I'd create a Chrome OS alternative (like CloudReady which was bought by Google) for old Intel Macs and other laptops that won't get official Win 11 support, and maybe partner with some productiviy SaaS to have a working GDocs and Office 365 alternative.
Open/Libre Office and their UX are too complicated for normal users like most Linux apps that are modeled after professional desktop applications.
Considering the amount of hardware that's out there and never will work on newer operating systems having a easy to install and use OS for web productivity tasks will very likely be a big driver for overall market share.
Is there a miniature ASIO soundcard planned for one of the slots? Not needing to carry an external audio interface around when working within a DAW is a major factor that's keeping me on MacOS (both pro audio and consumer use the same driver there).
They publish the CAD files (both mechanical and electrical) on GitHub with instructions on how to manufacture your own expansion cards. I believe the interface within the expansion cards is just standard USB-C. If someone could manage to squeeze all the necessary components within the physical dimensions, it should be possible to make your own soundcard expansion card.
Maybe addional hardware wouldn't even be needed. Onboard soundcards should be good enough for ASIO (they work fine on Hackintoshs and Core Audio on MacOS). The reason why it's not offered is the licensing I think, it's properietary technology from Steinberg, a German company who invested into Windows pro audio early on and kinda got a first mover advantage there.
I don't know how much licensing would cost, but Framework could possibly offer a driver for the internal card as an addon. Then the slot could be used for a small headphone amp which would be more third party friendly I think.
The only things 99% of people used PCMCIA for were networking (modems, Ethernet, or Wi-Fi) and once that got built in people didn't really need slots. The long tail of I/O is now handled by USB/Thunderbolt dongles.
I had those, but think framework’s design with a flat face for the port is a better design. For example one of my cards was the xylink? ether card with full-size port was the most useful. Looked like this: https://eu.dlink.com/pl/pl/-/media/product-pages/dfe/670txd/...
You don't need "professional" drivers for your sound card in 2022, latency and stability are mostly a solved problem. There are a few "nice to haves" about ASIO on Windows but it's almost entirely useless, and it's not like Steinberg is maintaining ASIO anymore.
I'm sceptic - I can't run anything with reasonable latency without using ASIO4ALL on my built-in Realtek sound card. Mainboard is with B450 chipset, from around 2017.
a high-quality DAC would be pretty neat. I'm not sure what connectors would be best though. RCA would be ideal, but those are probably too thick. Mini jack is obvious, but low quality.
It'd be particularly cool to get balanced outputs.
You can compare monochromatic scales between various color space interpolations and order them by contrast (great for accessibility work). Lab is from the 70s, the newest one there is CIECAM2 from the 2000s, also looking most natural to my eyes.
Kinda sad that there is no distinction made between color selection and color production. RGB based color opponents (e.g. red - cyan, green - purple) are less pleasing to the eye and culturally relevant than RYB ones (red - green, yellow - purple).
Let's say you develop a luxury theme, the yellow - purple opponency would naturally lead you to the classic colors of royality, purple and gold.
If (and that is a big if) using opponents results pleasing pairings only with some specially crafted wonky RYB colorspace then to me that is more just an indication that using opponents is not a robust way of picking pleasant pairings.
I am also very dubious about the claim of the color pairings being more or less "culturally relevant".
They're more pleasing because artists and graphic designers used RYB pairings for decades, these pairings all over the place in analog and digital media, people are more used to them. Even Adobe still uses an RYB wheel in their software, RGB only for color grading (it still deviates slightly from a normal RGB color distribution).
RYB is more culturally relevant because artists and designers "produce" culture based on it.
I'm wondering how you guys are searching, do you type in short word combinations like 20yrs ago or full sentences and questions? Thing is Google values search intent above anything else right now, and if you don't show clear intent they have to guess, and the selection of search results will be mixed in consequence.
Here's a up to date PDF from Google explaining search intent:
Sorry but you're holding it wrong if you don't search intentful enough.
NL queries return poor results if the content creator didn't create it with searchers in mind. Most of these sites also often have a very poor UX.
There's of course a larger incentive to optimize for popular stuff, especially when there's commercial intent (or implied commercial intent by the absence of informational intent).
Bad search results can be opportunities, and many new bloggers focus on this right now which is why they often appear first in search results before the actual experts.
But it would only take experts to improve their content to outrank them because expertise and trust are also ranking factors right behind UX, and if you have both you win. Expertise alone just isn't enough.
> Sorry but you're holding it wrong if you don't search intentful enough.
i.e. the users of my search engine are not helping me well enough for me to do my job.
> NL queries return poor results if the content creator didn't create it with searchers in mind.
i.e. the content creators from 30 years ago where not clairvoyant enough to consider the robot crawling needs I have, in order to do my job.
> Most of these sites also often have a very poor UX.
i.e. the content creators I am indexing just have plain text which is not helping me well enough, for me to do my job.
I wonder if there is ever an instance wherein google employees are able to look within and realize there is work to be done rather than blame external constraints. Specially when other search engines are still able to satisfy exotic/technical/archive queries, despite these external constraints.
Google had a mission to organize the world's information and make it accessible. It seems Alphabet has rewritten it to "organize the world's information"... "for popular stuff, especially when there's commercial intent".
>A lot of technically sound solutions in this space simply lack the addictive quality to draw in the crowds. Instagram and similarly popular networks, for all their flaws, are designed from the ground up to exploit human nature. If you sit on any form of public transport, you can see this in action. People obsessively checking whatever networks they are on.
I think the main reason why they're hard to beat is the first mover advantage of becoming the first popular networks of their kind.
This advantage creates multi-sided markets. There are strong incentives for businesses to build on top of those platforms enabled by reaching a critical mass of users, this advantage is converting networks into a self promotional flywheels pulling in more and more users.
It gets addictive because businesses usually know their audience and journey they're on and create content incentivizing them to take the next step in that journey.
Of course it's addicitve for users if you can anticipate their next step, and for businesses if they have all those micro targeting options just a click away. The easy way wins.
What makes it professional is that it's designed, with the intent to look oldschool/unprofessional. You've likely used a process and tools you were already familiar with.
Vernacular/unprofessional web design is search engine driven these days – using what's in reach. Basically searching for "create a website" and using one of the guides and tools popping up in the search results.
