100%. One big benefit of IDE integration is that it’s the same editor. Same keybindings, same syntax highlighting, etc.

There’s horizontal scrolling on mobile, which is ironic.

Unfortunately it’s not feature complete - you can’t paste images in review comments, for example. Still very useful for large PRs though.

I tried FreeCAD, I really did. I gave up due to constant crashes and terrible UX and went to Fusion. Even though it's slow on my laptop it's still a far better experience. I am never going to commercialise my models so it's acceptable for me.

(Note: I would have tried Solidworks given the reasonable hobby pricing, but it's Windows only, and I don't want a web-based CAD tool)

I’m someone else but for me the point is a serious bug resulted _incorrect data_, making it impossible to trust the output.

Assuming you are responding in good faith - the author politely acknowledged the bug (despite the snark in the comment they responded to), explained what happened and fixed it. I'm not sure what more I could expect here? Bugs are inevitable, I think it's how they are handled that drives trust for me.

My hypothesis is that certain products need users and feedback to be good. Maps is one of those, hence why they had to release it in a ‘bad’ state. Apple AI I think is another such product.

Why do you care if your personal site is minified?

Because some people care about low-bandwith users. Or about not being wasteful as a principle.

Doesn't compression make any minification gains negligible?

Depends on what you’re serving up. Blog? Yes. Video game? No.

Once we can use popover and anchor positioning, tooltips and drop downs can also be in the top layer. I can’t wait

This was never an issue for me in React. The top layer seems unnecessary. Just put your portal or fancy code such that it puts all those popovers at the end. If you order your DOM correctly, you almost never have to touch the z-index.

The point is it will be possible without a framework

`document.body.appendChild(newElement);` is pretty easy too.

I've wondered the same thing. I think one benefit is that it looks like HTML, which means it looks similar to what you see in the browser's DevTools, which makes it easier to compare and debug.

It also makes it easier to see what it's not: at a glance, the "p" could really be anything until you scan the context. The <p> isn't a string (that on further examination turns out to get used for marking up a paragraph), it is a paragraph demarkation (in vdom, but still).

FWIW Tauri has a comprehensive permission system

I think the concern is not XSS but rather trusting the first party developer of the binary that hosts the webview.

how is that different than apps off an app store?

On platforms that have app stores (including desktop operating systems like Windows, some distributions of Linux, and especially macOS), the apps you download from the store are sandboxed (UWP; Flatpak/AppImage; Apple) far more than raw binaries. Tauri apps are raw binaries; Electron apps are too; those are both different from visiting a webpage in a browser, regardless of whether such navigation happened manually or automatically (as in from a PWA shortcut).