Even apart from costs associated with proprietary software, the other reason to avoid vendor lock-in is to avoid self-propagating backdoors in the compiler. Ken Thompson described how to make such a backdoor with C in his 1983 "Reflections on Trusting Trust" speech. David A. Wheeler described "diverse double-compiling", a defense against compiler backdoors that relies on the existence of independent implementations of a language. Stable Rust doesn't have that because it's such a moving target, with widely used programs relying on language and library features less than half a year old.

See also "Reflections on Rusting Trust" by Manish Goregaokar

They knew this and decided to maintain Perl 5 alongside Raku (formerly known as Perl 6) for what is looking to be noticeably longer than the 11-year transition from Python 2 to Python 3.

The most prolific poster on my Mastodon feed is a retrocomputing enthusiast who uses a decades-old (pre-Intel) Macintosh PowerBook G4 as their daily driver.

GCC has tended to support more historic instruction sets than LLVM. If a device's instruction set is supported by GCC and not by LLVM, it can run programs written in C, C++, Fortran, and other languages supported by GCC. It can also run programs in an interpreted language whose interpreter is implemented in a language supported by GCC, such as Python and PHP last I checked. It cannot build programs written in languages supported only by LLVM and not by GCC, such as latest stable Rust. What keeps gccrs (the Rust front end of GCC) from entering production is that the Rust language is still a rapidly moving target, with popular programs routinely requiring features added to the language or the standard library less than six months ago.

The service worker API is explicitly designed to avoid downasaurs in "offline-first" use cases. It acts as a proxy to serve the shell document, style sheet, scripts, and stale data, even without an Internet connection. That's why I asked what obstacles there are other than a downasaur.

I have not presented my ideas to Grab because I am not a user of Grab. I would imagine that most readers of Slashdot are likewise not users of Grab.

I was expecting someone who has used the product to help others in this discussion understand why Grab probably chose and continues to choose to develop iOS apps instead of PWAs. The answers might have taken the form:

A. PWAs weren't capable enough 12 years ago for X, Y, and Z reasons, are now, and the engineering resources to port the native app to a web app would exceed the cost of acquiring and maintaining Macs capable of running the latest macOS
B. PWAs still aren't capable for X, Y, and Z reasons

And the right decision would be for phone operating system publishers to provide functionality in the included web browser to let a website act as a progressive web application. Safari for iOS has a history of lagging behind other platforms' browsers in PWA features.[1] This is particularly evident with respect to what the browser allows websites to do in the background. For example, Apple implemented Push API seven years after Mozilla did, and it requires the user to add the website to the home screen to enable PWA features.[2] Do you want Nintendo Music to pause when you switch to another application? Or if you've chosen to let Nintendo's website notify you when something becomes available, do you want to miss the notification if Safari suddenly decides that your domain's notifications shall be silent (without vibration, without sound, and at the bottom of the list)?

[1] "Progress Delayed Is Progress Denied" by Alex Russell
[2] "Push API" on Can I use...

With two exceptions I can think of. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it:

1. For lightweight web hosting, a low-end VPS from a company like DigitalOcean is likely to be less expensive than upgrading a home office from home-class home Internet to business-class home Internet to unblock inbound ports 80 and 443.
2. SMTP is still an old boys' club, with major mailbox providers (such as Gmail and Outlook) blocking connections on port 25 from on-premise IP addresses as likely sources of spam.

The alternative is developing a progressive web application (PWA) that runs in Safari instead of a native iOS application.

Does "too lazy" include no budget for a domain name before the proof of concept is complete? Let's Encrypt doesn't work unless you buy a domain name and keep it renewed. To satisfy a DNS-01 challenge, you need to host the domain's DNS at a provider with an API that an ACME client can use. To satisfy an HTTP-01 challenge, you need to be on an ISP that allows incoming connections on port 80. A lot of home ISPs block inbound port 80 because they use carrier-grade network address translation (CGNAT) or want to upsell business-class service or both. Nor does HTTP-01 work for wildcard certificates.

If I pay on one site, every single other site still has ads. So this locks me into the viewpoints preferred by the curator of one site and to the production values that one site's business model enables.

In theory, that's an argument for adding a "bathroom break" button to groupware more than for RTO. Managers would get metrics to find employees who misuse the break button in excess of what labor law encourages employers to allow.

Ultimately, that depends on the nature of the position. Do you work call center or something else?

I'm in development, not operations, so my manager tends to be more accepting of my habit of dropping offline for an hour at a time to avoid the 23-minute interruption penalty associated with complex problem-solving.

Say an employee with attention deficit or sensory processing disorder uses Teams on a separate device as a way to improve productivity on their primary device. Refusal to accommodate these conditions can get an employer in trouble under the ADA and foreign counterparts. If you end up fired for this, ask an equality lawyer about your options.

Chrome Web Store and addons.mozilla.org already implement "extensions".

A "page" is an HTML document retrieved through an HTTP or HTTPS URL. I think PPH is proposing enforcing a stricter same-origin policy. Instead of CORS, the document's origin server would have to act as a proxy to retrieve any third-party resources needed by the client-side script.