Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | catach's commentslogin

> Battery state is probably the only thing that I really think it must show you.

The screenshot provided does show a battery indicator in the top right of the UI (Usage section).


In my defense, I couldn't see that part of the screenshot because of the way the page crops it responsively.


I've found the "Copy text from image" menu command to be useful from time to time, and the features I'm not interested in seemed easy to turn off/dismiss/ignore?


> It’s not a big enough slice for them to want to chase.

Typical strat for them is not to be first with an innovation, but to wait and work out the kinks enough that they can convince people that the tradeoffs are well worth making. Apple wouldn't be chasing that existing slice, they'd be trying to entice a larger share of their customers to upgrade faster.


It's really difficult because many of the task types we use AI for are those that are linguistically tied to concepts of human actions and cognition. Most of our convenient language use implies that AI are thinking people.


If the closed fork functionality is superior enough to make the original de facto obsolete then the users have already collectively decided that the tradeoff is worth it.

And if the original can't compete it means the additional functionality was only going to exist because the financial model of the closed fork could pay for it.


> And if the original can't compete it means the additional functionality was only going to exist because the financial model of the closed fork could pay for it.

This completely disregards the fact that the "financial model of the closed fork" explicitly chose to build upon the permissively licensed original.

If the company chooses to build upon free software, they should be obligated to give back to the community from which they leech. Otherwise, they should just build their own thing from scratch with all the money they've hoarded, and keep it closed.


> If the closed fork functionality is superior enough to make the original de facto obsolete then the users have already collectively decided that the tradeoff is worth it.

Users cannot be trusted to make their own decisions about these kinds of things for the same reason that corporations cannot be trusted to be environmental stewards and children cannot be trusted to select a dinner menu or file taxes.


Just because users don't make the same choices you do, doesn't mean those choices are invalid.


users can only choose what is available. the license greatly affects the options that a user can choose from.


You know what would be even better? If the new functionality was open.

The original can't compete because the original author used a permissive license. Do you want to make yourself not compete?


That's not the only reason it would become the defacto standard, and it's naive to claim so.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extingu...

Users can get a bundled version that slowly breaks compatibility forcing vendors to align with the closed source version.


It would indeed be naive to make that claim, so it's a good thing that's not what I did.


> If the closed fork functionality is superior enough to make the original de facto obsolete then the users have already collectively decided that the tradeoff is worth it.

I'm afraid you did. Users are lazy, and IE and Java on Windows are great examples.


at the expense of the original developer whose work was taken advantage of without giving anything back or paying it forward.


Speed of replication isn't a part of copyright law, is it?


No, but I have to wonder if the reason it isn't is because up until now it was so slow and time consuming etc to create a replication.


Nope.

But I do feel bad for partaking in part for Louis CK's Twitter-Jesus rant.

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSSDeesUUsU


I have TST set up thus: closing a tab will close all its child tabs, if that branch is collapsed. Pretty sure Sidebery can be configured the same way.


I recall it being claimed that Mozilla has the warchest to survive at typical spending levels for quite some time, without Google.


If I am reading their financial statement correctly, they have about 3 years of runway. $500M/year expenses, $65M/year revenue other than search deals, $45M/year interest on savings and $1300M assets.

https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2024/mozilla-fdn-202...


Indicating that they could make it amazing if they wanted to, they just don't want to. Likely due to cost.


They organized their entire product line around premium artist products for the adobe cloud type spending professionals and it just doesn't work for them. It was a crazy strategy. They're still putting out new surfaces that have the same fundamental problem and burning their brand. They came out before Apple Pencil and made almost no improvement to it since then. Even the old windows ink laptops from the early 2000s had better stylus support (Wacom).


Incrementals tend to rely on a drip-feed of new mechanics and capabilities at the introductory phase, extensive automation in the middle phase, and marathon-like competition against other high-ranked players in the elite phase.

I don't think it's a particularly good counter-example.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: