I've used it quite a lot in Europe - specifically for walking directions in cities. I prefer Apple Maps for walking directions, especially paired with the watch - the data is good and the UX with the watch is excellent.
I can't find any reference to this on Apple's website. They simply they a USB3 cable is required to get USB3 speeds, which I assume they don't ship in the box.
Just because the term "social media" came later and was popularised by certain kinds of social media networks, it doesn't mean it doesn't encompass regular old fashioned forums too.
What is this right now other than a social interaction about a piece of media (the article)? This is a very arbitrary distinction for you to draw.
Ok, I wasn't making an argument for the Quest. I was making an argument against the idea that you need a $1500+ PC for VR, that's it. I don't have or want a Quest.
I’m neither here nor there on passkeys, but I think in this scenario if you stored your passkeys in 1Password at least - then when biometrics fail, it would require your 1…password.
Although I don’t know how the passkey support in 1Password will work, so I may be wrong on that.
Funnily enough, this is why the only USB-C chargers and cables I carry around are my Apple ones - because they've been the only ones that I've been able to reliably trust across all my other devices (including USB-C Apple devices).
>I'm surprised there are more Apple TV users than Apple watch users.
I don't think these stats suggest that there are more Apple TV users than Apple watch users.
They say more people use the App Store on tvOS than use the App Store on Apple Watch.
As an Apple Watch user, I'm not surprised by that all. Why would I want to browse the app store directly on my watch? That's annoying and cumbersome. I do it on my phone, it's quicker and easier and therefore I assume that'd be counted as iOS app store usage.
And I also reckon most Apple Watch apps people use are companions to apps they installed on their iPhone anyway, rather than Apple Watch only apps.
How is it different than having to use GOG's website to install a purchase you made or download an updated version?
Developers on Steam can ship their own update mechanism separate from Steam if they want to.
I feel like people don't actually know the policies of Steam and how it mostly just leaves it up to the developer, for better or worse.
If Steam decided to block developers from being able to do DRM, it wouldn't mean all the games would go DRM free, it'd mean the games wouldn't go on Steam, like they don't go on GOG - they'd go to their own launchers.
As much as people like to believe Steam has a monopoly, publishers have been able to bring out their own launchers reasonably successfully. People will go to their launchers if that's the only way to get anticipated games. Some of the most successful games started and remained outside of Steam.
The industry would look significantly different if Steam had an actual monopoly.
>• Valve is almost as infamous as Google for abandoning their hardware and projects.
In what way?
The Steam Machines didn't really take off, but they didn't sell any hardware for that - and they kept supporting the whole software side of things and progressing SteamOS, Proton, etc ever since - making the Steam Deck itself possible.
Steam controller and Steam link are still alive, get support and new functionality beyond the discontinuation of the hardware. The stuff they spawned, SteamInput and the Steam Link app, all still there and not abandoned.
Their VR stuff still gets updates frequently - the Vive, the Index, all still supported.
If anything, Valve are a good example of how to support your stuff long term even when the hardware hasn't sold as well as you'd like. This is really a bizarre view to me and the complete opposite of my experience as someone who owns at least something from every 'category' of hardware product Valve released. None of them feel abandoned whatsoever.