Because it doesn't protect your privacy (Google still tracks everything), but it gives Google an even stronger monopoly to make taking other actions to protect your privacy less viable.
The end game is still their web DRM pretending to be "security" to make it impossible for you to choose how a page is displayed to you.
Yes, they absolutely do. It would completely murder the supply chains to have such massive droughts in demand, and it would be extremely hardcore fucking over customers who had to have a phone in the period near the end of those terrible cycles by immediately making their phones obsolete.
If Tim Cook announced tomorrow that he had a proven cure for cancer and that he was also cutting the phone cadence from one year to five, he should be fired the same day. Annual updates are the only valid approach.
I was going to make that point, but I don't think the steam deck gets quite the same benefit on optimization. It could, but it needs a lot more volume before devs seriously target it.
More because they can just sell it on PC and a lot of us will tolerate it pushing the hardware past its limit anyways. A PS5 version has an explicit level of responsibility that the Steam Deck doesn't, unless they're actively advertising it. (That's not deck verified, because developers don't decide that.)
Annual phone refreshes make perfect sense.
You don't have to buy a new one every year. But a stable production cycle is very useful at the volume Apple moves. Spikes and troughs for a multiple year cycle would be much more difficult to manage, and if you do actually need a phone at the end of a 3 or 5 year production cycle, you end up with a product 2 or 4 years of development behind what you could have, without even getting the benefit of being able to get it at the price of a phone a couple cycles behind.
The steam deck is functionally a console. It doesn't have the volume to manage the same frequency of new devices.
It's not cheaper if the manufacturing capacity literally doesn't exist. You can't just wave a magic wand and have a company be capable of making millions of units.
Edit: It took several months after launch to clear the backlog and allow people to just order a Steam Deck, and it got occasionally backordered for several more months in some markets after that. Adding the constraint of being supply limited on joysticks would have almost definitely made that worse.
There's a massive difference between being able to get the quantity to serve the small number of people willing to tinker and buy niche controllers and being able to get the quantity to serve a mass market.
This is what I was wondering.
There are ways to do it. Whitelists and blocklists people can subscribe to (with different moderation strategies), with maybe default logic for integrating different lists and an easily extensible format for clients or end users to write their own scripts to do more complex combinations would go a long way.
But as much as "decentralized" sounds cool, I think more structured communities for content work better. Reddit worked so well as a source for information before it shit the bed because it allowed communities to form with their own standards and ideas. It was flawed, but a hell of a lot more coherent than twitter was, because structure is useful.
My understanding is that Valve is paying a good bit of money to CodeWeavers to make Proton a thing.
Yes, it's an investment they obviously benefit from, but if they had wanted to make their investment in a closed source proprietary solution instead, they could have done so. They chose a partnership with CodeWeavers as an open source project that advances gaming as a whole.
Again, yes, they benefit from advancing gaming. But they have the market share and cash reserves where they could have chosen to do so in a way that benefited themselves at the expense of everyone else, and chose to do so in a broadly beneficial way instead. That deserves recognition.
I want to use something other than goodreads, but I've tried most of the others and their management of lists just isn't tolerable for me. I've tried migrating to several (and the fact that most of them allow you to import from goodreads export is awesome), but I like to have a list with the nonfiction sorted out, a list I care more about of 50-60 I consider high quality about or adjacent to what makes us tick, and a few smaller ones, and rebuilding those lists is just too brutal to accept. They're also significantly worse in terms of quality of their database of books.
Goodreads lacks some things I'd like, too. Primarily, I'd like to be able to treat a series as a first class citizen so I can provide a couple paragraphs and ratings on the series as a whole, with the individual books kicked down to a lower layer of my reading hierarchy. Also, despite allowing you to manually order your lists (my version would allow for tiers), it doesn't display that ordering when you share a list with others. Eventually I'm probably going to roll my own and set it up so I can randomly suggest some of my favorites on a page, but I haven't got around to it.
I like the idea of bookwyrm, but I think it's too much mental overhead to implement the features I want for now, and ended up not doing so.
Punish the team and the player hard.
He doesn't get a pass for being complicit just because they didn't trade it for a player like he wanted them to.
The bar to be an improvement is so obscenely low that it's almost impossible for Microsoft not to be better.
I did really like the original last of us multiplayer game mode.
I have no interest if the plan is continuous monetization, but it was a solid set of modes with enjoyable combat.