The commission might have agreed with the timeline. It is unclear. But on the other hand this is not just about the relationship between Apple and the EC. Their understanding might actually have meant that the damage to users and other developers remained as is claimed here so the commission now has to listen to the injured party and adjust their posture.
Think of it this way: I am blocking part of your driveway for some reasons, and after a while me and the city inspector agree that I will remedy the situation next year. Would you accept that, or would you tell the inspector that your driveway is still not useable and that I should be quicker?
In reality there are only two mobile operating systems where there is any hardware to purchase in my town. These two operating systems are the only mobile devices where my bank (and as far as I am aware other competing banks in my area) offer banking on.
There are many variables that goes into the purchase of a mobile phone, the App Store is only one of many. Google is marginally better at allowing side-loading or alternative stores, there is a degree of flexibility in hardware choices and so on. But on the other hand I trust Apple more (absolutely not fully, mind you) with regards to general privacy for example. This privacy protection in conjunction with significantly better movie recording compared to Android are the two primary reasons I stay on iOS.
But at the same time, I am highly critical of Apple’s conduct here. And because it is effectively impossible to vote with my wallet I am voting with my vote so that politicians enact policies that allow me to use my devices the way I want.
Not all banks, government services, travel and ticketing systems, and the list goes on.
The unfortunate reality is that we have a duopoly in the mobile device market and having one of those devices are now a practical necessity to live a normal life for most people. Without regulation to force the market to open up there's little to stop organisations that want ever more control over the devices you can use to access their systems. Trying to go outside the two big players just means you're going to get a substandard or completely pointless experience. And even governments are in on it.
Which is going to be interesting when both the huge US corporations that form that duopoly and/or the government of their home nation decide to do something that goes against what the government or laws in other places want to happen.
You're not wrong, but I'm trying to raise the issue with any service forcing me into the duopoly by showing them my Librem 5. Sometimes it's quite entertaining. This is another venue for making the change.
Now show what banks (and where) have apps targeting that phone
Not glorified webpages. Full on apps. Preferably by the banks themselves (sorry bedroom hobbyists, I don't quite trust you with my banking details yet!)
And this is the problem. We should insist on standard web pages for everything, and never allow closed source apps on our devices. Native apps are far less sandboxed and under certain conditions make it trivial to spy on the user by accessing contact lists, other apps installed and more.
AFAIK the only Android derivative that has patched the most obvious security issues of this kind is Graphene.
Over twenty years ago there came a mandate that all places with many people gathers (both residential and commercial housing) should have a EN 54‑21 compliant alarm transmitter to automatically notify authorities in case of a fire.
I'm afraid that we are crying wolf right now and are undermining our efforts to permanently shut down Chat Control and the likes when we complain about these efforts with a history of not being misused.
I see many people liking their shield, and with good reason it seems, but is it a worthy ecosystem to buy in to when it has not seen a new hardware revision since 2019?
This. The lack of a Shield hardware refresh seems insane.
I get Nvidia (the company) has other priorities with higher revenue.
But they have a product, with proven product-market fit, that gives them a last mile connection with end users, in one of the highest utilization home spaces.
How has no one at Nvidia looked at that and said "I'm not saying we orient our entire focus around it, but shouldn't we at least fund it as a strategic priority?"
If datacenter revenue falls off, it's going to look awfully short-sighted not to have diversified customer base when they had the chance.
What benefits would a hardware upgrade bring the end user? Not releasing a new model every year sounds like a perfectly good thing to me as long as they keep updating the software without introducing performance problems.
My biggest gripe with the Shield is the newest one has a remote that I really don’t like. Luckily it can be replaced with a third party remote!
I too think yearly updates are a bit too much and I too want to keep my devices for a long time. Still rocking an iPhone 12 (mini).
But support for newer codecs like AV1 and general hardware refreshes to keep up with the underlying Android base would still seem like good ideas to me.
Reading the specs it seems that the Shield also would benefit from being able to detect frame rate to auto-switch via HDMI.
Higher network bandwidth to play UHD Blu-ray rips seems like something people want.
Same, one of mine is from the initial models, and still working and receiving updates... it doesn't have the 4k upscaling of the newer models, but I've been happy and have several in my house.
About half my watching is YouTube on a paid account, the other half via Kodi and the high seas. My SO uses the regular apps for Netflix, Amazon and HBO currently. Having support for hacker-friendly features as well as blessed apps with 4k support has been pretty great.
As another post mentioned, the remote (current and previous) have been less than stellar... I've been using the one linked below[1], which works pretty well, though uses a USB dongle. FWIW, can also pair a bluetooth headset if you want the big screen experience, but don't want to blow out the house with audio sometimes.
> If you are writing a scraper it behooves you to understand the website that you are scraping.
That’s what semantic markup is for? No? H1…n:s, article:s, nav:s, footer:s (and microdata even) and all that helps both machines and humans to understand what parts of the content to care about in certain contexts.
Why treat certain CMS:s different when we have the common standard format HTML?
> the iPhone always invisibly resizes keys hitboxes using predictions about what key you want to use next. This can't be disabled, and has been part of the iPhone since the very first.
Yes. True.
> It's a really abysmal experience for something that's so crucial to a smartphone
Full disagreement here. I expect and enjoy the predictive hitboxes, and this issue I am experiencing is not about those. It is when I type for example the letter "T" and I am certain I touched correctly and I am certain I _actually saw_ the letter "T" appear as pressed from the UI, yet when I look at the word I just typed something else which was obviously not the "T" appeared.
reply