"I can't think of a single compelling reason to upgrade [to iPhone 8, or iPhone 8 Plus] from an iPhone 7 [which was launched last year]," wrote Nilay Patel of The Verge.
Of course there's little reason to upgrade from last year's iPhone 7. The question is whether there is a reason to upgrade from a 2 year old iPhone 6s or a 3 year old iPhone 6.
The answer is No, because the iPhone 8 doesn't have a headphone jack.
I meant to type "And yet if I buy...".
The point is that Apple's argument for going all USB-C on the MBP is that USB-C is the future, and the fact that USB-A is ubiquitous today is not a valid excuse. The MBP team is expecting the entire rest of the world to abandon USB-A and switch to USB-C right now.
But this is undercut by the iPhone team. If Apple truly believed that USB-C was the way to go then the iPhone would have an USB-C connector. It doesn't, because the iPhone team is recognizing that it is premature to abandon a ubiquitous standard.
So if Apple doesn't have the courage of their own convictions, why should the rest of the industry behave any differently?
I was suggesting a (somewhat) simplistic compromise. Consumer can record to a device to watch later - but if said device has an option to upload/share with friends - then those shows with the flag set couldn't be shared.
Which is pretty close to what ReplayTV DVRs did (and still do).
On the ReplayTV you can send a show to another ReplayTV, but it won't let you send a show that your machine received from another machine.
That didn't stop ReplayTV from being sued, but I think that was more about the automatic commercial skip feature, not the show sending.
(Speaking of commercial skip, ReplayTVs have a secret feature that will be useful on Sunday: you can set it to automatically skip over the show content and only show the commercials.)
As far as patents go, TiVo and ReplayTV introduced DVRs at the same time, so between them they held the fundamental DVR patents. TiVo and ReplayTV had an agreement that they wouldn't sue each other.
In 2007 DirectTV bought the assets of ReplayTV, presumably to get the patent portfolio, just so that they could offer a TVR without being sued by TiVo.
Sir, your solution is well intended but is of limited effectiveness because it is a broad spectrum cure.
I have invented a more effective protocol, where first I test the subject by exposing them to small amounts of various types of electromagnetic signals. The basic Wi-Fi test discriminates between sensitivity to 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n and 802.11ac. The premium test will also test sensitivity to various forms of Wi-Fi encryption, channel numbers, jumbo frames, IPsec VPNs, hidden station ids, RADIUS authentication, Windows 10 Wi-Fi Sense, and captive portals.
Once the test is complete, I can expose the water bottles to the precise, tailored anti-rad treatment for the individual subject. All for the low price of only $500 for the initial basic test and then $50 per treatment. (A treatment course usually runs for 100 weeks, and then monthly maintenance doses for life.)
True for Mozilla, but not for Google. It has a Google updater that runs independently of Chrome and other Google apps.
The reason non-admin users can update on Windows is that Google subverts the security model by installing applications into the user's profile.
The whole issue is based on ethics of business. If they are willing to cheat the emissions, what else are they willing to cheat?
You need to download the free product.
Bitdefender.com > Home Users > Toolbox > Free Antivirus leads to Bitdefender Antivirus Free Edition.
Happiness is twin floppies.
