This is the real issue IMO, framework mainly appeals to the environmental crowd and economical crowd. Problem is buying used corporate workstations is way better for both these markets + it doesnt even seem like the motherboard upgrades are much cheaper than just buying a new used laptop. Maybe with terrible ssd prices the calculus changes, but you still need to upgrade ram on a new board anyway. Hardware just doesn't improve on the 2-4 year timescales to justify this anymore.
I think this is the most important aspect of Linux accepting more rust contributions. More and more existing maintainers are aging out, and people just don't learn or want to build large applications in C anymore. From what I understand companies doing proprietary kernel development have largely made the rust transition for new code at this point, so fewer and fewer systems level programmers will be used to C (and C++ over time) for these tasks. Existing maintainers pressure against rust development could become a threat to the long term viability of the kernel.
I'm not a home theater power user, but this is good info to make sure my setup is future proof for when I finally get a new TV. All these different standards get really confusing.
One specific example I encountered was ndarray. I couldn't figure out how to make a function take an array and an arrayslice without rewriting the function for both types. This could be because I'm novice with the language, but it didn't seem obvious. I ended up giving up after trying to dig through the docs for a few hours and went back to C++.
Maybe for your use cases that's OK, but there are many situations where the size and ease of upgrading provided by shared libraries is worthwhile. For example it would suck to need to push a 40+ GB binary to a fleet of systems with a poor or unreliable internet connection. You could try to mitigate this sort of thing by splitting the application up into microservices, but that adds complexity, and isn't always a viable tradeoff if maximizing compute efficiency is also a concern.
The main issue I have with rust is the lack of a rust abi for shared libraries, which makes big dependencies shitty to work with. Another is a lot of the big, nearly ubiquitous libraries don't have great documentation, what's getting put up on crates.io is insufficient to quickly get an understanding of the library. It'd also be nice if the error messages coming out of rust analyzer were as verbose as what the compiler will give you. Other than that it's a really interesting language with a lot of great ideas. The iterator paradigm is really convenient, and the way enums work leads to really expressive code.
I think they might be using it as a beta testing ground for their back end features, the brand is also pretty valuable in and of itself. The traffic avoidance is much more aggressive than Google maps
If they forced them to split Waze off and make it independent again it probably could, it's probably the only non default app I see people use regularly
This is the real issue IMO, framework mainly appeals to the environmental crowd and economical crowd. Problem is buying used corporate workstations is way better for both these markets + it doesnt even seem like the motherboard upgrades are much cheaper than just buying a new used laptop. Maybe with terrible ssd prices the calculus changes, but you still need to upgrade ram on a new board anyway. Hardware just doesn't improve on the 2-4 year timescales to justify this anymore.