cancel @cancel@merveilles.town

@eqe @sir @neauoire Yeah. I saw the oxidizer for the new engines listed first and didn't type the other ingredient because I'm stupid (since RP-1 implies the oxidizer).

But I wasn't implying either is clean, just that they're willing to change how they work, and they'll need to reclaim carbon somehow for the Mars missions at the least. (The soil in Mars has the oxygen frozen in it?)

@eqe @sir @neauoire oh yeah I wasn't claiming raptor engine is cleaner. It has a way higher oxidizer mixture though, right? Like I usually see it listed first. Actually I guess I should look it up.

@sir @neauoire yeah they are using RP-1 for these engines. Their future engines use LOX.

Their future plans include a carbon-capture system (which apparently they've already been working on?) so that the carbon that does get used in engines comes out of the atmosphere, so there's 0 net gain or less in atmospheric carbon.

They're forced to do this on Mars anyway since there's no way to dig carbon out of the ground there.

@rugk a bit -- it's kind of a blend. like the toggle switches aren't actually in Mac desktop OS, only iOS.

Menus are de-emphasized. Some other stuff.

It gets points for easy installation and working out of the box.

@codesections What about the reverse argument -- getting billed for the downtime on the SLA

@raelzero hey if I'm gonna be mean I'm gonna do it thoroughly

@raelzero I would get along really badly with myself

Official update:

I was 75% mistaken on the part of the scare-dialog.

"Curation" overuse receives a neutral rating.

0% mistaken on the toggle switches. Screw toggle switches, man.

Thanks to:
@codesections @cassidyjames
@mdhughes
@sp6mr

In a few years, people will describe me behind my back like:

"Don't bring up the topic of toggle switches on desktop GUIs around that guy... he gets angry"

@cassidyjames Maybe that's just me. But I've pointed this out to some of my friends in the past and they've said "ah yeah me too". I can gather a group of people if you don't believe me!

The switches also take up more space and are harder to align in forms. Also, in forms, they have a on-the-side label instead of a checkbox-specific label, so you can't click the label to toggle them.

At least you can actually drag the toggles in elementaryOS. So you don't get a full failing grade from me :P

@cassidyjames I'm not against having more widget types. The problem is that these horizontal toggle switches are ambiguous with their on/off state unless you're able to tell easily by color.

I mean, I've been seeing them for 10 years at this point and I still do double-takes whenever I see one on its own in a UI... is it on or off in its current state?

@cassidyjames Oh, are the toggle switches a GTK thing? Actually I had no idea, I haven't used GTK in forever.

@cassidyjames Toggle switches probably need to be flipped in RTL languages:

@cassidyjames Well, my point was more that there is plenty of precedent for having checkboxes apply immediately without an apply button. In my personal experience I think it's more like 50/50 rather than overwhelmingly Apply-based.

(Apply is very common in first-party Microsoft software that isn't part of the OS, like with Office, but is less common in Windows OS stuff itself.)

@cassidyjames

Check boxes in Mac System 7 preferences (1991):
https://guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/settings/appearance/macos70-2-1.png

Now that I'm mostly done lambasting elementaryOS, I'll say some good stuff:

They have put a lot of effort into practical usability. The defaults are all mostly good. Everything that it ships with actually works out of the box.

@Aerdan @codesections

I'm coming from the angle of an indie developer selling software for money. MacPorts (or homebrew, etc.) can't help with that.

@cassidyjames @codesections

I agree, this is a lot of hard work! And most of it seems good.

I'm still gonna die on the toggle-switch hill, though.

@mdhughes @cassidyjames

If I thought it was hopeless, I wouldn't have pointed it out at all :)