Your question is somewhat answered there: "What is Euro-Office?", "How does Euro-Office compare to IONOS Workspace, office.eu, the Proton productivity suite, Nextcloud Hub or XWiki?"

However especially "Why was a new office suite needed" is telling.

True EU sovereignty spells: the only requirement is, it must work "greatly" with MS. Oh well, in the past libreoffice and the likes mostly chose open formats as their reason.

If EU sovereignty means simply being a rip off, you get into trouble my friends. This is Chinas business and doesn't spell innovation nor does it mean optimism for the future.

In other words: AI doesn't have a blind spot no matter whether AI will ever "get" Cobol or not.

So even if we jump into 2050, we won't have to fix any React application due to three simply reasons: It is easier to build something new; AI understands the old garbage; and the last one: who knows, what will be in 2050?

Tough time.

My biggest concern is not AI, but the total demotivation of the veterans. Suddenly there isn't merit nor fun in building something over a week you took off. And that hits hard.

I am only judging the ones I was offered to send in teams but always refused. They appeared to be a rip off and and let's call it as it is: shit show.

I don't think that a hackathon solves anything worthwhile. If it would, why not make everything a hackathon? Why don't declare the exception the rule?

Good stuff takes effort and time. Crunch mode or death march as I used to call it because with their pale faces after three weeks without any free time, was generally something I despised and prevented in the first place.

I build the only successful Web Application in Financial Systems in a global bank and I knew we need to think smarter with all the responsibility and accountability. So we always sharpened our axe first.

I let my best devs work as much and long as they wanted because if you are in the zone, you exploit it. And yes, quite many freely worked at home on weekends as well, but I pushed them hard to not put this into the normal work stream in order to prevent any fake improvements that come to hurt them.

I gave them the promise to any free time they wanted and when they wanted given that they take care of their absence beforehand. I was never disappointed and people work differently. One guy worked month on no end, and suddenly hit me 9 pm "Boss, I need a break, give me two weeks starting tomorrow." Always granted without any hesitation.

Sprints? 80%, not 120% masked as "challenge". No dev gets bored. They need the feeling of being free to do their craft.

It worked best.

That's why I never personally as well as with any of my teams took part ever in a hackathon.

There is a reason why landing pages don't use distraction.

As a platform lead and product lead with millions of customers, be assured that you are not your customer. Never ever think of you as the focus of your website if you want to have success in business.

If you want to sell or marked and money as well as the slightest bit of seriousness is involved, you have to follow industry standards and never your own taste which is highly misleading.

Boring first is a good statement and principle to follow. Always track and A/B. There is a reason why all landing pages look the same kinda, and at least follow a certain structure.

Any deviation from it won't help you, even though you personally enjoy your personal website. You would be surprised what other visitors think about your website, how they perceive it, use it, and I mean literally everything: browser size, smartphone model, screen size, scrolling, click behavior, colors - everything.

I am so glad the psychology of online sales has matured. It is in everybody's interest to work in a trustworthy environment and using the right approach signals a company acknowledges and appreciate its customers.

I learned it the hard way, but got the lesson. I am totally different. I find many landing pages fishy, while they are the most successful there are, and like exploring on my own as well as fantastic animations.

On the other hand, I value the text only principles of everything serious from archivex and Pubmed. I am a developer fist, who loves animations sind decades. But this is bad for business. ;)

Personally, as someone being used to the Motorola Razor foldable, which happened to present back then. It was really good and cool as well. I hated the ever smaller getting Ericson smartphones.

I am looking forward to Apple's copy of Samsungs foldable smartphones. After all, I don't want to carry an iPhone as well as an iPad mini around with me.

And I see the foldable more as a replacement for the iPhone ultra max phones. No matter how large the screensize they have, they never beat the iPad mini on readability, even being stuck with the old one for many years.

Dude, in business we think in terms of large numbers, internationally easily in billion times processing images. This wouldn't cut it.

Also, do you buy the mega expensive super individually designed shoes from the best shoemaker there is to march along though some dirt or simply stick to gumboots?

OpenCV is used behind the scenes for many of the fancy stuff those major AI provider pretend to do. Claude is a huge system and not a LLM anymore.

However, the antithesis is also correct that there exist better solutions to solve the issues.

Both premises hold true.

I have an extensive assembler coding background on 6510, M68000, and i486. I had a very hard time accepting that something could be solved faster and more stable in a higher order language while the downside is more memory, more CPU etc.

More and more it turns out that programming languages are something accidentally read by machines and written by humans, even though this premise got destroyed lately by AI.

However, what I love about C++ is, that it has a basic canon of commands that can be used to build nearly everything while looking extremely ugly and hard to grasp if you don't read very slowly and accurately - so it is a very error prone and dangerous thing that rightfully got substituted by better constructs that allow for better distinctions as well as usage.

I could do everything in assembler (Hey Python users: you know that in the end everything ends up as machine code, don't you?) but it takes 100x times longer and is constantly reinventing the wheel.

Have you ever started to get into the intricacies of bit signs? No? Well, you should definitely, and to this day it gave me a lasting impression when I started wrapping my head around it, when I was 10 to 11 years old hacking my way into the world of assembler programming on C128.

You don't want to take every concept into consideration. You don't want to take interoperability into consideration. All the time!

You want to focus on the problem to solve, not the implications of the implementations all the time.

I am having such a blast very often using Python since it just works with much cognitive distraction about which language construct to use in order to get the machine doing what you want. It is so capable, enable it, to simply ensure within boundaries that the compiler uses the best decision given the context, which is up to analysis.

That's why I stopped using C++ or more precisely stopped any attempts and trying to be smart or fancy. I got to re-read and maintain the code month to years later and history showed, I don't marvel at how magic the line works and brutally smart I was at the time, but simply hate me for obscuring something in a line, that could be well understood if I had used 10 lines, while the compiler gives a damn anyway.

C++ is still necessary but every discussion to this day is about the point you made: every digit counts - and also which position, context etc. You got to be very prolific in order to put into a line what other put into 10.

Is it worth it? No.

In early days it was the correct decision. Memory was sparse, CPU power slow, and the language was small compared to today.

The last time I felt comfortable with a "assembler kind feeling" was with JavaScript before ES6. Peak jQuery level, with the most coolest concept only JavaScript has: Function.prototype.toString()

John Resig will have his place in my programming heroes olymp, who revealed this secret for me, and it opened my eyes for the beauty of higher order languages.

I admire C++, but so do I Python.

But I hope I won't have to ever use C++ again.

To put it:

" * Government decides and approves about the filters we have on our feeds * the government has the right and duty to tweak them if they're not working in the way a panel of experts decides * no ability to change providers since there is only one that takes care of your entire social graph / reach "

Choose the premise wisely.

Security, legal considerations, internal controls and tracking for monitoring.

See, corporate means usually financial services. Money laundering is a thing here and there are deliberately checks and controls implemented as well as boundaries which don't allow for "deploy to PROD instantly" processes since they pose a red flag.

For example, PEN testing is mandatory as well as token handling to connect to the right backend.

Legal, as a hint, has a show stopping word in here. Every text, that surfaces, needs to be approved first, and also documented. "How inflexibel and anti-business" you might think, but here is the kicker: the wrong words as well as wording gets you into trouble faster than you can imagine.

Here is one example out of many dangerous mistakes, that cost you dearly besides a noticeable shitstorm:

We (one of the largest banks operating globally) were 2017 (!) already closely monitored which means, every change would not be undetected. And we are not talking about days later, but instantly, seconds later.

We have to follow certain obligations in certain countries to conform to legislation. So we are also obliged to incorporate changes, but these had to follow strictly the letters of the law. So if you deploy this change 5 minutes too early or too late for a specific day, you could be hit by a lawsuit. Ridiculous you might say and I somehow have to agree but my opinion does not play a relevant role here or better: won't change because I follow law while keeping my opinion.

And this is also something that disallows for the "vibe code to PROD" myth: Usually many teams and departments are involved.

I am glad I worked in corporate, because my understanding went from the cocky and totally arrogant "One team from us would beat you all easily. You are totally outdated." line to the "Well, now I understand that it is a difference to be under scrutiny globally and have to define responsibility as well as accountability depending on the context. And god forgive me, that I had no insights into a huge regulated machine, that has serious redundancy, however it works and rebels do more harm than good."

BTW, the EU also plans for a energy transformation, being a military powerhouse, surveillance state - what else could be wish into reality?

My first association fired up the many letter makers that existed at the time.

Future Project build some great makers. They were common around 1986-87.

They featured a whole bunch of character fonts along with highly popular sounds from Rob Hubbard on their disk, usually 10 to 15.

I used the fonts and muziks as as starting point for my first endeavors into C64 assembly programming.

I really appreciate and acknowledge Google's innovations since their inception.

However I am also puzzled and stunned by their bogus product decisions. As far as I can say, and this is my personal opinion, Google has a lack of what I call portfolio management. Really. At the highest level there is no clear decision about product development as well as marketing.

Or, in other words: There is an overarching strategy, but under this there are many principalities that autonomously decide about their product portfolio.

This is by design. These principalities work independently of each other. They have partly conflicting products, no real corporate design so every product looks totally different, from old school and minimalistic Google Search look till AI and crypto bro inspired designs.

I don't want to go into details, but I was stunned the last time I got told by a high ranking Google exec, that they now do portfolio management and also consolidate the icons of the mobile apps, which means that they share the same look and feel and color scheme.

This gave us the red, blue, white buttons roughly 1-2 years ago, which didn't make any sense if you consider the individual app icon tied to its app, which partly didn't allow for the meaning of the app behind it.

That's why suddenly to us users a product gets killed, because of budget constraints or local decision making processes. An exec is running an experiment, so to say.

Paradoxically it isn't necessarily about earning money with these products, since Google is still extremely profitable which allows for all these "expensive" experiments.

My take is, that the exec responsible for the product doesn't hit the boss's KPIs with the new product, which of course aren't disclosed to the public, but amount to partly a very significantly high incentive aka pay check. We talk about millions, not a couple of bucks. Incentive works. Extremely well.

So yes, there is only Google, but if you consider the mental model of having several independently operating business units working together like independent companies in a holding and the holding usually doesn't care about your product as long as some boundaries aren't crossed and it hits the target KPIs, Google is fine with all its products.

I talked to many folks about this, and why are they not joining forces or aligning certain products to improve these significantly - it won't fly.

A senior developer from one of the US top banks once told me: "Why align or reuse code? We earn so much money, there is no need to minimize costs or even think about it, because that would only be waste of time. Instead we create product after product."

Don't judge different companies by the sorry state we are used to. ;)

Remember: one year showed up to be a gigantic leap in regards to quality of results and innovation in the AI space. Agents weren't really a thing and vibe coding wasn't even invented as a term because the top notch tools at the time were lousy, with lovable being the frontrunner with its - in my view - sorry Tailwind recombination tool shaming AI to do the work.

Then fall hit 2025 hit us, new year's eve and suddenly there was such a massive surge of innovation and competition with ChatGPT Codex suddenly showing up.

Remember: one year ago many now commonly used tools weren't yet available like Nano Banana or Codex.

"The 25k are so vast" - Yes, and no. For example, if the machine is bought for business usage I can deduct the costs from taxes. This roughly amount for 50% of the financial burden.

So I jokingly use to say, that I pay only half the price for my Apple business machines. And yes, I am strict in this regard. Business means business. No private emails etc. nothing on my company computers.

Maybe there are other options as well to reduce the financial expenses the dude mentions, but it doesn't seem so.

I would also go for leasing, this way already the monthly payments can be deduced and I don't need to buy and maybe resell the machine.

Apple is a luxury good. Without business usage or at least partly using it for business as well as private (mixed usage in tax reports) I wouldn't buy the devices or think twice.

Apple under Cook evolved into a Gucci like luxury brand, that is more and more a rip off than quality delivered, especially considering the latest OS updates for Mac, iOS and iPad. Apple is a mess, following Microsoft Windows' footsteps happily, because the CEO is as has been correctly assessed, no product guy.

But I stop with my rant here.

Always try to use tax deduction as leverage for your computer expenses. Every citizen should invest in basic knowledge about that.

Even a 10-20% professional usage for work (mixed usage) gives you a noticeable advantage over normal pay.

Proof: Propaganda, DAT, teleprompter. Who cares, if the show is right? All the open studio concepts have limited credibility.

Also there are a lot of incompetent people running and ruining businesses. In fact, that's called evolution.

So, who cares? I do, because I know what I want, but would happily develop my own station to play what I want. This is actually what my innver voice at least sometimes does.

There is a reason why startups succeeded because the founders actually ate their own dog food as well as solved a problem that many felt.

Products are no projects. Product development is so incredible hard.

The reason why I like Steve Jobs is his nerdy personality, best shown in the iTunes key note. For two hours the guy plays around with the app, demonstrating what to do with it, how and why.

Remember, this is the CEO. No wonder lower ranks had a hard time when they came up with ignorance about a product.

Today’s so called Product Owners know next to nothing about their product nor craft.

Design by committee. And this is what will will AI as bloated bottleneck: piling on a mess of documents only ever increasing context windows can barely make sense of.

The lost art of lines deleted is amplified within the AI age.

Please show me only ten of the SaaS you lead that rely on your CSS framework.

You must have one, because you talk about structure and premises. Orderly put and repeatedly applied you get a framework.

I doubt it.

I registered my first domain 1997. I love to debate anyone coming up with a clever not so clever theoretical argument against Tailwind.

Where are all the you might not need jQuery JavaScript guys?

The same goes for Tailwind.

And just as a reminder: CSS started as so called separation of markup and design. A zen garden tried to proof this but only showed how one cannot exist without the other.

Loose coupling as the saying goes.

Since the ACID test CSS went from some proposals to a stunning black hole of finally receiving differential treatment with the level nomenclature.

And you besides all incompatibility issues and different browsers still think that you really grasp CSS or even know how to apply it semantically correct even though by matter of fact many concepts feature bogus terminology due to compatibility issues?

I would love to interview you regarding edge cases. Do you get box models? Collapsing markings? Floats? Clearfix? Order of application?

Print layouts? Views vs fluid design?

Really, attacking Tailwind is the same as “Let’s build our own Google” trope. It shows lack of competence.