How would you drive the adoption of such a protocol in an environment that is largely hostile towards attempts at demonetising things?
How would you drive the adoption of such a protocol in an environment that is largely hostile towards attempts at demonetising things?
I would remind you that Aukus is a mess of the Coalition’s making - after they made a mess of the original submarine replacement project under Abbott and Turnbull, insisting on Diesel.
But for Labor to withdraw from Aukus would cause a shitstorm of unseen proportions.
That’s the thing. Apple has that track record already. This years iOS update will be available for phones released as far back as 2017. And that’s not a recent development - 4+ years have been the norm with iOS devices for a long time, while many Android phones have suffered from much faster obsolescence.
Google have yet to prove that they can fulfill this promise.
I’ll touch base with you in 7 years to see how that’s going.
*from the manufacturer
Does your Android phone get 5+ years of software support?
My in-laws brought me back a pack of 4 different craft beers from a trip recently. I can’t drink and enjoy them - way too hoppy. Even the Pilsner - and I like a good Pilsner - was not enjoyable at all. The one that’s left is the dark beer - going to be an expensive dirty Diesel one day.
Sorry, I absolutely care about proper Ultrawide support. Currently the game is dogshit on an Ultrawide, with interface and mouse input being all kinds of screwy.
But where are they offering it? Big cities and densely populated areas where people have options and therefore won’t swarm to the product? Or are they offering it in small, remote towns where there’s not a lot of competition?
Where I live, mobile home internet is not available outside of metro areas and larger cities, and in the regions mobile towers are chronically underprovisioned and overloaded.
Net neutrality isn’t going to do a thing about this kind of stuff. In a best case scenario, you’ll end up with overall data usage limitations - no more ‘unlimited mobile data’.
ISPs meter data usage because it’s pretty much the only way they can impose some form of limitation on a finite capacity to provide such data to you and other customers - other than data rate limits (read: slower speeds). They can’t guarantee data rates in almost any setup, because ultimately, while ‘data usage’ is a bit of an artificial construct and ‘data’ is not in any way finite, the pipes that deliver the data certainly are of finite capacity. Mobile data capacity - and in fact, any wireless medium - is a shared medium, the more people try to use it simultaneously, the less pleasant it’s going to be for each individual user. Ask Starlink users in many US areas how overselling limited capacity impacts the individual user.
Mobile data usage also has different usage patterns than if you’re hotspotting your PC. You’re not going to download massive games or other bandwidth hogs to your mobile. You probably won’t be running a torrent client either. So they can give you unlimited mobile data because you’re simply not going to put as much of a strain on the infrastructure with pure on-device usage than you will with hotspotting.
This isn’t a defense of what AT&T is doing. But net neutrality isn’t going to force them to suddenly be all ethical. It’s not going to make them provision infrastructure that doesn’t fall over at the first signs of higher-than-usual load. And it certainly can’t change the physical realities of wireless data communication. In an ideal world ISPs wouldn’t be so greedy and/or beholden to greedy shareholders to be cutting corners, and instead provide sufficient infrastructure that can handle high demand.
And to those who are talking about their workarounds: you may not like it but you’ve signed a contract. That contract stipulates acceptable use, and if you’re found to be breaching the contract terms, the other party is within their rights to terminate the contract. Again, in an ideal world these contract terms would be more balanced towards the needs of the customer, but in the meantime your best recourse against unfavourable contract terms is to take your business elsewhere. And if you can’t do that, everything else is at your own risk.
Except there is no ‘unlimited’ for water or electricity.
Nothing is stopping you from being in control. You can turn auto save off and set things up any which way you like. People have different preferences.
And yes, an application should absolutely ask for a file name and save location on document creation - that’s just good UX. Asking for those details when the user is ostensibly about to finish working is not helpful.
I didn’t make any assumptions about what you know or do, aside from what you think you know about me.
I don’t know what you’re driving at, but whatever you think you know about what I’ve done and what I’ve seen, it’s not nearly as much as you think you know. I work with IT, with software as much as I work in those fields. I experience bugs as much as anyone. I’ve seen the contempt many software devs and professionals have for regular, non-technical users so many times, it manifests in their attitudes, their documentation, their responses to GitHub tickets, their UX decisions.
I don’t care if we are the same or not. Don’t make assumptions you can’t corroborate.
First of all, as a time honored tradition it is customary to say this: Never, ever trust an autosave.
I’ve worked in IT and software development for 25 years, and this is literally the first time I hear someone say this, never mind call it a ‘tradition’ to say it.
I grew up in that different time too, but I completely agree with the person you’re replying to.
Auto save is a must. No arguments. You can have personal preferences and behaviours that make you want to disable autosaving and control your saves manually, that’s perfectly fine, but that’s you and your preference. A modern application should absolutely have autosaving enabled by default. Anything else is user unfriendly and indefensible.
She’s one person influencing millions, if not billions, that’s for sure. She’s not some random author, she is one of the most well known personalities of the 20th and 21st century. Her opinions carry weight, as misguided as that may be on the part of her followers.
I’d partially agree with you if we were talking about some random who has sold a few hundred kindle copies of their book on Amazon and is spewing nonsense. And even then I’d call for people to not support that author in any way shape or form. JKR is however hugely influential, and that absolutely should matter when it comes to deciding who you give your money to.
I suggest you do your own research then. From everything I’ve read, JKR is a horrible person and virulently anti-trans. There are a lot of ways to br horrific without outright calling for people’s deaths.
She actively campaigns against trans rights and has said that if you buy her stuff, you support her position.
Brave is the one run by transphobes who also love crypto.