docs: comparison with https://github.com/jdx/mise

[hab25]

Here are the differences I observed and that are most important to me:

• mise does not support conda-forge.

  Note:

  It supports other sources through its https://mise.jdx.dev/dev-tools/backends/, but, of all of those, https://mise.jdx.dev/dev-tools/backends/ubi.html is the only one that is "cross-language" (this matters because e.g., while npm can technically ship any binary this is rarely done), "cross-platform" (supports Linux, macOS, and Windows), and probably has at least as many Windows packages available.

  However, to provide the overwhelming majority of its packages, ubi is relying on GitHub's API not breaking, which is unreliable due to it being closed source and not a consensus-derived open standard.

  Further, there are popular and useful packages, like https://gcc.gnu.org/install/binaries.html, that do not provide GitHub or GitLab releases.

• mise does not include its own cross-platform shell like https://pixi.sh/latest/features/advanced_tasks/#our-task-runner-deno_task_shell, meaning one cannot trivially use it to reproduce the very simple git clone and pixi run start setup on all major platforms.

• philosophically, it seems that mise is not trying to achieve this very simple setup that pixi enables, outlined in the previous bullet point. Concretely, this can also be observed in the fact that its npm backend requires node to be installed, its go backend requires go to be installed.