Readit NewsA lot of people are claiming that ghostty is "faster." I watched the lightning talk where the author claims that catting files and binaries is faster.
I tried this against ghostty itself after building with zig build -Doptimize=ReleaseFast, using: time cat ghostty.
In GNOME terminal, it took 3.340s. In ghostty, it took 16.947s. I must be doing something wrong?
Now that Safari has them, I guess there’s pressure to have feature parity?
I'm also kinda disappointed they just copied the UI from Chrome instead of releasing a refreshed version of the previous implementation. Old Firefox tab groups were like Safari tab groups (or "workspaces" in Edge, Vivaldi, Zen and maybe others), and I think they are way better for organisation. Yeah, STG extension still exists, but having it built-in would be nice.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/7375555?baselin...
But without AVX512 and possibly much higher power consumption.
It is kinda exhilarating to see how much competition is going on with AMD, Intel, Apple and Qualcomm.
Usually how I do it is at my office desk I have a second monitor I hook my laptop up to. So I open a new window, let that be the group, and then I use my mac for the terminal and my ipad sits to the side with spotify and any chat apps, out of the way and easy to dismiss.
What's extra satisfying is I'm a tab hoarder. But you finish a project and get to see all those tabs go away.
By the way, built-in tab grouping is also on the list of features in development. Hopefully they don't go the Chrome way
There is no technological reason why applications can’t be distributed as PWA packages similar to the days prior to the App Store.
This would serve two important functions:
1. Remove most if not all distribution monopoly concerns
2. Create application standards that function nearly identically across the myriad of screen sizes and input types that are now available.
The current status quo of some service that makes my life easier or better only being available in a browser or only available on one or two of my devices (or, most often, available in a few ways but only bug-free or full-featured in only one method of access) isn’t the future I want.
setHTML() is already implemented in Chrome/Edge and Firefox so this point is a bit outdated - there is a safe alternative to innerHTML.