They only introduced this recently because of the always increasing backlash against their practices.
And thing is, they only sells parts for a small subset of devices from the last decade. If you have one of the latest devices (from iPhone 12), great. If not, get fucked.
Yup, people have been suggesting this for a while, but that goes against the interests of Apple.
Also, it’s still confusing to me how they just allow for someone who sees you put your pin and steals your iPhone to be able to hijack your iCloud account.
They say it’s to stop people from stealing iPhones to sell for parts.
What they don’t say is that the only reason there is a market for that is that they aren’t willing to sell the parts directly at an affordable price…
I just think it’s stupid people are always crying that Chromium forks are “controlled by Google” when they can do whatever they want with the fork.
I’m not saying that Firefox is bad because they take Google’s money.
I just think that if you consider that, they are more dependent on Google than Brave is.
And since one of the main complaints of people is that they want to turn away from Google stuff, that should be taken into consideration.
The complicit part is the most bullshit thing I have ever heard.
They said unequivocally that they won’t support it, just like they didn’t support Manifest V3.
Just because Brave forks of Chromium, that doesn’t mean they have to accept every change Google does and they can also do their own changes (ex: not supporting Manifest V3).
At least they are financially independent from Google, which you can’t say about Firefox.
They can do whatever they want, they only do it because Google allows it.
By that logic, Brave is also completely against Google because they block their ads and go against them.
Your last point is laughable.
Yes Brave cannot make commits to Chromium, but it makes changes to their own repos (well, obviously) and can also accept/reject changes Google makes to Chromium.
In my opinion, Firefox is more of a slave to Google than Brave will ever be because they rely entirely on Google giving them money for the default search engine.
Is Brave’s revenue model scammy? Maybe. But at least they aren’t Google little bitch.
The browser as is right now is open source and has way better defaults for privacy than Firefox (currently it seems it is the best browser in this aspect after librewolf. see: https://privacytests.org ).
Got it. Perhaps he’s used to it due to pubs in the macbooks.
I mean, he probably cleaned it out with alchool and the ultrasonic first.
I know that, and probably everyone here knows something similar. The issue is the average consumer that doesn’t care about tech.
But normal people unfortunately don’t know that many resources to research this and think that if something says it does x, it will do x.
For tech people, we know the whole printer market scam, but for normal people, they just see a bunch of printers with multiple functions being sold.
I’m not in the printer market in anyway, but I know that the current inkjet printer market works by selling the printer at a loss and making the big bucks on the ink you’ll need.
If some company made an actually good printer, they would have to increase the price significantly in relation to the rest of the market and, for the simple consumer, they see the much lower price tag and just go with that anyways.
Regardless of that, if you buy a printer with a scanner function, that function should work… well, as a scanner.
There is no reason for it not to work like that other than negligence or malice.
Capitalism seeks the highest profit, but what that means depends on the customers.
With the Netflix password sharing crackdown risky bet, customers answered loud and clear: they are more than willing to pay more money to access the same content instead of standing their ground on the decision.
When there is actual competition and customers are demanding of what the offering should be, that’s when we see prices go down.
There are an increasing number of markets where monopolies and deals between companies leave people without any choice to make at all, but I don’t think the market of streaming services is an example of this.
To me the only thing lacking from Matrix is the ability to search encrypted conversations on mobile.
I believe Element has it for desktop and iOS, but nothing for Android…
The only reason they’re a competitor to Google is because Google allows them to be by giving them money for the default search engine.
They’re just sailing their boat until it sinks.
Organization represents anti-corporate interests.
CEO gets paid almost all donations despite poor performance.
Seems pretty corporate interests to me.
Bull fucking shit.
Apple goes out of their way to stop repairs. They ask the companies that supply their microcomponents to create a new version of them, just different enough for the original not to work, then make them sign a contract to only sell to them. By doing this, third party component level repair shops can’t just buy the components from the supplier and have to have a stock of donors boards in order to repair anything.
When you go to the Apple store because something in your board failed, they charge you the price of a new device to repair it and then advise you to just buy a new one. Even if you decide to do the repair because it’s more eco-friendly even thought it costs the same, you will lose all your data, because they just replace the entire thing instead of the milimeter capacitor or microchip that is broken.
Apple devices are still a pain in the ass to open and use non-standard screws with tons of different sizes, making sure that if you mix a longer and a shorter screw, you will probably break something.