great question and hard to find the answer. is this becuase it reveals somethign that doesn't help the narrative

> . Some controls are way too small to use with it.

Would you use a racing wheel to manage files ? What about a keyboard for drawing program ? Wo why are you complainig that controls too small to use via touch screen are too small - AND, this is why touch screen is 'minimally' useful? bro..

> MacOS has a ton of tiny widgets...good luck pressing the red vs yellow button in the upper left corner reliably....same thing with the extensive use of right click. The desktop OS is heavily optimized for precise pointers.

you guys get this wrong all the time. The idea of touch is not to replace your precious mouse or turn mbp into a 'tablet'. There are PLENTY of obvious uses for touch on mac os that include non-precise pointer requirements. E.g. almost any scrolling, like a pdf, spreadsheet, web page. You don't need to hold your hand up to do this you just do as if you are pressing ESC but move your hand an inch further. rest it on the computer. it's not hard. fingers behind the screen, thumb on front. Easy. You can even scroll around at the same time as using the mouse pointer with your other hand. This is pretty neat. Other obviousy uses, things like maps, and even things like mixers, or controls in audio software which infamously favours skeomorphic designs lending almost ideal conditions for touch input. (think multiple channel mixers sliders) And finally Taking cues from the experience when you use an ipad as a second macos screen the areas when they can make a kind of touch bar on steriods is very interesting. It's like Nortaon commander style F button control ,but for the whole OS, and contextually aware. Open your mind.

if expense is the concern, buy a mac book without a touch screen. Not sure, for example how it's worse being able to hit play on my music app without having to find a mouse pointer using an abstracted input device, i.e. trackpad or mouse. but i guess haters gonna hate.

don't touch your screen then. You realise that you don't have to touch the screen, it's only an option for people that want to be able to ?

yes. why would anyone not want it?

To plug wired headphones in.

Wifi 7 is more robust?? Consumers dont give a shit. No headphone port?? LOL And its £100 more expensive? This thing is DOA If i was apple id be doubled over laughing at the attempt here. No one will but this instead of a neo. Does it even do graphics? Or is it still a shitty integrated?

100 000 000 eur in fuel cost he said

catshit on pizza. I like this phrase. thanks i will steal it.

I think the point being made is that something CANNOT be a playstation exclusive if it is released on PC, by definition.

I can't think of anything worse than this. (OK well I can but..) This has all the veneer of a 'podcast' (ugh i hate that term) but without any of the substance. Why on earth would I want to listen to a fake podcast ? What the actual fuck. I listen to radio, long form talk, and 'podcasts' because I want to hear what the person has to say. either the show host or the interviewee. This really just sounds like a way to get adverts and effectively droids inserted into content that looks like something it isn't. horrifying.

I do that. taskbar on left - my machine. bottom is user machines. I might stick the server taskbars at the top, seems like a nice idea

"users to discover new applications" simply means users will see our adverts

Does the robot rely on vision only with cameras in same position as eyes? Or is it using more sensors etc than the human