Amen. You’re like a capitalist, but without the capital.

The one thing scrum has succeeded in is creating an industry of people that get paid to do little work, which is fine as long as they don’t take themselves seriously enough to get in the way. Bullshit jobs are a needed feature of a well run economy.

This is a bad interpretation from the outlet. VW has been fighting against tariffs for Chinese EVs.

If I go to any of the teams I interact with who program their components in C++ and proposed Rust or anything else, I’d get a similar reaction. They’re very good at C++ and they very rarely have memory and threading issues. 😂

Commitment issues.

“It’s herding cats: introducing Rust effectively is one part coding work and ninety-nine parts political work…”

All software development in a team is. More like 20/80 or 40/60 if you’re lucky.

So far one of the best use cases for AI in software engineering has been identifying idiots and sociopaths.

Kinda, however Linux is always better in one regard - we can change it and it generally serves the needs of its users since its users build and change it. Windows and macOS on the other hand serve the needs of Microsoft’s and Apple’s major shareholders and only in part of their users to the degree they can get away with. The goal is always gaining and retaining market share while extracting the most value from the users - money, data, etc.

If enough of us wanted a sleek, uber smooth desktop that has all UI bases covered, we could totally do it. We just don’t give enough shit and we’re content with what it is. Case in point, I know multi-monitor support isn’t amazing, so I buy a bigger monitor and use more windows. 🥹 Personally I’ve been content with the mainstream desktop Linux UX since 2012-14. You won’t see me digging into features in GNOME or Wayland.

It depends on what you’re using it for. Elaborate multi monitor setups? Starting a web server? Controlling a robot? A car’s ECU?

Linux isn’t a specific platform. Linux the kernel is a generic kernel that can be used and tuned for virtually any hardware. GNU/Linux the OS is also a generic OS that can be customized to work for variety of use cases. The most popular desktop Linux OSes are still very generic. Most of them aren’t built to be power efficient on laptops for example. Yet we know Linux can be very power efficient on variety of purpose-built mobile hardware.

Windows on the other hand was built from the start to be a desktop OS. The desktop and later laptop use cases have always been primary. To the point of making other use cases more difficult. The same is true for macOS. So when you see them performing well in some desktop-related use cases where Linux might struggle a bit, it’s no surprise. If enough of us wanted it to be better at that, we could make it happen. If enough of us wanted macOS or Windows to do something Apple or MS didn’t, tough luck. So it’s just a matter of priorities and resources.

The kludge wins. 😅

Are you sure? Cause KVM’s doc lists two: https://www.linux-kvm.org/page/WindowsGuestDrivers/Download_Drivers and the first one ain’t Fedora. The language used doesn’t suggest that one is a canonical source either. Now imagine that I’m a noob or otherwise using KVM for the first time. I have to figure out what the difference is and which one to get because I don’t want to make a mistake and end up with a broken install. Mind you I have ended up with bad graphics depending on which driver and what version I’ve installed.

On the client side of a relayd-based wireless bridge using OpenWrt, I discovered there was a bug in that relayd version which made the process hang after it moved so many gigs of data. I made a cron job that pings the network relayd makes accessible. If the ping fails, it nukes relayd. Of course this relies on a live machine to ping. If this machine dies for some reason, the cron job would just keep killing relayd over and over again. 🥹

I think NDISwrapper is still maintained for issues like this.

I think anyone doing production administration would be using some storage level snapshots. Also updates are rarely done in production. Typically new VMs are spun up, from prebuilt images that contain the new updates.

It objectively takes fewer mouse clicks and keyboard keystrokes to install a Windows VM with drivers and full integration (3D, shared folders, etc.) on VMware Player than virt-manager. I could count them for you but I have better things to do. Setting up an equivalent VM with virt-manager is significantly more work. Just a trivial example - getting the VirtIO drivers. On virt-manager you have to search the web, find multiple sources, figure out which to use, figure out which version to download, download it. On VMware, you click the top menu, then Install VM tools, the end. With that said I’m not complaining, because I don’t have the time to write the patches needed for virt-manager to work the same, but the difference is there.

VMware Player is the best by far in terms of GUI and ease of use. With that said:

• It breaks once in a while due to kernel module / kernel mismatches that sometimes require manual patching. This is rare but it happens once every couple of years
• It may become paid given Broadcom’s corporate history

Virt-manager is pretty decent and it will not break on a stable distro but:

• Some of it workflows are far from intuitive
• Virtualization via virt-manager (really KVM) doesn’t currently have any 3D acceleration for Windows VMs
• Windows driver/guest tools installation and integration isn’t nearly as trivial as it is with VMware

Personally, I’d try using virt-manager because it will work “forever.” If you can’t get something to work and feel overwhelmed, go to VMware for now but long term you’ll likely have to get used to virt-manager.

We do, however, need zealots in the ecosystem

This is a very important point. I left the rest of the sentence not because it’s not important but because most people understand that part.

Way to distract from otherwise good argument about firmware. Really dumb take. In case you think I’m being flippant, let me present an alternative blob:

GNU are striving for the ideal goal of fully open source hardware and software. Their statement correctly highlights the compromises of the reality of using proprietary hardware which requires proprietary firmware; compounded by the reality of oligopolies maintaining their market positions via proprietary software. Our take is that providing an otherwise open source OS within this reality is significantly better for people than letting full corporate control reign until open mobile hardware becomes practical and common, if it ever does.

I should have know that the person on the internet noting 30Mbps was pretty good till recently is a fellow Canadian. 🍁 #ROBeLUS

BTW, TekSavvy recently started offering fiber seemingly on Bell’s last mile.

Yeah, I also moved from 30Mb upload to 700Mb recently and it’s just insane. It’s also insane thinking I had a symmetric gigabit connection in Eastern Europe in the 2000s for fairly cheap. It was Ethernet though, not fiber. Patch cables and switches all the way to the central office. 🫠

Most people in Canada today have 50Mb upload at the most expensive connection tiers - on DOCSIS 3.x. Only over the last few years fiber began becoming more common but it’s still fairly uncommon as it’s the most expensive connection tier if at all available.