If you have a strategy that would work better
Not shitting on users would work better for making them not pissed off at your bullshit. Specifically, giving users a way around the 24 hour delay not-your-phone-google's-phone fuckery.
Mocking Dvorak used to be a favorite Slashdot pastime, back in the day. We forgot about it when we got too busy mocking Cringely. It was exactly because he was constantly wrong.
I want to buy the service I want without having to pay for services I don't want.
This is the same reason I won't pay for youtube. The ONLY feature I want is disabling ads without going through hassle. I don't want any of the other ones and I don't want to pay for them. IDGAF about TV or background music for example, they can fucking keep it. If they would charge a reasonable fee for ad removal alone, I would pay them.
Well, there are some other differences, the ads have become more obtrusive. Like yeah there's always been ads, but they have gotten bigger and flashier over time, or at least they had last time I saw them for a moment while my browser profile was munged.
We have national TLDs. But
They should not have been. They could have a domain in each country in which they operate if what's what they want to do. Those TLDs should not exist. Also, nobody should be able to get a domain without proving they're in the country it comes from. Fuck all this vanity domain shit without any reality behind it. Make domains make sense, for the first time.
Google doesn't have a problem with non-Play and sideloaded apps being installed in general. They do have a problem with malicious apps, regardless of source.
And yet, their method for addressing that issue 1) doesn't prevent the installation of malicious apps, it only delays it, and 2) gets in the way of the user installing non-malicious apps from sources other than Google. Therefore Google is broadly incompetent and/or malicious since this thing they've done only harms the user.
He consistently shills for corporations in general and Microsoft in particular.
Either he's an advertising bot or simply one of the most obvious and pathetic examples of internalization of capitalist propaganda the world has ever known.
Nothing non-sense about it.
Your rebuttal is beyond nonsense.
The world is full of devices which do more than the basics
That's a stupid response because he didn't say nobody should ever install such a thing. He said it should never happen without consent.
IT CAN SIMPLY BE TURNED OFF. There's literally a windows setting to disable both installation of drivers via Windows Update, and installation of any software from driver manifests.
Yes, and it's a blanket setting, it doesn't do what he asked for, that's why you're a shill for Microsoft who no one should take seriously: You don't even take the time to understand the argument before you leap to their defense, o cuck of cucks.
Governments are generally not made up of people with real capabilities.
Because they won't pay enough. They would rather pay twice as much to have a consultant do the same work. There's no way to make that make sense except for corruption.
Not really. Most Mac users judged superiority in terms of the user experience
That doesn't disagree with what I said at all.
Microsoft offering some PC vendors with highly discounted Windows does not change this.
I think that it does, because most people in history bought a PC from an OEM, and the rest of us could get an OEM copy if we wanted to. Having been a Mac user up into the 040 days, and then slightly again after that, I did always appreciate the fact that Apple wouldn't even in theory hassle you about making your own copies of the System disks. But: Apple wasn't giving you anything that it didn't make sense for them to give you, and they for most of history they've charged a substantial price premium and provided inferior performance. Even today, when they actually have impressive hardware for a time longer than the moment the G5 had in the sun, they still only excel up into the mid-range, but I have to admit they're killing it there.
I paid $100 for the last version of Windows I bought (the absolutely peak Windows 7 Pro x64, for what it's worth) and I got a legit system builder's license as I was building a potato of Theseus which has evolved into the big black cube-shaped 5900X I'm using now. I could run that Windows 7 in a VM today if I want to, and I occasionally do when I need to run some kind of programmer or something — just attach a hub to the VM to solve all the awkwardness. But I haven't run either Windows or MacOS except under protest since I discovered AmigaOS and Unix at nearly the same time, in 1991.
So that's describing the sane way to go. Problem is security teams aren't "sane".
It seems to me that there is a general lack of sanity in the world. This is only one of the most personally irritating personifications.
Nope, they don't "trust" vendors
That's fair in general, but that still doesn't mean that you should chase every CVE immediately... I know, see above
Both things
My favorite is the times it's told people to make a right angle turn off the side of a bridge. That's not an instruction very likely to cause harm because there's not an exit there for some idiot to take, but it's especially hilarious because there's no excuse for that.
PS2s didn't come with HDDs so devs couldn't rationally require one.
Most games after that install
Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (7) Well, it's an excellent idea, but it would make the compilers too hard to write.
