Captain Obvious Competition.
These companies already have your money, so updating a device that's already been sold is a needless expense. There's also a good argument to be made that updating a device hurts future sales. If your phone isn't updated, it will start to feel old, so you're more likely to buy a new phone sooner.
Yes. I have a high-end preamp-processor, updatable over the net. Plenty of bugs. Did they ever fix them, much less add new features? No. Did they release a new model? Yes. I have a high-end camera. Updatable over the net. Plenty of bugs. Did they ever fix them, much less add new features? No. Did they release a new model? Yes. I have a high-end radio transceiver. Updatable over the net. Plenty of bugs. Did they ever fix them, much less add new features? No. Did they release a new model? Yes. And so on.
The whole "we can update your device" bit is a scam (and often, so is the "we can update your software" bit.) The only way a corporation is likely to actually update hardware responsibly is if legislation forces them to. And good luck trying to get THAT in place when corporations outright buy the decisions of the legislatures.
I know, right? I keep telling them those are MY Pokemon, but the little bastards are always there first...
LMOL yes moron Uber competes with taxi service.
Sure. Any transport method that is used instead of another is competition. Walking, bicycles, private cars, motorcycles, skateboards, Segways, busses, subways, jitneys, hansoms, taxis, limos, Uber... all competitors that reduce opportunity for the others.
Anyway, the story is that Uber's earnings will be garnished to subsidize taxis. I wonder, would people approve if their bicycles and cars and so on were taxed specifically to subsidize taxis and/or other transportation methods?
It's fascinating to see the "this business has a right to exist, workable business model or not" attitude arise in a new space, and to watch the politicians be bought and sold accordingly.
If we all had smart-phones 100 years ago, today's taxi regulations (and the various boards enforcing them) would not have been created. Which means, it is time for them to be abolished.
I am so with you. No more smart-phones! BURN THEM! BURN THEM ALL!
Soon, teenagers might begin speaking to one another again; dress in ways that attract the eye; undertake outdoor activities other than "find that Pokemon"; and play games that develop co-ordination of more than their hands, develop whole-body muscle-tone, maybe even ask each other for dates with, you know, actual speech and eye contact. Maybe even kiss!
Nah, never happen. Bring on the VR hoods and nerve stimulators. Soon, "my teenager's in the cloud" will be a common parent's lament, and the most common teenage problem will be bedsores.
Even if the 4 core chips can't compete with Intel, I'm hoping they force Intel to drop the eye-gouging prices.
Oh, come now. You don't think that Intel has actually achieved a reasonable yield in their manufacturing processes, do you? That's unpossible.
Zen's initial availability is slated for late this year, with lager-scale roll-out planned for early 2017.
You know, although a tank lager looks big from the outside, there are usually no more than a hundred or so tanks in one. So this doesn't seem like a very large rollout.
On the other hand, if one of the tanks rolled over the editor(s), that would be a service to humanity.
Okay, granted. Then no more support.
You're one of those who are against the LJBT* community, aren't you?
*(Lossy JPEGs Bereft of Transparency)
Ads can be good. They can enable commerce and content. Responsible advertising contains a combination of three things: a still image, and/or text, and a link. IOW: an HREF element, and within that, an IMG element and/or perhaps (preferably) some textual content. No scripts other than what's required to actually serve the ad, no videos, no animations, no scraping of user-specific information.
Anything/everything else is abuse.
Remember when Google was all about text ads?
Google's ethics cancer took care of that. For myself, I don't see many ads any longer. The status quo is to attempt to abuse me; fine. The status quo on this end is to block ads.
Online lets software companies release shitty products ASAP because they know they can sort of fix them later on.
Perhaps so. Assuming that's the case, though, I see no imperative -- at any level -- to support shitty product development.
If your time is so valuable, why are you gaming at all?
Gaming is a positive recreational activity. I don't mind putting time in; I get an improved mental state out.
Waiting hours for what you so blithely term a "patch" is not a positive recreational activity. Therefore, I decline.
No one is going to stop patching games because you have a terrible Internet connection
My connection is 30/5. Hardly a "terrible" connection. Until you try to shove gigabytes down it, of course.
Then you've gone post-console-gaming due to your extreme position.
Wrong. My earlier consoles continue to work fine. I've gone post-buying new consoles, which is something else entirely.
...they can have my money for another console if and when they abandon this incredibly toxic and annoying "cloud"-based approach to gaming. I am NOT going to spend money on a console that inherits the unacceptable shortcomings of the XB One. Put the games on disk, sell the disc, let me stick the disc in the machine. it should work. It should NOT go into a paroxysm of download after download at the game and system and add-on level. I have literally watched a NEW game take HOURS to become usable on the XB One. Wrong direction, Microsoft (and Sony, and whoever.) I pay, I stick it in the console, and it works. Otherwise, no thanks. My time is worth more than your bleeding cloud-mania.
Real Users hate Real Programmers.