This is why I personally built a home media server. Lapsing licensing agreements, older content, escalating streaming subscription costs, etc all led me to it. The secondary effect of being able to consume the content without depending on anything other than electricity is an additional benefit.
> The completely arbitrary and almost random lock-down decisions have crushed all small business, giving over their entire customer bases to large big box stores.
The response here in Washington State has resulted in permanent closure of more businesses than deaths with covid within the state.
Occasionally I stumble on a Facebook thread that allows multiple tiers, and I'm not sure what the enabler for that is. I'd love to see that extended to all threads even if I would vastly prefer a true forum over their groups.
I'm curious, if you don't trust iOS at launch or even several months down the line, why bother with it in the first place? Pick up an Android and join the dark side. I'm honestly baffled as to how locked-in Apple users let themselves be, even the tech-savvy ones.
Pick a manufacturer that gives you timely updates with a support duration you're happy with, and you're fine.
And before you complain "it's insane that I have to do that", you've already done that: just you picked Apple.
The mistake people make is in thinking of Android as some monolithic, consistent thing. It's not, and can't and won't be. Buy a Google phone, or a Samsung phone, or whatever, and stick with a manufacturer you like. At least if they start doing things you don't like, you have options in the same ecosystem. If Apple does something you don't like, you have no other options without jumping ship.
Is there an android device manufacturer that is currently supporting a 5 year old phone? I'm on the iPhone 6s, which released in 2015, and just installed iOS 14.
Android phones seem to be a 2~ year lifespan, even Google's own devices. Having switched from a Nexus 5, which got just two years of major Android updates. (Which also slowed to the point of being unusable, and eventually completely breaking with boot loops and then bricking itself)
Apple updates for 5 years. No Android manufacturer does that. Google offers 3 years and Samsung does 3 years on their high end flagships (which I don't personally like).
Apple is simply on a whole different level in this regard.
Better specs for $400 less, on a Pixel?
Name one phone built to last with better specs than the iPhone SE please, I'm listening.
I don't care about multiple cameras, OLED displays, 120 Hz or whatever the industry is trying to push these days, I just want a reliable decently built phone with a good SW support.
Furthermore, I don't see how replacing the phone more often would be a positive thing, it just means I would produce more trash.
The SE 2020 is using the A13 chip which is about double the performance of the best snapdragon soc available right now. There doesn't exist an android phone with specs comparable to the SE.
You previously said "the specs are the same or better for $400 less", but the A13 in the SE blows away the Snapdragon 730 in the Pixel 4a and the price difference is only $50.
> The mistake people make is in thinking of Android as some monolithic, consistent thing.
Well, the Android branding is all over the place. No one thinks “I’m going to switch to Samsung”. It’s “I’m going to switch to Android”. Android phones are commodity devices.
I do say I'll switch to Samsung or a One Plus if I'm looking for a higher end, an OPPO or Vivo if I'm going for a lower end, or a Redmi or Honor, if I'm going for a midrange resilient phone.
I use a Blackberry for my black box phone, so I don't really care about security on my Android stuff - Google or China can have all that's in there. What I do care about are having options, and Android does provide me a lot of options. For instance, my first Android phone was a Samsung and while the phone was awesome and lasted a solid 4 years, I hated the customer service offered. Then thought I'd have a cheaper Android, so decided to go with a Motorola. Then once I joined the workforce, it was the BB + Honor combo, because Honors are so much resilient. Just because Android has so much more options doesn't mean they are commodity devices, unless you look at phones as a status symbol, which is a thinking I've honestly grown out of.
I don’t think you’re representative of the general market...
I’ve never heard of people talking about the “Samsung experience”, or the “Huawei experience”. These devices are interchangeable. People talk about specs or price or getting longer term support.
I mentioned the Blackbox phone only because folks here (and mostly here alone) care about privacy. People outside this ecosystem don't give a damn about privacy - it's either the value of the phone at its price or its the capability of the phone which appeals to them.
Appleistas are the only ones who talk about the Apple experience because clearly it's only Apple which came up with that marketing gimmick. There's nothing different or even superbly superior of the Apple experience compared to the Huawei or Samsung experience. On the contrary, it's effectively much easier for most people I've met to get familiar with Android over Apple. Like most people mention here regularly, most people buy Apple only because of the green chat box stigma.
> There's nothing different or even superbly superior of the Apple experience compared to the Huawei or Samsung experience.
Absolute horse crap, unless you speak for the market. I don’t have to carry two phones and also don’t have to worry about privacy. In fact I have a phone made by a company who could really give two craps about the ad market and feeding it more data. Second is you can be sure if it’s Apple you’ll get quality. With other android phones you’ll get mostly cheap. The user interface style on android is also ugly, cards are old, material is boring, but this is subjective, just like you saying Apple provides no better experience than Samshit or Chinawei
The privacy of an Apple phone that allowed the Saudi prince to order a hacking into Bezos' phone, which ultimately leaked out info and led to his divorce? Yeah, no thanks.
Being on Blackberry, or any non-Google phone really, allows me to segregate my really important stuff from my every day stuff. Equating Apple's security to that kind of segregated security is a bunch of absolute horse crap.
Absolutely, lots of people are loyal to certain brands or look for the best value/spec in Android devices and make their choice based on that. If people didn't care, everyone would be buying $50 Android devices. Most people I know now even look at the version of Android it comes with.
I own an Android One device (Mi A2) and in the last year updates were complete garbage. The manufacturer clearly couldn't care less about my (2 years) old device.
I'm using LineageOS now and I'm much happier, but I think I'll switch to an iPhone SE when my phone dies
Android One held lots of potential, but Google managed to stuff that up too. They need to wrestle back control over the OS from the OEMs. Until they do, Android handsets will be disposable beyond a life of 2 years.
Ironically, a company that understands that model is Microsoft. It's a pity they aren't competition for Apple in this space yet. As an iPhone/Macbook Pro/iPad user, I am eyeing the Surface Go 2 w/WSL as a potential future replacement for the iPad.
Because privacy. I have no illusions that Apple’s privacy stance is permanent, but for now, they’re far superior to Google, Android, and associated vendors in that regard.
I've had my own share of this. Among the emails I've received, there have been some from within the New Zealand Parliament, a fire department in Oregon, an OB/GYN on the east coast of the US, car loans, home loans, concert tickets, plane tickets, and other less consequential things.
How's the actual mask use? The majority of people I see reuse the same one over and over, frequently touch it and adjust it, and then touch other things. I don't see how they're achieving much more than safety theater that way.
Does that matter? I thought the point of having the entire public wear masks is to stop the wearer's breath from spreading germs, not stop the wearer from coming in contact with germs.
Obviously medical professionals or other people who come in close contact would be better off using medical-grade masks in a hygienic and consistent way- but for the majority of grocery shoppers and such, I thought the purpose was simply reducing your ability to spread the germs.
How does it not matter? If their breath contains something that shouldn't be spread and they're actively touching the damp mask containing it and then touching other things, how does that not spread it?
you said that if people touch their mask or adjust it, "I don't see how they're achieving much more than safety theater that way." Covid is primarily airborne. If you prevent your breath and your coughs and your speech from spreading the germ and making it airborne, you're accomplishing a lot. And I feel like "damp mask" is a bit of an exaggeration. A hell of a lot more than "safety theater".
That's fine from a theoretical standpoint, but the reality is far, far different. People in general do easy, token gestures. They're not following proper procedures for mask use.
Citation needed. Reusing a mask that is already loaded with exactly the stuff you don't want to breathe will cause the material to dry as soon as the user stops wetting it with their exhale, and then pass through on re-use because it's under the filter size, even for an N95 which practically nobody is using.
There are good reasons they are called disposable masks.
Viruses don't live forever, and the current coronavirus is no exception. Current estimates for surfaces vary a bit, but I believe it's no more than 1-3 days for fabric. And of course, the decay is exponential. Finally, why would it matter if you inhale stuff you just exhaled? If you're already sick, it doesn't matter anyway. The mask is about you preventing others from getting sick; it only marginally protects you from other people.
The exhaled air does not go through the disposable fake mask.
Disposable masks that the majority of people are using are are not for reuse, and it says right on the box "not for viruses". The "oh but large particles they (aerosol experts) didn't think of that" thing is surreal to see people say with a covered face.
Yet those same masks are reused multiple times per day. Taken on and off. The multi-day exponential hand wave fails on reuse, the exhale re-hydrates the medium. Masks have a finite capacity before they are a net negative, and cloth IRL insanity is a growth medium.
The psychology of "wear a fake mask for others" is next level propaganda. It's right in line with the drastically more dangerous social contagion that person X knows better than person Y and therefore is righteous to force their ideas (medical procedures) on person Y.
Conditioning people to make medical decisions for others is too obvious, but here we are, fake masks and all.
It's a deadly religion, which repeats over and over in human history.
Every single claim you make here requires scientific evidence as in actual studies that demonstrate such effects. Are you seriously trying to argue that not wearing a mask at all is the optimal way to handle a highly infectious respiratory pathogen? You should be advocating increased availability of N95 or better rated masks instead. I believe the US has made a serious error in only allocating N95 masks to hospitals. The gamble is that surgical masks or cloth masks are enough, but they don't filter very well. Cloth masks are woven and have large holes everywhere making them only somewhat better than nothing. Surgical masks were never intended for serious filtration and don't even form a decent seal. BTW manufacturer claims or disclaimers are not evidence for anything in particular and are irrelevant.
There are a lot of not-altogether-scientific reasons. Gay people can’t give blood. If I recall correctly British people can’t either because of Foot and Mouth disease, something that happened in the 90s.
They are based on reasons that are statistically founded in some way because not everyone's blood can be tested as extensively as anyone would like, so reducing risk factors helps. I can't speak for every country but this is at least the case for the ones I've lived in and donated in.
Also, it's no longer true in many (most?) places that "gay people" can't give blood, as the distinguishing factor nowadays is usually recent sexual activity.
Note that "recent at-risk sexual activity" specifically means (among other things) a man engaging in sex with another man in the past 12 months (at least that's the case in Australia[1]).
Practically speaking this means that the vast majority of gay men cannot donate blood -- even if the criteria don't explicitly say the words "gay men cannot donate blood". Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are purely statistical reasons why these restrictions are in place (blood banks aren't out looking for excuses to reduce their supplies) -- but it's really not accurate to say that it's no longer the case that gay men cannot donate blood.
I also hasten to note that having many sexual partners is not considered "at-risk sexual activity" (though there are some exceptions), while two monogamous men in a homosexual relationship having sex is always considered as being "at-risk".
> In 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relaxed its guidance but still required men to abstain from sex with another man for at least a year before they could give blood, a policy that the the American Public Health Association said was “not based in science”.
Can confirm: I'm not allowed to give blood in Australia because of the small risk (with a potentially very bad downside if it manifests) that I'm infected with mad cow disease, due to living up in the UK in the 90s.
They still let me sign up to the organ donor list though.
Edit: foot and mouth disease was a decade later. I don't believe it's a problem in humans?
I’m actually more of a fan of a la carte content than channels. I typically spend $0-100/mo on TV shows and movies, which I strip the DRM from and copy into my permanent collection. In aggregate, I probably spend something comparable to what cable would cost. It’s all content I want with no filler or commercials, and I’m not held hostage by some subscription.
