Apple can absolutely be expected to fix it! They'll have someone trained to deal with this exact scenario, and employees will have been exposed to similar scenarios in mandatory anti-bribery training, and instructed exactly how to respond. In fact, I can guarantee this is gonna become a textbook example that all other companies are gonna be using in their training going forward. Bribery is a big deal for companies on this level, especially those teetering in the world of luxury like Apple is.
I recently replaced my Macbook screen after living with a half cracked LCD for over a year because I had assumed it was impossible to DIY and a hefty charge was inevitable. I followed the relevant guide on ifixit and found the whole process pretty straightforward. I would have grappled with it much earlier if there was more messaging out there that says "hey, if you have nothing to lose, and more spare time than cash, you actually can fix these things yourself", because you totally can! And you also get to feel smug about it afterwards because you hear so much to the contrary.
Yeah, you totally can. Anything that's been assembled can be disassembled.
But the number and complexity of tools has increased a lot. Used to take 2 screwdrivers to fix a phone or a laptop. Now you need special screwdrivers, a heat gun, pry tools, glue, small tweezers at least.
And a whole BGA rework station if you want to replace components with a decent quality of work.
Part of the confusion was over the T2 chips that were added back in 2018 that were reportedly[1] bricking computers if non genuine parts were used locking out independent repairers.[2] I'm not sure if that functionality is actually active though.
Komar and Melamid is an art group that took surveys of art preferences in different countries and then made the logical favorite and least favorite paintings.
As a vehicle for getting word of their site redesign out its clearly been pretty effective. I mean I literally learned Bloomberg redesigned their website from an art blog of all places, and this is the second time its been on the HN front page now. This is a 'how', not a 'how not'.
I can't live without Tab Mix Plus and multi-row tabs on Firefox. On Chrome I can't even be a power tabber. It's pretty much the only reason I've stuck with Firefox over Chrome.
The post-crash session restore seems to work well for me; and luckily it's not a frequent occurrence.
At one point, the post-crash session restore on Firefox actually single handedly made me move to Chrome. Another reason was the fact that I needed to kill its process because the UI became unresponsive.
Chrome was fresh and snappy, not a fair comparison at that point but it was definitely fast. I never wanted to switch away from Firefox but I felt like I had to because it had become unusable.
I've switched back to Firefox since and all the previous problems were gone. It's been very reliable and if it did crash (which can still happen like with all software) it would restore my tabs just fine. I just like it better than I ever did Chrome and I certainly like the organization behind Firefox better than that behind Chrome. :)
I'm not sure how you can use Chrome with a lot of tabs anyway. Maybe with a mouse with a DPI switch so you can hit the few pixes they size down to if you have 20+?
Keyboard controls to switch tabs. But I can have about 20 before they get too small to click on my laptop -- but they've already become too small to know what is in what tab at that point. I do it anyway. Because my browser is just about as messy as my physical desktop or my apartment.
This is cool. Most impressive thing for me is how wildly different the three works (& thus approaches/challenges posed) are. Curious how Cassatt will be tackled.
I'm not sure of that, because I'm not sure it is possible to generalize about postmodernism. While most postmodern theorists would agree on doing away with the high-modern rejection of any classical, traditional or historical vernacular, there isn't a coherent positive direction they would recommend, and many post-modernisms would be as embarrassed by an earnestly traditional work as a high-modernist.
Perhaps I'm seeing what I'm looking for, but, in hipsterdom, I see an aggressive undercurrent of unabashed classicism and traditionalism, taken forward in meaning, but not necessarily in formalism, underlying a very shallow ironic shield that preserves just enough ambiguity to allow bailing out on full classicism when pressed by modernists and postmodernists.
It's a continuum, of course, but I would expect a postmodernist to make a logo with obviously absurd historical references, juxtaposed in a surprising manner, whereas a hipster would put the cool shit he or she likes today in a straight-forward reference to a historical style, letting the meaning supply the irony, rather than the form.
