested in Tauri in the first place was their 1.0 Release[0] which included information on just how much CO2 output would be saved by switching from Electron to a similar Tauri app (600Mb vs 3MB)
Of course you're right that if, instead of using Web UI in the first place, companies went straight to native apps then there'd be even more savings to be made -- but there's trade offs to be made with regards to aligning OSs and reusing components and onboarding engineers and writing good cross-platform tests when working in native that just aren't there when working with a WebUI, and something like Tauri which has many of the upsides with fewer of the externalities of Electron should be applauded at least as a step in the right direction.
I understand where this guy was coming from with the comment about Tauri being the same type of thing, but when you really take a look at Tauri, it seems to really hold up. There are some Tauri apps that have performance that is easily on par with native.
The only thing is that Tauri apps seem to be quite easy for the developer to botch and end up with performance problems. One of the worst performing apps I ever used in my life was a Tauri app.
> The only thing is that Tauri apps seem to be quite easy for the developer to botch and end up with performance problems. One of the worst performing apps I ever used in my life was a Tauri app.
I'd say that's generally true with web-based UIs. It's possible to create web UIs that perform fantastically. But you have to know the platform and be disciplined, and it's easy to mess it up.
Firefox is around 8% of market share in the US on non-mobile devices -- up from around 4.5% this time last year. It's downright wrong to see 80% increase in users over 12 months as 'dying' -- and in general 1 in 12 users is significant enough that you should be caring about it.
Commenters seen to love declaring things to be dying, and marketshare trends are only tangentially related. (see e.g. "Netcraft confirms it" meme)
I personally feel like softeare is dead once it is no longer useful, and there is no likelihood of that changing in the foreseeable future. That's obviously not the case woth Firefox.
On the other hand I've seen exaggerated reports of the demise of a project that hasn't had a git commit in the last week, or isn't commercially relevant for whatever the commenter is interested in. Even this doesn't seem to me to be true for Firefox, but I don't think the accusations will stop, or the signal-to-noise will increase.
Yeah, the younger generation must just be wired up differently, it's all those popular kids, can't be anything to do with the proliferation of scrum, agile, and crunch that make them focused on doing all those tickets ;)
Trying to educate a boomer (new official term for a millennial) into not complaining about zoomers is like trying to convince a zoomer into not dying inside when they think they have committed an act of cringe.
It's best not to try! These are the cultural delusions that drive us!
Saying Louis Rossmann is fighting for the right to repair while trying to keep individuals from repairing their own devices is like saying Linus Torvalds created Linux to keep people from getting the idea to build their own operating system.
Rossmann is fighting the good fight and also often doing videos showing how a repair actually works.
Most famously a video where he showed that a certain type of common Macbook screen repair is just a simple bent pin that he even repaired for free while the official Apple repair would have cost hundreds of dollars
The stuff that Rossmann repairs are "simple" because he has the tools and expertise to do so. It's very much a "$1 for the screw and $999 to know where to put it" type of situation.
Does everyone realistically expect Apple to have a Rossmann-level repair person[0] in every one of their 528 Apple Stores to do these "simple fixes" with professional gear.
Or is it actually more economical for them to build the equipment for swapping whole boards so simply that anyone with 30 minutes of training can do it. (This is the gear they rent to you when you want to self-repair btw)
[0] 3+ more likely so that they can have vacations and sick days too
Most companies do a simple board swap for the customer, but then send the faulty boards back to the factory to be 'refurbished' - ie. run through the automated test rig and check every function is fully working.
By doing that, an unnecessary board swap is 'free' to the manufacturer - which makes diagnosing problems in the store far easier - just keep swapping parts till the issue is resolved.
When those boards end up back at the factory, they'll pass the test immediately and be able to be sent right out again for another repair.
For boards that don't pass the test, sort them by the failure symptoms and suddenly repair becomes far easier - "these 50 need a new power supply IC, pay someone $25/hour on the rework station to do that, costing $3/board labour and $3/board in components".
I didn't argue that to shame on Apple.
I can understand why that is done ( especially with warranty extensions )
What I am arguing is that there may be a much cheaper ("easier" for the person who knows what to do) way to repair it if you don't care about the warranty but that path can currently be blocked by the manufacturer.
For example: We had a deadline for submitting our final game build last year and my laptop where I had everything setup died a day before the deadline. I went to a local electronics shop, bought a different laptop, removed the SSD from the broken one put it in the new one and was backup and running 30 minutes after returning home.
I would not have cared about warranty there, only about the speed of getting back up and running to meet the deadline.
Yes, he’s a really nice guy and likable and I enjoy his videos too.
But you cannot ignore the fact that he’s highly financially incentivized to hold the positions he does, given he both owns a repair shop and probably makes even more money talking about repairing things on YouTube.
They're not just videos "about repairing". He's teaching people about defects, finding them, and how to repair them. He's selling tools used for repairs, even though someone can start a competing business. It's like you're being sceptical of teachers because they're getting paid.
Why do you think he set up repair.wiki? It's a free resource he started to provide diagnostic and repair guides for a wide range of electronics. He's very transparent about wanting people to be able to repair their own devices and his actions clearly back that up.
These are not the actions of someone being protective of their skills to make more money imo.
