The main advantage is accessibility and ease of use: with the browser, no setup is required on the user’s side, no toolchains need to be installed, and there’s no need to be familiar with SSH or terminal workflows
It also provides a more visual and interactive environment (editor, peripherals, simulation controls), which is especially useful for teaching and for beginners.
The Docker image is there so you can easily install it on your own machine if you want to run it locally or work on development
Thanks! The visual editor is actually a big part of the project
I used a little AI to create the graphical interface since I focused heavily on emulation, testing, and refining and optimizing the circuit editor. But now I have plans to improve the UI and make it faster and more intuitive
Still a lot to improve there, but glad it’s useful already
Having held a similiar position for IBM, personally I just don't like dealing with customers. Some are great, others are just a pain ... I like my machines better :-)
You might have more luck looking at people with 'pre-sales engineer' experience for the role? They are used to lots of customer engagement ?
Thanks for this feedback. Someone recently sent me an article that said the FDE role is going out of style because engineers are getting there and find they don't like the customer work, which is what triggered my question! I'll look into pre-sales engineer. The big challenge here is finding someone who still is an exceptional coder versus a customer-facing person who can manage the coding aspects with AI.
Amazon (use to ?) have roles where your expected to be on-site with clients 20-25% of the time. But given how often they were hiring for the roles, I think the turn over was pretty high.
"SourceForge was abandoned due to UX issues and the adware debacle"
I'd say SourceForge was abandoned due to VA Linux going under. I remember the pain/panic as large numbers of OSS projects were suddenly scrambling to find alternatives to SF. I actually started a subscription to GitHub just to try and help ensure they had the money to stay in business, and we didn't have to go thru that again.
I've had a similar experience - I basically have to tell it to do everything twice now. It especially loves ignoring instructions to re-read a file (or re-read in FULL) and just uses its (stale) cache/context version. It also wants to 'pattern match' instead of actually reading what's provided which leads to lots of really basic logic errors.
Have you seen Genode (1) ? An operating system framework with a pretty usable OS built on top. Last I heard, it was getting pretty close to being usable as a daily driver. lots of cool tech (micro kernel(IIRC), capabilities, sandboxing as a first class citizen, GUI system, posix compatibility layer, etc). Its been around for ages, has full time developers (its used as the basis for some (all?) of their products.
From the website: "Genode is based on a recursive system structure. Each program runs in a dedicated sandbox and gets granted only those access rights and resources that are needed for its specific purpose. Programs can create and manage sub-sandboxes out of their own resources, thereby forming hierarchies where policies can be applied at each level. The framework provides mechanisms to let programs communicate with each other and trade their resources, but only in strictly-defined manners. Thanks to this rigid regime, the attack surface of security-critical functions can be reduced by orders of magnitude compared to contemporary operating systems."
The part I never really understood, was I thought the subscriptions were to try and boost Opus usage, not claude code usage ? I'm not sure why they care whether you use API or claude, as they limit the number of tokens you can use anyway - and once the request hits the model, I would have thought it takes the same amount of effort to process it regardless of where it comes from ?
It’s definitely to encourage Claude code usage. Owning the interface through which your core product is delivered is a hedge against the commoditisation that everyone talks about. Eg, it’s much harder to switch from Claude code to cursor or vice versa than it is to switch between models in cursor (I sometimes don’t even notice model defaulting to composer inside cursor)
This is clearest reason for us to accustom ourselves to using open weight models on open source harnesses. Whatever advantages the frontier closed models offer, this will turn into ash in the mouth, when the enshittification cycle begins. And don't be mistaken, it will begin. There is no precedent which can claim otherwise.
I am sure the models themselves are being RLHF tuned to work very well with the proprietary agent harnesses. This is all turning into a huge trap right in front of our eyes and the target is not just programmers but also companies whose core product involves software production.
I can believe it - maybe they feel they have enough of a lead in usage with programmers with Opus that they want to locking down the tooling side as well.
reply