conciselyverbose

If you, as the owner, don't have root, it's extremely locked down.

There are a few you can get root, but they're the exception, not the rule, and having to jump through hoops for it is still a locked down OS.

Not particularly. I use it because it's always available.

But the limiting factor is way more the lack of real estate than it is typing.

Have you seen road redemption? It's a more modern rogue-lite spiritual successor.

I can't promise it will scratch the same itch, and it's not cutting edge technically or anything, but I got some mileage from it.

Edit: It's bundled on Fanatical for a couple bucks right now.

I write and run plenty of small to medium Python scripts on my iPhone. It's an adjustment, but it's absolutely manageable.

It doesn't matter that very few devices connect. That's the only reason they have to volume to be affordable at all.

If you took the total cost of having satellite coverage available and divided by the amount of satellite assisted rescues needed per year, the amount that a satellite company would need to charge just to break even would absolutely be thousands. Satellites are expensive. Rescues are rare.

The only reason it's able to be something regular people can pay is because there are hundreds or thousands of people who don't ever use it paying into the pot. Without those people, the economics don't work. "Unlimited SOS" isn't any impact to the network at all, because frivolous use gets punished by other people.

Apple being able to get you literally any discount at all is already a value add. (And they've completely footed the bill so far).

Less than "unlimited" isn't meaningfully cheaper to provide. It's $144/year and not thousands per use exactly and exclusively because you can't buy it when you need it.

If you could buy it on demand, 99.999% of revenue disappears because there's no reason to pay for a subscription, and you have to massively raise the price per use for the service to break even.

I think I'd rather have Draymond Green.

He's not worth it any more, but he was a lot longer than MBC.

The fact that it's usually fine is probably why they didn't feel like they had to do this to start.

The failure rate probably isn't that high, but it's extra wear over time that can be prevented.

I haven't played it, but I think that's the game I've seen the combat compared to.

They're probably not paying per incident, because that model doesn't work. They're paying per authorized device.

What if that number was 10 grand? Higher?

That's more in line with what covering the costs with "only pay if you actually have to connect" looks like. Actual forest services offer similar programs in some places, where you pay a small annual fee as "insurance" against being liable for needing to be rescued if you're negligent and need it. Capacity is expensive and use of these types of services is simply not common enough to benefit from economies of scale. You can't make your costs back that way without charging out the ass when it's needed.