Because they design their own, yes. That’s how economy of scale works.

To benefit from it you either need to sell an absurd amount of stuff or buy from those who do.

Bit pricey but the Framework 16 is always a great option for the more tech inclined.

Doesn’t come with Linux by default but they support it very well and have people on staff for Linux support. You will have to install it yourself though

Strong preference to the left. The one on the right I never know where to look. Way too busy and I always miss what I’m looking for at a glance. Searching and searching every time sucks shit. On the left, it’s just a list. My overworked brain can handle that easily. Also, I prefer more angular designs over the bubbly pattern that’s so common today. Lastly, when it’s always there it’s easier for my brain to know where things generally are spatially.

Of course, the left one does waste a good amount of space breaking from a more minimalist idea. You don’t need a menu when you’re already in the settings view you need. Benefits to both, negatives too. I prefer the left version.

Lastly, I do disagree with the idea that MacOS was doing a “form over function” as the function is clear. It’s a waste of space and, usually, mind function to put things that are un-needed in front of the user at times they don’t need them. MacOS Strives to lower the amount of visual overhead given at all times allowing you to focus on exactly what you’re doing without the rest of the UI in your way.

I don’t like it aesthetically as though I like minimal design I find taken to the extreme it can be too boring but it absolutely has a function.

Dahm been quite a bit since I’ve seen this one. Wonder what changed on my system?

I’d argue this is more like “I want to build a competitor to spotify so let’s decide between using mariaDB or writing an SQL compliant database from scratch”

In your example, a database is the end goal and you can either start with a premade or make your own.

Here, a social media platform is the end goal. Activitypub is a very important part of it but it’s not the entire piece.

If we replace the parts of your analogy with the original your example would parse out to “I want to make a competitor to lemmies ActivityPub integration, so let’s start with fedify” which is not the same as the article states.

Now, should you re-impliment a protocol yourself or use a generic library is the real question. Both have their benefits. With option A you have full code ownership and can wrap your solution around your end goal without the issue of dealing with the original to get needed changes accepted. You don’t have to worry about code not written by or understood by you. With option B, you get a more robust and almost certainly more accurate implementation. Along with, for free, better integration with any service using the same library. Very useful for a federated service when talking about cross platform.

Both have many more positives and negatives of course and each person should decide on their own how to proceed.

My opinion? I think it’s usually best to own anything which could feasibly be understood by a single dev. Even if each dev doesn’t. Anything larger shouldn’t be internal in my strong opinion unless very good, specific reasons apply that makes an external solution impossible or increadibly difficult. Most negatives of an external library also apply at that point with enough time.

Thank you for posting it by the way. This is both good, and important news