2 years plus source code and working oss backends or 10 years (and still source code).

2 years will just ensure endless forced upgrade cycles IMO.

If it’s a backup server why not build a system around an CPU with an integrated GPU? Some of the APUs from AMD aren’t half bad.

Particularly if it’s just your backup… and you can live without games/video/acceleration while you repair your primary?

Is there a reason you need a dual book instance instead of a VM or even WINE?

Unless you need direct access to hardware and if you have enough RAM, you can probably avoid dual booting altogether.

Seems that Mr. Trump wasn’t singing the same tune when it went his way in October 2016 with a certain FBI director…

Good enough? I mean it’s allowed. But it’s only good enough if a licensee decides your their goal is to make using the code they changed or added as hard as possible.

Usually, the code was obtained through a VCS like GitHub or Gitlab and could easily be re-contributed with comments and documentation in an easy-to-process manner (like a merge or pull request). I’d argue not completing the loop the same way the code was obtained is hostile. A code equivalent of taking the time (or not) to put their shopping carts in the designated spots.

Imagine the owner (original source code) making the source code available only via zip file, with no code comments or READMEs or developer documentation. When the tables are turned - very few would actually use the product or software.

It’s a spirit vs. letter of the law thing. Unfortunately we don’t exist in a social construct that rewards good faith actors over bad ones at the moment.

As someone who worked at a business that transitioned to AGPL from a more permissive license, this is exactly right. Our software was almost always used in a SaaS setting, and so GPL provided little to no protection.

To take it further, even under the AGPL, businesses can simply zip up their code and send it to the AGPL’ed software owner, so companies are free to be as hostile as possible (and some are) while staying within the legal framework of the license.

Should be much higher.

A combination of inflation, gap between workers and leaders at the company AND productivity.

50$/hr and 3 day weeks. There’s no reason to grind to make the ruling class more wealthy.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

There sadly isn’t a viable one at the same level of functionality.

Edit: some random other comment appeared here. Fixed.

deleted by creator

Agreed. Companies should be required by law to release source code, build guides, documentation and service architecture for services or apps that are required by hardware they sold.

While there are bigger fish to fry at the moment, socially speaking, the problem is only going to get worse if legislators don’t step in.

Building off the other reply - it’s the standard UX/UI design tool these days. Name a popular SaaS tool - their design / product team likely uses Figma.

They were recently in the news after their acquisition by Adobe fell through.

They also recently release a competitor to Google slides/powerpoint.

Thanks for the reply. Makes sense. I haven’t had any jobs recently that would push us there.

CC is also priced low enough we can sign back up for a month if we need it.

One feature set of CC I’ll miss is the libraries functionality working across all the apps. Someone on the team needs a client asset in any app ? (AE/ID/PS/AI) There it is.

How so? Genuinely curious what’s missing as someone who tried it on a job, and loved it.

I just sent a job to print yesterday and the printer didn’t bat an eye.

Are we talking specific types of printing? Like booklets or runs with specific imposition needs or something else?

I think ultimately it will depend on what one needs printed. It would easily meet most common printing requirements as far as I can tell.

I tried Affinity Publisher 2 the other day and it convinced me to pull the plug on Adobe and switch on the Affinity suite. Everything was straightforward and far more intuitive than InDesign ever was (which itself was far better than Quark Xpress before it).

I bought the Affinity Suite, exported all my Creative Cloud libraries (they’re just zip files with a different extension), copied all my Creative Cloud files to our self-hosted Nextcloud and off we went.

I promptly cancelled creative cloud. As I’ve said before, I’ll miss generative fill in photoshop - it was very good.

It’ll also take a while to figure out / learn Fusion as a replacement for AE but having spent a lot of time with Shake in the past, it’ll be fine.

Yes indeed.

The last project I did with one was build a moon and tide clock - all written in python with a motor controller, external display and individually addressable led lighting.

They’re also great as diy audio streaming devices for whole home audio.

I’ve had lots of fun with the very affordable Pi Zero 2w. Will pick up a few more before they disappear.

The illustrator tools are terrible. But removing and replacing backgrounds in Photoshop has been spectacular with one caveat - they are less great if you give it any instruction. If you use the generative fills with prompts the results are not at all great. However, if you leave the prompt blank it does a bang-up job matching the existing background set / scene.

Equally impressive has been generating parts of photos that are missing when extending the canvas size.

It tends to work best with photos that are “inside” (interiors) with strong geometric cues - but it has expertly matched lighting, backgrounds and their level of focus (or lack thereof).

As someone who’s used their tooling and the generative tooling… I have to admit trying to push its limits for giggles. It is VERY conservative already so I don’t see why they’d need additional moderation privileges.

This is an awful change.