Did anyone really think that making UEFI systems the equivalent of a mini OS was a good idea? Or having them be accessible to the proper OS? Was there really no pushback, when UEFI was being standardized, to say "images that an OS can write to are not critical to initializing hardware functionality, don't include that"? Was that question not asked for every single piece of functionality in the standard?
JakenVeina
joined 1 year ago
As someone with 0 investment in this whole ecosystem, I saw and perused this article like a week ago, and my immediate impression was "Why is this guy constantly saying 'Wayland breaks XXXXX'? Wayland isn't breaking anything, it's new tech. Wayland has certain features, or it doesn't or doesn't yet. The only folks breaking anything are those swapping use of X with Wayland, within various apps or tech stacks, potentially prematurely, where Wayland doesn't yet have the full set of features needed."
Whoever this is seems to have a really poor understanding of long-term software development, despite being way more invested in it than I am.
What the hell is an immutable OS?
So, looks like a singleplayer story/campaign game, built in the FighterZ engine? Sounds dope.