PyErr_SetString

The first priority needs to be to make it easy and obvious to do the right thing.

Trying to make rules to forbid doing something insecure isn't helpful at all. If I need to do something and the only way I know how is the unsafe way, there's a big risk I'll pick that way. Unfortunately, it seems that security work is often just about trying to stop people from doing things, not helping them to do it the right way.

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/11/28/domes-are-very...

Either way, these things are fun to read about...

I had one and it was great! The reason: You could do a lot of the necessary things with a phone, like:

* Making calls

* Sending text messages

* Set an alarm/timer

* Take a photo

You could also do a lot of the less necessary things like:

* surfing/facebook/reddit, through the web browser.

* playing (some) games

But, those less necessary things were just a _little_ too much effort to be worth it. Surfing was a bit cumbersome and I didn't have that many apps on it.

I found myself using the phone less for unnecessary things and just as a tool to actually do things I needed. I loved it for that. If they sold decent phones still, I might probably buy another. Now I'm back to android and use the phone for more unneccessary things again.

Also, I liked the sounds and themes on the Jolla.

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and call BS on that too. Here's the info about standby time you can find for iPhone6:" "Up to 16 days (384 hours)"

I'm interested in knowing if anyone even got half of that. And if you actually start using your phone it'd go down a lot more (which you probably would want to, since you know... you bought it to have as a phone)

One is not really dependent on the other. You could use open source and not allow modifications or you could use closed source software and allow endless customization.

I also don't consider it an "android problem" that manufacturers do this. Most of the good stuff ends up in standard android after a while, which wouldn't have happened if no one was allowed to make the changes in the first place.

But why wouldn't someone who IS interested in running the application on Linux simply do the last bits to get it to other platforms? I have NEVER seen that happen.

"And while there are thousand of useful C# programs I doubt many don't have direct python / Linux competitors readily available that do near enough the same thing."

Sure, but I refuse to believe all the competitors are always doing a better job. There should be at least some application that found their way over to for example Linux.

There's a funny thing about its cross-platform nature: You almost never see C# apps on other platforms. Why is that? There must be thousands of useful C#/.Net applications made that other platforms could benefit from, but the ONLY ones I've seen are the ones that targeted Mono to begin with. Nothing else.

Something fishy is going on here.

To be fair, Mono never delivered on its promises. There must be tonnes of .Net applications that Linux users would have been thrilled to get on their platform. Yet the only ones I have seen running on Mono were the ones that were specifically targeting Mono, not ones that were running on windows and just happened to find their way to Linux.

So, either most .Net applications are crap that no one really cares about or they were tied to the windows platform. Of course, it could just be blind, unmotivated hatred, but that's not how I've perceived it.

If Microsoft never bought the software that eventually turned out to be Office, someone else would have provided a solution. If Microsoft hadn't bought (and resold) QDOS, someone else would have provided an operating system for IBM, and people who make chairs wouldn't have seen a big difference today.

The point is valid, even if you have a point in what you write too.

I have a few bad experiences with "the guy who gets things done".

There's an old saying that the last 10% of the work takes 90% of the time.

If you stop after the first 90% (or why not at 80%?) and jump to the next exciting project, you will be percieved as very productive. And because you don't put in the time to properly document things, you'll be the only one who knows it all and you'll be percieved to be a guru who knows everything.

Sure, it might not work perfectly, but it's only minor flaws that someone else can fix. Right? You're too busy being productive in your new project, leaving a mess for people to maintain in there.

And it works. Your managers see you as the go-to guy. You will get things done. And the fact that people then spend ages of time to patch your work just proves how much more efficient and better than them you are.

Yeah, you probably guessed it: I spent the day yesterday cleaning up someone elses unmaintainable, undocumented mess. Someone who is now working on a new project.

But, not everyone at MS works with windows, which is why I was a little surprised about the statement that everyone had more than one machine.

Just out of curiosity, why does everyone need more than one machine?