in the US, this is called "monetizing" and is business as usual. If you disagree you are just a communist who likes big government regulations. Also corporations can legally buy politicians in the US. Again if you disagree you are just a communist who likes big government regulations.

They use cheaper version of the SoC with no modem. Even the iPad has no cellular modem (in its wifi version) because of the costs savings.

Also, even if the modem was there built-in to the SoC (and not disabled by eFuses and not binned out from a smartphone batch because of defects), you still need RF transceivers, power amplifiers, filters, antennas... these are hard to hide, especially if you don't have a cellphone tower just out of your living room's window.

The models have been pretty damn accurate, even if they are continuously being refined. What is harder to predict is the amount of greenhouse gases that will be emitted X years from now, because it depends a lot on public policies.
A lot of countries (mostly in the Europe) reduced their emissions. Others still increased but still made efforts to limit the increase. Because of those efforts, the temperature is not raising as fast as it could have. But that's not because the models were wrong.

Al Gore is 78. Why would he move to Alaska? He has at most 20 years left. The temperature will increase by maybe 0.2C during that time.

RHEL to Debian. Clearly they want to use a major distribution. Not something that may not be around next year.

According to the study, it has more adverse effects, unfortunately.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.go...
But it may be worth it for the increase efficacy.

Well hopefully the authors are not dumb enough not to consider this. And even if they were, the peer reviewers would have caught it.
If it's genuinely 27% more effective when targeting the same flu variant (compared to regular vaccines), it's definitely a breakthrough.

Not really, because flu tend to kill old people who ALREADY had kids long ago.

It would be a good thing yes.
But it's still different. Historically, you could always buy a game from brick and mortar store not owned by Nintendo or Sony. That was never possible with the iPhone.
Not sure how it is with digital stores now, but I wouldn't be surprised if they followed Apple's "lead" in that vendor lock-in department as well.

Still, console makers would argue that they sell consoles at loss and they make profit with the games. Apple makes a huge profit on phones. It appears the EU DMA applies to general-purpose computing devices, and therefore smartphone/computers but not gaming consoles. You don't use your gaming console to install your bank's application, for instance. But I guess if the video game console market was becoming as anti-competitive as Apple, they could be regulated in the future as well.

Imagine if Toyota tried to charge 5% fee on all gas purchases not even sold by Toyota.

Oh I never denied that there are laptops with better touchpads/keyboards/displays than others. But you didn't mention any of those points in your original post, just "feel" and "plasticky".
Glass was just an example that a material can look/feel premium while be technically inferior. Up to a point we could say the same about metal. It's heavier than plastic so plastic laptops can be better even if they "feel" cheaper. My Thinkpad T is in plastic and I don't see anything wrong with that.

Oh, no problem with people who want their computer to look good. Just don't call it "build quality" as if it had anything to do with the quality of the product or it's ability to last. Call it "look and feel". And admit that sometimes inferior products from a durability perspective can look or feel better. Glass back on phones is a perfect example of this. Plastic would be superior from a technical perspective, but "look and feel" people and reviewers forced us to have a weaker material because it looks and feels more expensive.

I had a plastic Dell (Inspiron something several years ago) and we kept it for something like 7 years before replacing it by a newer laptop. Never cracked. Sounds like your problem is more that your users don't take care of the laptops because they are not theirs. In my field we often use rugged laptops to use in shops, maybe that's what you need as well.
What people call "build quality" is more often about looks and feel than actual strength anyways. Glass back on phones is a good example of this. A plastic laptop likely has better survivability to drops compared to metal ones, because they are lighter (less dense) and plastic absorbs shock instead of transmitting it to components.

Who care if it "feels" cheap? It's a laptop, not a status symbol. What matters is how it performs. A 100% glass laptop would not feel cheap but would be total crap.
Nothing wrong with plastic laptop. I never replaced a laptop because the plastic didn't last. Not once have I told myself, if I bought a metal laptop it would have lasted twice as long as this one I'm now forced to replace.

Well SMS/RCS doesn't work with the phone number on my business card either because it's an office landline/voip. So it's no better than the other application you criticize as not being universal enough.

I rather not have the carrier in control, and not have a protocol depending on a phone number which I don't own, rather than have something that will work the 0.001% of the time where my Internet is too congested to send a simple message. Also I don't think RCS works any better as it uses the data connection, unlike SMS.
SMS has many flaws, including not receiving the message if you swapped your SIM card when traveling to another country. The carrier may or may not send you the message when you come back.

That's my point we pretty much never "need" SMS. RCS was not even worth developing.