wfleming

Nikanj isn't wrong (and is funny), but I think the other (more justifiable) reason is that jQuery largely isn't necessary anymore: when it came out, there were an uncountable number of browser incompatibilities that needed painting over, and APIs for remote requests, DOM querying & manipulation and the like were very immature, so a library to make everything usable was extremely valuable.

Now, those APIs are mature & standardized & it's generally not too hard to write vanilla JS that works across all the major browsers.

I don't think jQuery has failed, but for the kind of baked-in functionality Rails wants it's not really needed, and there are good reasons not to pack another dependency into your framework if it will increase page download size & is increasingly unlikely to be used by the framework's users.

I agree: I personally find Rust more expressive than Go. I don't think it has any more "semantic overhead" than any other language with a highly featured type system.

To tie it back to the article a bit, Rust also seems like a relatively natural choice for a team considering switching from Haskell if their reason for switching is performance. The niche Rust fills for me personally is that it has a very robust type system (putting it in a similar camp as Haskell) with an explicit focus on fast, performant code (which Haskell does not have).

I'm a little surprised it didn't seem that they considered a GC-less language like Rust. If your latency requirements are that strict & you're already considering a total rewrite, I would personally have been looking into a solution that would avoid GC entirely.

> Again: no way to enumerate the options at compile or runtime so copy paste it is:

The author didn't find a built-in function to construct a list of option tags from a list of strings, so, instead of building their own... they copy pasted all the strings and manually built the option tags one by one. They could have collapsed that into a one-line `map` call.

Elm is young and has a long way to go: it is definitely missing many of the conveniences that a web framework will give you (such as functions for building forms from data). Personally, I miss typeclasses coming from Haskell. But it is a Haskell/ML-influenced language before it is a web framework, so for a while anybody using it should expect to be building more of their own plumbing.

Maybe I'm being presumptuous, but the author's approach seems like the kind of error fairly junior programmers make all the time: "if there's no function to do it for me, it can't be done, I'll copy-paste". That's a teachable moment. It's too bad if trying Elm when they didn't have the experience to build their own plumbing turned them off from that kind of approach: I liked Elm for a side project, and am hoping to try similar approaches like PureScript in the future. Getting the "if it compiles it probably works" experience on the front end is addictive.

As you've probably noticed in the other replies here, opinions vary widely :).

These kinds of things are also part of why I switched to OS X in 2003-ish, so I understand the hesitation.

In my experience, Linux is perfectly fine nowadays for these things. I've been traveling a bit recently (and so have been using a lot more random WiFi access points, tethering with my phone, and relying on battery for power), and everything's pretty much just worked for me.

My company's development team is just about 50/50 Linux/Mac now, and I haven't seen any real difference between the two sides with issues for WiFi. In fact, I've probably seen more difficulty on the Mac side recently: I feel like the last few versions of OS X have had the habit of randomly dropping WiFi connections sometimes. One of my friends has an MBP that will drop a connection & refuse to reconnect until restarted (or at least he hasn't yet found a solution that doesn't involve restarting).

It's possible a lot of the issues people report might be down to hardware/distribution choices: not all hardware support is equal, and not all Linux distributions are equal. FWIW I use Arch Linux on a ThinkPad.

That all might sounds a little "works on my machine", but I'm not trying to say that the contrary stories of people having a terrible time aren't valid concerns. What I am saying is that many Linux users have perfectly stable & pleasant experiences, and many Mac/Windows users don't have stable/pleasant experiences, so ultimately YMMV regardless of what setup you choose.

I like the BSDs, and considered doing that instead of Linux.

My company is a heavy Docker user, though: dealing with docker-machine & running Docker via a VM on OS X was one of the final straws that caused me to switch. Given that FreeBSD's Docker support is pretty recent (and was still considered beta when I was deciding to switch), and OpenBSD doesn't have any native support at all as far as I know, I felt that the probability of trading one annoyance for a similar one was too high, so Linux was the right choice for me.

Proper window tiling was one of the annoyances that prompted me to switch!

I used dwm at first when I switched back to Linux, but found it still doesn't handle multi-head very well, so now I use XMonad (with dmenu), and have been very content with it.

> Linux can solve some pro needs, but not most. It’s a fantastic server OS but a miserable desktop one, and that will probably never change.

Depending on which pro needs We're talking about, I don't believe this is true anymore.

I was a Linux user for many years, then an OS X user for over a decade, and earlier this year I'd had enough with being annoyed by OS X & switched back to Linux. I am extremely happy I did.

If you want beautiful GUIs or do video/audio/graphics editing then, yes, macOS is still superior. If you are a developer who spends most of your time split between the terminal and the browser, then Linux is not just an acceptable substitute, but can in fact be a superior replacement.

I had completely forgotten they added Windows Container support when running the daemon on a Windows host! Thanks for the correction.

To add some technical explanation to what larrybud said: Docker containers aren't full VMs. They don't virtualize the computer hardware or the OS kernel. So when you run a bunch of Docker containers on a computer, all of those containers are still using the same underlying OS kernel. Docker really only natively runs on Linux (and BSD), and all Docker containers are running in Linux, so running a Windows VM inside a Docker container would really only be possible if you also ran something like VirtualBox inside the Docker container (and I can't really imagine that working or being a good idea).

In short: VirtualBox is still probably the best option for running those IE VMs, and for cases like this Docker is not really a replacement for or competitor with solutions like VirtualBox.

I recently switched to Enpass[1] and am reasonably happy with it: it might be an alternative for you to consider as well.

It's very much a 1Password ripoff, which I mean as a compliment: the UI will be familiar to you. It's not nearly as polished as 1Password, but there don't seem to be many native password managers that are. Their desktop clients are free, and their mobile clients are flat licenses (actually free downloads with limited functionality as a demo, and in-app purchase to unlock, but whatever).

Sync options are actually a bit better than 1Password I think: the usual suspects like Dropbox are there, but you can also sync over your own webdav server if you want to.

I switched because I wanted something that had a decent Linux client. If 1Password is going the way of subscription pricing, it seems like I made my switch none too soon.

[1]: https://www.enpass.io/

Is that 10 hours being used or 10 hours just sitting in your pack? I've taken my iPhone 5 on a couple 5-10 day hikes in airplane mode & it's done pretty well.

Why wouldn't Apple's current usage of "force touch" also conflict with this?

Maybe I'm just tired & not able to detect sarcasm right now, but isn't 2^80 bytes more bytes than are currently stored in the world? That's on the order of 10^24, which is something like 1 million exabytes, which is a million squared terabytes, right?

There is a new content blocking API in iOS 9 that makes it possible to write third-party ad-blockers.

Apple isn't writing their own, or pre-installing one, or anything like that. (At least, nothing like that has been publicly discussed, and I'd be very surprised if it was something they did.)

Ditto: so much about Meteor just makes the day-to-day work of building something a real pleasure compared to other tools.

For me, the thing really holding it back from more serious work is that I've had real problems getting testing to work well: Velocity[1] has had a bunch of problems for me.

I hope things like the focus on MongoDB and the lack of good automated testing tools are just because Meteor is still fairly immature. It could be a really good tool for a lot of use-cases.

[1]: http://velocity.meteor.com

Do you have any plans for better iTunes library 'sync' support (i.e. delta updates from a changed iTunes library after initial import, and maybe even writing your changes back to iTunes)? I understand the long-term technical challenges involved, especially since Apple can (and will) change the file format just to mess with you. But for me, at least (although I suspect this would be true for many), this would be a critical feature to really switch. Mostly because iTunes is always going to be the bottleneck for syncing to my iPhone, which I use extensively for music.

That said, I think this is a really awesome effort. iTunes has definitely become way too bloated, so it's great to see a serious alternative being attempted.