Python problems exist on all platforms. It's just that most people using Python have figured out their 'happy path' workarounds in the past and keep using them.

Python is awesome in many ways, one of my favourite languages, but unless you are happy with venv manipulation (or live in Conda), it's often a nightmare that ends up worse than DLL-hell.

Python is in a category of things you can't just use without being an expert in the minutiae. This is unfortunate because there are a lot of people who are not Python developers who would like to run programs which happen to be written in Python.

Python is by no means alone in this or particularly egregious. Having been a heavy Perl developer in the 2000s, I was part of the problem. I didn't understand why other people had so much trouble doing things that seemed simple to me, because I was eating, breathing, and sleeping Perl. I knew how to prolong the intervals between breaking my installation, and how to troubleshoot and repair it, but there was no reason why anyone who wanted to deploy, or even develop on, my code base should have needed that encyclopedic knowledge.

This is why, for all their faults, I count containers as the biggest revolution in the software industry, at least for us "backend" folks.

Shortly to arrive in other countries, although perhaps not focused on dress code.

Yet no mention at all of Zonulin.

Because not even Wikipedia can really explain what it is =)

The 'Industry Standard' option in keymaps, made a huge difference to many.

The UX is still quite different to all the others, but absolutely approachable now, and not the complete brainFun that ZBrush is, for example.

It is crazy that the industry is still charging so much, but with Blender (and Unreal) catching up every day, their days are numbered.

Because 'dogfooding' has worked so well for other products...

If you don't get feedback from the people actually playing your game (or using your product), you will never get the improvement you need to help them.

You can have the most talented passionate people there are developing a product, but if it's not working for the people you want to sell it to, it's the wrong product.

Most tech products are terrible because those paying for them are not those that have to use them every day, or because they solve a corporate problem (compliance) and not a usability problem which is the actual need from the people on the shop floor.

Many big games/products are already built mostly on metrics, and that has proven to be a terrible way to work out what people 'want'. It's a great way to justify money decisions though, so it keeps happening (and games/products from big companies keep getting worse).

I see. So you don't know what dogfooding is.

I like and agree with something you've touched on here. I think the downvotes are perhaps because you're not putting an end cap onto this idea here. And I think that end cap is: the feedback a company gets when it dogfoods its own product is *not* guaranteed to be similar to the feedback it gets from customers.

The implicit assumption with dogfooding is that more feedback is better, even if that feedback is artificially constructed.

I think the idea here is that foisting one's product onto one's own workers is likely to incur a bunch of additional biases and preferences in feedback. Paying customers presumably use the product because they need it. Dogfooding workers use the product because they are told to do so.

I bet they still expect their employees to write 'aspirational goals' each review, just as every tech company seems to do now.

Except for the fact that people with ASD / Neurodiversity are often more likely to be passed over during interview and selection processes as they don't fit the social norms that hiring manager also expect.

So even if they are more likely to be diagnosed - and I presume you mean White 'Men' explicitly, as Women are even less likely to be - they're also more likely to not 'sell' themselves during applications in the expected corporate way, and therefore not get the high-paying jobs.

Diversity is not just Race or skin colour, but that's easier to see (and to consciously bias).

If Bitwig would add user-modules to the Grid, along with a scripting language, it would be perfect.

Where they both fall down is in less capability for the piano roll and midi for more complex compositions and styles (orchestration) and although Live has made some moves towards improving that recently, they're both still way behind in that area.

Totally agree regarding the piano roll. Same with the sample editor.

Saying that, DAWs just have different specialization. E.g. for a long time midi support in ProTools was extremely limited. Cakewalk already had an excellent piano roll in the late 90s.

I think the purpose of the tool is to detect the unexpected number of additional queries, not what is returned.