Comment Re:I have to think this will be restored sometime. (Score 1) 175
By all indications, Facebook and Google agreed to the same license as everyone else, and the license is anything BUT ambiguous, given that it's subtitled "for in-house, internal use applications" and then only gets more explicit about how it's intended to be used from there. I ran through a lot of the details about the license in a comment yesterday.
Given that Facebook was paying the users, whose to say they can't argue they were 'internal/employed/contracted' users as far as Apple's Terms define them? I'd argue that they are wrong and in my view are not compliant - but no doubt FB has a small nation army of lawyers to argue the contrary...
Comment Not that influential (Score 2, Insightful) 134
Only a diehard mac fanboy of old would try to argue its massive influence in wider gaming - and I say that is a mac user...
Comment Re:because now they are the target of the reviews (Score 1) 189
Comment Re:because now they are the target of the reviews (Score 4, Insightful) 189
When they had DVDs they had to keep physical inventory, and ship physical inventory, so predicting demand was important to their logistics planning.
Now they have unlimited inventory, and shipping is essentially instant and with zero marginal cost - so in that regard, demand prediction is less important.
Comment Easy to scoff, harder to respect (Score 5, Interesting) 84
It takes some mental effort to respect that fact that Tata brought car-based mobility to a new generation of people that otherwise couldn't afford the level of vehicles we enjoy in more developed nations today... it wasn't too long ago (~50 years) that we were driving cars worse in quality and safety than the Nano... and they cost a pretty penny even for first world nations at the time...so why begrudge and scoff at another developing nation's progress on the same path we also walked (albeit earlier)?
Comment I'm confused (Score 2) 126
Comment Re:Perhaps they can call it iAd? (Score 1) 38
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Comment Re:Dead or just temporarily unusable? (Score 1) 331
Buy a Macbook Pro and you only have USB-C ports for connecting other monitors and peripherals, and Apple currently don't make a 1st party hub. Whilst you can go USB-C -> DisplayPort Alt Mode, this means multiple cables and doesn't solve other peripherals and power. So many people have adopted hubs like Dells D6000 which is actually a pretty great piece of kit, and lets (or used to at least) any USB-C capable machine (Mac/Linux/Win) be plugged in with one cable and get multiple displays, ethernet, usb, headphones and power all from one little plug. It was awesome!
DisplayLink may have started off as a lowly USB display standard, but it now can support multiple 4k displays at 60hz which is pretty impressive, and has been working perfectly fine for quite some time across plenty of different devices and monitors.
Comment Re:Dead or just temporarily unusable? (Score 1) 331
Rolling back MacOS is not necessarily a straight forward process, nor is it practical for dev environments.
Submission + - Latest MacOS Update Disables DisplayLink, Rendering Thousands Of Monitors Dead (displaylink.com)
Some days in, DisplayLink has yet to announce any solution, and most worryingly there are indications that this is a permanent change to MacOS moving forward.