This sums it up well. The hardware is great, the software isn't.
I recently programmed the same app for iOS and Android. iOS took twice as long, simply because Apple's APIs suck. Case in point: The background task APIs (plural, yes, unfortunately) are so bad that Apple felt compelled to publish a video "Background execution demystified" [1]. If a dev creates an API and then has to publish docs "[my API] demystified", then the API sucks. Period.
I value stability and the freedom to configure the OS to my liking. macOS is stable but forces countless things on me that I do not want. Windows offers freedom but comes with many glitches. Linux is extremely stable and puts me first by letting me configure it. I love it.
Absolutely. I did a little bit of iOS development at some point and was genuinely shocked by how bad the documentation was and by how often WWDC videos was the best documentation available.
To give a concrete example: At WWDC20 Apple showed off a new Core Data feature called "derived attributes" [1]. Only many months later did they add the bare minimum of written documentation covering a fraction of what was shown off at WWDC [2].
The title of the session was “Background execution demystified”
Background execution is a computer science topic that many don’t understand well. Much like font antialiasing or other computer science topics that people don’t have to deal with daily.
Note: I’m not saying Apple APIs are great. I was just originally pointing out the context of your post.
I spent an afternoon watching and re-watching this video just to figure out how the otherwise-undocumented behaviors of the API work. It was exclusively about Apple's implementation, and not in any way about the general CS topic.
It's too bad that Linux doesn't come with Apple Silicon. And while 20s me would have loved configuring things, once I had a family and a lot less time, I just want it to work.
I once devoted 2 years of my life to developing a file manager called fman [1]. In total, it generated probably 35,000$ in profits, so my income from the project is somewhere around 10 $/h. As software developers, our opportunity costs are high. I use my file manager to this day and love it. But I regret spending so much time on it.
Congratulations on your launch. I wish you more success than I've had. Failing that, I wish you that you will see earlier than I did when it is time to move on.
I once recorded a video about my experiences developing a file manager [2]. Maybe you'll also find some interesting bits and pieces on fman's blog [3]. Incidentally, an article there is what sparked my current venture, which is much more profitable: consulting services around automatic updates.
If you'd like to have a chat, feel free to reach out. My contact info is on my website. :-)
Hey, thanks! Yes, I know about Fman. I’ve tried pretty much all file explorers on Windows, a fair number on Linux, and fewer on macOS. I watched that video a couple of years ago, it had some nice insights. Thanks for sharing that.
I've been talking about File Pilot since the early days of the project, so I managed to build a following on Twitter and Discord, along with a decent number of email subscribers. I'm hoping that'll be enough to spread the word.
I'm sorry Fman didn't work out for you as a business. But truth be told, you need to deliver something exceptional to compete with established players. While I don't see other file explorer alternatives as direct competition, I do think File Pilot will bring a breath of fresh air. We'll see how it goes!
That's not exceptional IMHO. It's a good effort, but not exceptional. Exceptional apps scream "wow" and are feature rich, with great UI/UX. Example of exceptional apps are Obsidian, TablePlus, Transmit (by panic), Sublime Text, VSCode. File Pilot has that "wow" factor and the features.
Holy heck! I remember fman, and it was amazing! Literally the only file manager I used that could hold a candle to Total Commander. I remember everyone hating on it on linux forums, because it wasn't open source, despite nothing in the linux world coming close.
Good to know, thanks for the insight. I was playing with the idea of creating a similar app, with more features and faster (in C++). I guess there is no much demand for modern NC clones, orthodox file managers. Btw, are the sales still going on?
I put it down to desktop utility apps being a very tough market because 1. they are time-consuming to develop and 2. people hate paying for desktop software. You already have several comments in this very thread from people complaining about the price:
Arnim Ronacher, author of rye (later uv) has very clearly highlighted that exact xkcd when he started working on rye. But he still decided that it was worth a try and as it turns out, rye/uv has become something that has a realistic chance of becoming the way to use python for most use-cases.
I do believe this is the next natural evolution. People don't like to pay for things and ads are a proven business model. I bet the big labs are looking into this
Could this be an attempt to prevent Altman from turning OpenAI into a for-profit too cheaply? If I understand correctly, then turning a non-profit into a for-profit requires selling the non-profit's assets at a fair price. If Altman says he buys it for 40bn and there is no other offer, then who's to say that this is not a fair price. On the other hand, with a 90bn offer on the table, it will be hard to argue that the assets are only worth 40.
