We're just looking at a single app optimized for a platform nearly 2 decades after release and somehow concluding people don't ever optimize software these days. Some software is always going to be inefficient as can be but there is more well optimized software available now than there ever has been.

And often it is like they are stealing from the company. I remember seeing on LinkedIn a ${seniorExec} of a place I worked at posting how they are a million miler first class traveler on airline X but they'll be switching to airline Y exclusively from now on because X's point system isn't as good anymore. The moral of the post was supposed to be something about treating your customers right for loyalty or something, what I took away from it is this person is throwing away my entire trip travel budget on individual flights because they are selecting how to get the best kickback. Meanwhile I'm trying to get approval to chop 4 hours off what should be an 8 hour door to door flight by spending $120 more than the recommended flight to avoid an extra hop and layover because that just makes no $ sense from a hours perspective.

The best perk I ever got for travel was an actual pay increase for it, many times larger than any hotel or flights points program has ever been worth to me. If you want to give your travelling employees a perk then that is a real way to do it, not a few brand specific dollars for each part of the trip you have to sign up for.

https://x.com/XenoKovah/status/1339914716454526979

> I purposely designed a mechanism so that M1 Macs would retain the capability to boot completely arbitrary code instead of XNU if users wanted. But you have to 1) reboot to recoveryOS with a physical power button press and 2) put in your SEP-backed credentials.

> The challenge to running arbitrary code of course, as @marcan42 noted in his crowdfunding effort to getting linux on the M1, is that the SOC is undocumented, so you still have to reuse bits of XNU and/or reverse engineer a bunch of stuff.

> As one senior architect said "the contract is that there is no contract". So that Apple can change things to suit its own needs, not others', to build the best macOS experience, which is what most customers (besides y'all who follow me) are there for.

12.1 also added support for raw image boot, which was seemingly for, and has only been relevant to, making booting Asahi Linux easier. Discussion at the time https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29591578 and an archive of the tweet's content below:

> Looks like Apple changed the requirements for Mach-O kernel files in 12.1, breaking our existing installation process... and they also added a raw image mode that will never break again and doesn't require Mach-Os. And people said they wouldn't help. This is intended for us.

I just threw them a small donation for supporting this software for so long, even if it's only 98% how I'd want the project to be run all these years myself.

In general, you're almost certainly no longer on the path to calculating anything that should be called TCO once you've started removing costs associated with using the item. Apart from that, you're probably not on your way to a very meaningful cost comparison either.

Interactive data filters would definitely be fun on its own account though. E.g. the population slider or by having a button making it the largest cities above x population instead of countries/capitals or so on with centers of states. It looks like there are several different maps on this site, such things may make it more a single experience with more overall value than the separated parts. Still cool as it is though :) just one possibility to go further with it.

Even if they don't want to handle it directly, this is the kind of thing a single sponsor can pay Igalia for, who have shown the ability to make entire new Chromium subsystems like MathML. There is no shortage of C++ browser developers in the world to do maintenance work.

All of these kinds things need protection against data loss and centralized control+management, not just the user folder alone.

Looking at it more, I believe the story repeats with the TSMC processes used for the CPU vs chips like GB200 as well.

Even if none of the above were the case, the question still isn't "why not make the enterprise GPU" it's "why not make the higher margin per chip area product". If the NV1/GB10 take less die space and cost a lot it's not immediately apparent the enterprise GPU actually nets Nvidia more $ per die or not. That's why it's relevant these will be sold at a premium.