I have learned SQL with Postgres, provided by my university,
and found the "explain analyze" and "explain cost" to be a god-send :-) Especially when I was trying to learn the impact of various things on the query-execution time.
When I used MYSQL, I found its EXPLAIN counterpart much more rudimentary.
But if I were to teach somebody SQL, I would probably just use sqlite because it just uses a simple binary file as a backend and doesn't need a running process :)
I am not really OPS or DB guy, so I can't comment on meirts of the databases in production.
Yes - it seems that MySQL is easier to set started with and there is more information available online. Also a lot of cheap hosting uses MySQL which is plus for hobby projects.
More like, a lot of garbage outdated tutorials available online. Copy and paste to get SQL injection vulnerabilities! Easy!
Seriously, what is "not easy" about Postgres? Just read the official documentation, which is actually readable and good.
About hobby hosting… there is Heroku Postgres, but no Heroku MySQL. (There are third party addons for everything, yeah). Cheap shared Apache hosting is TERRIBLE. It should NOT be used for any new projects.
Yeah. Popularity and the ability to work at cheap horrible apache hosting companies all the way to big bad facebook does speak volumes, doesn't it? :-)
The line length of readable text is quite limited, yet our monitors are wider than they are high. Since websites still contain a lot of text they profit more from getting the full screen height than from getting the full screen width. Hence vertical tab bars.
I'm not a fan of the giant pictures they use as representations of tabs when my tab bar fits ~40 tabs in one screen height. But I guess that heavily depends on user preference.
The workflow on Linux is very different, you just have to get used to it, but it's ok if not better in some ways. I mean instead of designing websites in raster with a bit of vector, like people do in Photoshop, you would have to do it in vector with a bit of raster, because the raster editor there being Gimp and all is quite limited and slow, but the vector one (Inkscape) is very powerful. So, for people coming from Photoshop it could be a refreshing learning experience, beneficial for productivity.
I've been using vector software since Corel Draw 4 and quite frankly I don't understand how people can design layouts in Photoshop. I've done it, but it's really a pita compared to working with any vector graphics software.
Gimp's UI makes me really sad :( -- I used to be a HUGE proponent of it, since I had grown up using it. I had never known photoshop before, so gimp's UI made sense to me.
3-4 years ago they seem to have changed (apparently to make things closer to photoshop, is my guess?), and now it seems like the UI sucks for everybody.
For years I ran Windows in a VM on a Linux desktop and used Photoshop that way. Very easy solution and the mouse controls for interacting with the VM were awesome too; it was about as close to a native window as you could get.
Same for me - last I checked, Gimp's UI is too damn awful. But I only need 5% of PHotoshop's features (smart selection, fill with color, resize, crop, optimize for web) to optimize images for web work
