It is great to know that there's a logical successor.
As I mentioned above, I work in a company that offers a SAAS that's based on the Device Sync solution. We were weeks away from announcing a collaboration-oriented product based on Atlas, but now these plans are in shambles.
We are actively looking into Ditto now, and the P2P approach to sync is genuinely impressive. So, a couple of questions for you:
1. Is there something in your platform resembling the Flexible sync functionality of Atlas?
2. Do you feel that the partner-first approach will open up some space for Ditto? Have you encountered any Atlas Device Sync functionality that would be impossible to replicate for Ditto in terms of integration with MongoDB?
1. Yes Ditto uses query-based sync. Candidly, the flexible sync in Atlas has roots back to when I was VP of Product at Realm. It was a must for me, but I think got abandoned for performance issues then brought back. Ditto was built always to support flexible/query sync. We recently have added our own more advanced query engine - DQL (SQLish) and it will enable JOINs and other advanced queries while still being schemaless JSON collections. In this regard Ditto is a better compliment to Mongo than Realm is from data model perspective.
2. Yes this partner-first approach is huge opportunity for us. Given Realm had to sell, we were very focused on building a sustainable business. This meant though more focus on enterprise and specific use-cases than going wide to all developers (you can see how well that worked with Firebase, Parse, and many other developer products when you have VC backing). This means we have a solid foundation technically (large-scale deployments in mission critical systems) to now handle wider awareness. Mongo will really help us bring the awareness of Ditto.
3. Right now candidly our permission system is nascent compared to Atlas - a webhook fires from Ditto to allow you to integrate into external identity systems and apply permissions. The focus with enterprise meant we targeted use-cases that didn't have too much dynamism in their permissions and data models, so you will find our system naive comparatively. This is a top priority where we will be adding built-in dynamic permission functionality that is similar to Device Sync later this year. You can read more on our system here: https://docs.ditto.live/auth-and-authorization/data-authoriz...
I am genuinely sad this news does not seem to have gained much traction. I think the technology itself is great and that makes the deprecation announcement so surprising.
We were weeks away from announcing a new product based on Atlas Flexible Sync. Now the project's fate is hanging in the balance.
Really devastating. I think the rename from Realm is why people haven't noticed this, but I guess also its popularity really has dwindled. Even though I only use local RealmSwift, I don't trust that the community will be able to keep it going even in maintenance mode.
People unhappy with USD can always use USDT, opportunistically printed in hundred million "dollars" equivalent per month by 3 semi-anonymous guys in non-extradition offshore and which was dropped like a hot potato by the only auditor company who even considered auditing this scam. There is only one small flaw in this plan - for some weird reason not many people are rushing to adopt this toilet paper "currency".
Well, those billions of fake dollars are being used to buy Bitcoin, which props up its price, which attracts excited retail investors to buy Bitcoin — so in fact people are rushing to buy the USDT toilet paper, they just don't know it.
Libra is not selling rights to non-existent tokens. That’s why it’s not a security while TON is a security. No one banned TON, they just said that if you fundraise by sale of tokens then said tokens are securities. Which is a fairly straightforward truth.
I have worked closely with Intel Edison for quite some time. For $50 it's quite alright, if you take built in wifi onto account.
The real problem is lack of Intel's support. Edison runs an ancient kernel, the yocto image source is full of hacks, which do not suggest big interest in prolonging the device's actuality. Instead, Intel decided to add Arduino compatibility to a x86 Linux board, god knows why.
> Edison runs an ancient kernel, the yocto image source is full of hacks, which do not suggest big interest in prolonging the device's actuality.
This killed it for me. I have one through Hackster.io and the first two projects I attempted bogged down in "need to compile this common package from source and hack it up to try to get it working" land. Meanwhile on a Raspberry Pi the same packages are an apt-get away.
I've been asked many times why someone would choose an Edison and the best answer I have is "if you really, really need to use an Intel board" and even then there are better solutions from them.
You can buy ESP8266 boards with wifi built in for less than $3, so wifi doesn't justify the price tag. The Edison is certainly a lot more more powerful, but most IOT applications simply don't need that power. And if you do, Raspberry Pi Zero is still far cheaper.
But this actually proves your larger point that Intel just aren't that interested. If they were, they would sell Edison at a loss for $5, which would spawn huge community support around them.
Intel they are suffering the classic innovator's dilemma, where competitors grab the low-end with products so cheap that no-one cares about their inferiority. The competitors then slowly improve their products (see the ESP32) and gobble up most of the market. Inel will rule the high end for a while yet, but I think they recognise they have already lost the low end.
I'm assuming you already know, but in case you don't, there's now the Pi Zero W. Less than £10, but it's a Pi Zero with wifi (802.11n) and Bluetooth (4.1) with integrated antenna.
It is great to know that there's a logical successor.
As I mentioned above, I work in a company that offers a SAAS that's based on the Device Sync solution. We were weeks away from announcing a collaboration-oriented product based on Atlas, but now these plans are in shambles.
We are actively looking into Ditto now, and the P2P approach to sync is genuinely impressive. So, a couple of questions for you:
1. Is there something in your platform resembling the Flexible sync functionality of Atlas? 2. Do you feel that the partner-first approach will open up some space for Ditto? Have you encountered any Atlas Device Sync functionality that would be impossible to replicate for Ditto in terms of integration with MongoDB?