I view "you might not need tmux" in the same way as "you might not need browser tabs".
Yes, if you only have one or two terminal sessions or open web pages then you can probably live without using them, but anything beyond that leads you into reimplementing features to cope with your desktop's lack of ability to manage dozens of windows.
That is something I have strived for recently, to use all the great window management features of my window manager of choice instead of browser tabs or lots of terminal tabs running tmux. If that didn't work well I guess it would have been a good sign that I need a better window manager. Even went back to use bookmarks instead of leaving hundreds of tabs open and having a bookmark bar instead of a tab bar is not bad at all.
I have come to believe that tab management is really the job of the window manager not individual apps. My window manager allows me to tile windows, or create tabs out of overlapping windows. The tabs can be from the same app or even different ones.
tmux can move windows from one session to another or to a new session. pretty much the way browsers move tabs around and create new windows. it can even have the same window in multiple sessions. i'd like to see a browser have the same (identical) tab in multiple windows.
MS Windows has excellent multi window management with Alt Tab Win Tab etc. Far superior to others.
I have all my terminals with distinct icons and background colours to tell them apart. The operating system (Windows) does the heavy lifting.
i tried Mac for about five years but missed MS Windows “every window can be alt tabbed to”. Mac has “every app can be command tabbed to and therein each app has its own subwindow management”
> MS Windows has excellent multi window management with Alt Tab Win Tab etc. Far superior to others.
If by "others" you mean Mac, okay, but KDE and some other Linux desktops are at least as good as Windows at this out of the box, and much more customisable.
Windows has basic window and desktop management, but I would hardly describe it as excellent. Most tiling window managers would provide those features and then more.
Just don’t minimize the window. Removing a window from the alt-Tab list is basically the only reason to minimize it in the first place on Mac. (Not reflexively minimizing windows does take some time to get used to if you’re coming from Windows, admittedly.)
you can use workspaces for that. for comparison, gnome on linux doesn't even support minimizing windows any more. you move windows/apps that you don't want to use right now to a different workspace.
On Windows there are applications that minimize to the tray instead of remaining on the task bar. That’s my most common reason to minimize, so that it disappears from the task bar when not in use.
i have used WindowMaker but also the original NeXTstep for years, and WindowMaker's integration with GNUstep apps and its emulation of the NeXTstep interface always felt incomplete.
Do you know if there is a way to quickly switch between only two individual windows in different applications? A very common paradigm for me is swapping between two windows, for example a terminal session for code editing and a browser window for reference. On Windows and most Linux WMs, this is just a quick alt-tab hit to toggle between the two most recently focused windows. As I know there is no way to do this on macOS without bringing _all_ the windows to the foreground, which is not what I want. This is my #1 complaint about macos, I'd be so happy if there is just some shortcut I'm missing to accomplish this.
I'm pretty sure that's part of what stage manager is for — you can drag windows in the same stage and they operate how you want — but there's too much manual setup required for me to realistically suggest it as an alternative.
There are a bunch of third party tools you can use though, [AltTab](1) is free and tries to replicate windows experience on Mac. [Raycast](2) has a Switch Windows command which also allows direct access to any window via the keyboard (bind to alt+tab if you like) amongst many other features.
Control+F4 - ‘move focus to the active or next window’ is essentially that. (With the caveat that if your keyboard focus winds up on the menu bar or otherwise not on a window at all, control+f4 shifts focus back to the window, rather than switching windows. The main way to make that happen is with the other control-f-key shortcuts that no-one uses, though)
If you’re going to use it I’d probably rebind it in the keyboard shortcuts settings.
But many terminals have tabs so if all you desire is more than one terminal open but not multiple ui windows there are other options. VSCode for instance!
byobu+tmux lets me log into a remote machine once and then have multiple named sessions/workspaces each having multiple named tabs. The sessions persist when I disconnect and are there when I reconnect the next day. Is that possible with terminal tabs?
I don't specifically distrust the code. I dont know where my data on that hosted service ends up since its rather private information. So self hosting is an option if i can see a demo without providing my personal data.
> but I'd also skip using their hosted service given that Traccar is a Russian company.
Why?
I mean... I don't live in russia, russian police/fsb has no power here, same probably is true for you too, and if i/yo do something stupid, the chances of a russian company giving data to my/your local police is much lower than if I/you used some local company. Why should hosting in russia be problematic here?
How else do you expect to test something? You either install it on your own server, and send your private data to your private server, or you use a public server and give them data.... what third option do you expect?
The whole reason the 737 Max series exists is to avoid having to start over. By maintaining "backwards compatibility" type approval with the regular 737 then the existing massive pool of 737 pilots can jump straight in it and start flying.
I always thought that was the most idiotic part that the FAA accepted. Like, I get that there has to be leeway for similar configurations of the same plane so they don't have to go through the process for each. But it's been so clearly abused that it's ridiculous now.
However even within the same type rating you may have additional training or restrictions. For instance the FAA prohibited Southwest from using the same pilots across three generations of 737 (Classic, NG, MAX), so Southwest ditched the Classics when they bought the MAX.
A big advantage Airbus has is their more modern designs are full fly-by-wire, so they're able to more practically compensate for the handling characteristics in software.
As far as I know (not a pilot or aeronautics engineer) MCAS was more or less an attempt to do the same to a non-fly-by-wire plane, and we see how that turned out...
The picture is just to show how far the plane has deviated from its original design on a colinear (e.g. same price/size target among the new generation) scale. If you want more depth into the pains Boeing goes to not trigger a "new design" recertification, there are plenty of articles on it released during the initial Boeing MAX MCAS forced crashed saga, such as ArsTechnica's series of articles.
I attached a cheap IKEA Vindriktning PM2.5 sensor to esphome to get air cleanliness data into Home Assistant [1]. That's also very simple to do - solder some wires and write a few lines of yaml and it shows up in the web UI. I bought two of them and they are accurate to each other, so the sensors appear to be acceptable.
They are extremely inaccurate. But relative measurement is OK - you can see rising or falling pollution. When I put one in kitchen it "died" pretty fast - I think the cooking oil grease got onto the sensor and it is game over for me. Shows MAX PM2.5 all the time.
It does but it's a different sensor and doesn't pulse as frequently (I think it has a weekly pulse to clean it... SENS54 is the sensor if you want to look it up)
Why turn it off? Google are still going to parse your emails and pull out details about bookings to build a better profile of you, no matter what settings you disable. So why not have them do something useful for you while they are doing it?
I'm a mapping noob, but I've got a half-planned project which will need web based maps, and tilemaker looks great.
The GitHub readme lists "You want the entire planet" as a reason not to use tilemaker. Why is that? Presumably it's excessive RAM/CPU usage during pbf conversion, or when serving tiles from the mbtiles sqlite file.
But how excessive are we talking? How big a machine would be needed to process a planet file? What tools work better with huge input files?
It might be doable with 256GB. I've tried with my 144GB machine and it's too slow to be feasible. But ultimately I think 128GB will be achievable... I've got a few ideas that could potentially reduce memory usage.
For whole-planet scale, the traditional approach is to load the OSM data into a Postgres database, and then serve vector tiles from there.
The submitter of this issue [1] reported that 64GB of RAM was insufficient to load an 18GB PBF. Considering the planet PBF is 58GB, you're going to need a lot of RAM (and time).
I tried the example tilemaker config (4 layers, zoom 11-14) on the 519MB Australia PBF. My 24 thread PC took a little under 20 minutes to finish generating 773,576 tiles, using about 10GB of RAM.
Cloudflare's RFO blog posts are incredibly detailed. Each time I read one, I feel reasonably confident that they have learnt from the mistakes that lead to that outage and that it shouldn't happen again.
In the UK, lots of real estate descriptions side-step the problem completely and use terms like 'Bedroom 1' for the largest bedroom and 'Bedroom 2' etc for the 2nd largest.
It already has the Early Television Museum: https://nerdydaytrips.org/daytrip/na/us/early-television-mus...