Yes, it's totally fine to be dissatisfied with a service and cancel subscription when you're no longer getting the value. I think that it's the rational thing to do.

Lately, several months go by without me even touching Netflix. I'm at the stage, where I keep the subscription because of maybe one show in a year which I then watch in a week, when it's finally released.

Edit: My experience with Excel - https://twitter.com/martin_ky/status/983019737729916930?s=20

I have never come across a Google product and thought “this is a well designed and clear to use program”. Except perhaps Google Search and Gmail of old - between circa 2005-2008.

To a state where users need a (another) datacenter to access/view/use even trivial apps with “reasonable” responsiveness. There are services already being offered to this end [1].

[1] https://mightyapp.com/

What I mean is, work in a domain you know something about, with tools and technologies you know well. Be comfortable with your skills and know they are on par with the task you've been given (and also know when they are not). Don't put more on your plate than you can take.

Of course, being too comfortable can result in stagnation. Sometimes, we need to push ourselves or be pushed in order to learn and grow. Let your superiors know when a task is outside your comfort zone. A good mentor will try to push you, but also let you fail gracefully.

At my workplace it's about 60:40 Windows to Mac user ratio. Regardless of the machine, nobody closes the lid when moving in the office between desks and meeting rooms. So, I'd say it's probably not that.

I think, it could have been Java (or the JVM at least) in place of WebAssembly in browsers already a long time ago, were it a more open standard.

For example, a road built with cheaper materials will break and need to be patched more often. A poorly engineered application will be slower, consume more CPU power, more data bandwidth and require more storage space, will be buggier and waste more users' time.

With only a very basic understanding of economic theory, I would imagine that market forces at scale would optimize these inefficiencies and ultimately work to reduce total costs. Perhaps this unconscious, natural process would even work, were we not consciously optimizing against it on the wrong variables, such as the next quarter's profits.

No it’s not. With WebAssembly, it is a matter of trust in your browser vendor and its ability to properly sandbox WASM/JS content. With plugins, you basically gave up full control of your machine also to whichever plugin vendor. The number of trusted relationships is different - it’s fewer with builtin WebAssembly. That is a noteworthy distinction, I think.

This is a common misconception of beginner Qt users or people who just looked at Qt superficially and decided not to use it, because it's not "regular C++".

You use Qt with 100% pure C++. Qt itself is written in 100% pure C++. The part that confuses people is the metaobject compiler (or MOC). This is a simple code generator tool that provides additional features like runtime type information and reflection. It does not modify your source code, only generates some additiona, 100% legal C++. Granted, this requires an extra build step before invoking the C++ compiler. But Qt's build system handles this automatically, and it's not really difficult to integrate into any other build system.

Starting with Qt 5, you don't even need to invoke the MOC compiler, because in many cases, the features provided with generated code were replaced by new C++11 functionality.

If/when C++ gets proper metaclasses and programmable compile-time code generation, there will be no more need for MOC, because all of its functions can then run in a single compilation step.

There's a great blog post debunking the myths about the QT metaobject compiler - https://woboq.com/blog/moc-myths.html

That has been my experience as well.

I think the web dev crowd advocating HTML/CSS originates in a) limited knowledge beyond the web tech field, and/or b) thinking that web is the state-of-the-art of computing.

The trouble with modern web is, that it was not so much designed as it evolved. But evolution in general is doggone slow and produces mistakes and mutations. I think the evolution of the web platform is still in a very early phase.