Short answer: no, it isn't. On average I would even say it is worse. There isn't always a Uber driver available. There isn't one waiting for you at the airport. Drivers are less professional. They are possibly not insured.
If it was the same price, I'd take regular taxi all the way.

In my city Uber is about 10-15% cheaper. The only reason to use it is price.
If licenses are a bad thing, then we should end them democratically for everyone. But if, as a society, we think they should remain, then Uber drivers should have to pay for it.

Of course they are. They don't need to pay for a license. They pocket 90% of the savings and the user gets the other 10%.
Force them to pay the same licenses fees as every other taxi driver, and their price will be the same as regular taxis. Possibly even more if they can get them out of business.

You mean gas stations, not oil companies.
Anyways, what I said applies to every industries, oil included.

You get basic economics wrong.
A tax is never 100% passed to the consumer, unless the demand elasticity is null. In practice, some part of the tax is absorbed by the seller/producer, and in part by the consumer.

Some of them might invest in green energies, however they will make much more money in the short term (and that's all they care about) if we don't fight climate change.

BS. Oil companies fought scientists for years and still are. They want us to do nothing about climate change. Only recently they stopped saying that climate change didn't exist.

The problem is that some people, called homeopaths, make a living out of it and that it is close to a fraud. Profits don't fund medical science. Profits fund homeopaths and corporations developing the pills. And worse, they do not admit it is a placebo.

I understand Samsung is free to innovate. But my point was that for most people, Samsung's keyboard is a regression, not an innovation. Now that Google has a Korean keyboard, there is no reason left for Samsung to keep heir keyboard anyways. Especially if they can't maintain it, they should get rid of it.

What innovation did Samsung bring with its keyboard? If I don't need Korean, why would I need it?
Samsung make OS images specific to many countries/carriers. Most of these could do just fine without a Korean keyboard.

Swype wasn't added by Google to the play store. It was added by Swype itself. They (and not Google) choose to sell directly to carriers/manufacturers instead of selling through the play store.

They should be able to do all that while making their keyboard available in the Play Store, and therefore easily updatable.

Why is Samsung making a keyboard in the first place?

It's hijacking when you try to distribute your modified software as the original. Sourceforge is free to fork Firefox and call it SourceFox or whatever. But that's not what they are doing.

If they wanted standard cables and peripherals, they wouldn't be buying Apple stuff.

SM what?

Using new compilers was the whole point of the OP. Of course if you keep the old compiler you can keep the old "make" utility too.

Because not only the code would need to be portable, but the build system too (makefiles). Also, in 25 years you don't want to re-qualify everything and risk introducing some new bugs because the new compiler doesn't behave like the old one. Too risky.