That joke's been around since Microsoft tried locking people into Internet Explorer, so ~30 years. Microsoft's been Microsofting for at least that long, Satya hasn't changed that.
When Microsoft first established a web presence, 1994 was probably the year if not 1993, www.microsoft.com showed "Welcome to Microsoft's web site. Where do you want to go today?" followed by a list of destinations throughout their site. They promoted the second of those sentences to their official slogan.
I've written quite a few web components that were more or less standalone. I've looked at lit quite a bit but never fully understood the "why". Could someone share their own personal experience with why they needed lit? What does it offer that can't be done with standard spec web components?
For me, a big draw of web components is that there's no `npm install` needed. I prefer to ship my components as plain JS files that can either be hot linked from a CDN or downloaded and served locally. Call me paranoid but I just don't fully trust node modules to be clean of bloat and spyware and I just don't want to have to regularly deal with updating them. I'd prefer to download a web component's static JS file a single time, read through it, and forget it. Maybe down the line I might revisit the source for the component as part of standard maintenance.
For example, I made a simple like button component[1]. Later, my friend made a cool component for showing a burst of emoji confetti[2]. I decided to optionally pull it in if an attribute was set on the like component. I downloaded his source and hosted from my own domain. However, there was actually a bug in his code that caused the confetti to "rain" if you spammed the like button a few times quickly. He fixed that, but I actually kind of liked it so I just didn't update the source for the confetti component.
> I've looked at lit quite a bit but never fully understood the "why".
Because people don't want to write hundreds of lines of useless boilerplate by hand.
Web Components API is verbose enough that you want to handle it with at least some abstraction. And at one point it was explicitly marketed as aimed at library/framework developers.
Whenever I have an Apple platform issue, I simply write up a detailed complaint and then send it via iMessage to one of my friends. I know that it's all supposedly e2ee but I swear it's a lot more constructive than firing it into Apple's feedback black hole. So far, it's worked pretty well.
On macOS (26.2), if you have a game controller that has been connected over bluetooth but is not currently connected, if you go into the bluetooth device list in System Settings then click the circled "i" icon, it opens an information modal. This modal incorrectly lists the device type (my controller right now says it's AirPods 4). It also has a button for "Game Controller Settings...". If you click this button, it opens Find My. If the controller is connected, it opens the "Game Controllers" pane where you can adjust the settings. I'm not sure if this is just my specific controller (Nintendo Switch N64 Controller), but it seems like a pretty obvious bug. And while you're at it, why don't you just go ahead and roll back the entire System Preferences app UI to what it used to be?
When I was an intern for some reason they issued me a voip phone for my desk. One day I got bored and figured out I could telnet into it. Nothing interesting but it was still a fun moment for me!
A very very long time ago as an intern I was working on a perl cgi script and I would often test it with telnet. I was used to messing around with hayes commands so manually typing in HTTP commands seemed like a natural extension of that.
I hope this isn't in bad taste, but I applied for the editor-in-chief position at Cloudflare back in August when they had it open. I'm still very interested in the role. If anyone at cf is reading this, my email is bro @ website in bio.
It’s my primary hn reader now.