Then we can be stuck with the same low-res <200ppi screen for many years to come!
(My personal pet peeve is the stagnation of pixel density in displays outside of Apple hardware and phones.)
What's wrong with replacing the display and keyboard? They're the cheapest parts of the computer.
(I think the compute module includes the chipset, too, given that it includes the ram and wifi. It probably exposes pci to the laptop which is at that point just a bunch of peripherals.)
My Thinkpad T490 has 210ppi and it's nothing special. Runs Debian like a champ (I am addicted to TrackPoint so I'm stuck with Lenovo these days). The picture quality on this laptop is far superior (contrast, color saturation, black levels) to my 16" MBP (the LCD panel on the 16" MBP is shameful, it is the worst Apple display I've had in 15 years. If you calibrate it so that colors aren't washed out it is so dark it's impossible to use. If it wasn't a work laptop I would sell it, but luckily I have a good external 4k monitor).
So I call shinanigans on what you are saying here.
That said, I'm staying with the T490 because the best generation AMD thinkpads aren't available with high resolution panels yet, so I will grant you that you have to be patient to get a good laptop display. OTOH, you are wrong about retina displays, they aren't uniformly good so you have to be selective there as well.
This is one thing I've been keeping an eye on. I cannot find a way of doing that now; I don't think I can make the Möbius Sync the other commenter mentioned work either since it can only access files under its own App directory.
If it's a whitelist or a blacklist is really just an implementation detail.
The key here is that the developer can choose to opt-in/out when uploading to the mac store (defaulting to opt-in), however older apps will be opt-out by default (as the developer didn't have this choice when they uploaded).
Well if you want to get technical on terms, it’s probably not implemented as either a whitelist or a blacklist and is probably just a database field which was defaulted to false during the migration.
And because it’s likely implemented like that, you can either generate a whitelist or blacklist if you want, but in reality it’s highly unlikely it’s implemented as either of these things.
But regardless it seems like this whole thread is just about semantics anyway.
Yes in 2014 they made the move. The first iPad is from 2010. So we have 4 years worth of old arm compiled apps. I don‘t understand the intel part though.
Er, like the vast majority of phones at the time. It only took them one more year to prepare and release both a dev kit and an App Store that revolutionised the industry. One year.
J2ME was an utter nightmare, I know because I worked in telecoms back then. Mobile app development as an utter shitshow in 2007 with no signs of it getting any better.
It just seems weird to complain that the company that made mobile apps mainstream "didn't allow it" earlier. The only reason they delayed a year is because the SDK wasn't publication ready yet. They hadn't even finalised the APIs yet and they were still very buggy at the launch of the first phones. We know that from interviews from former employees, the iPhone OS changed hugely between launch and the second phone a year later. A lot of the internal apps were extensively rewritten. Not a great time to push third party development.
Given the sensitivity, absolutely nothing. Seriously, a negative only means that the sample swab didn't have COVID on it. This test is not very useful unless you get a positive.
For context, my wife is a physician. Had a patient that turned out to be positive, test negative while in the hospital. A day later, he was intubated. While he was intubated, his original, outpatient, test from 11 days earlier came back positive.
This test is mostly useless anyway: you need to administer it at the narrow window when you have covid for it to be effective. This implies that you have to keep it on hand, ie it can be too late to order it when you have symptoms since it can be delivered too late to detect anything. Then you have to wait for results for many days once you send it - so it’s useless for guiding your action during the time you have symptoms.
If you administer the test when you don’t have symptoms it useless as well since most likely you will miss the window.
Not sure why you would take it if asymptomatic (assuming you aren't an essential health worker), unless you were told to either as part of a random sample study, or because a contact tracing effort told you you were at risk.
If you take it while symptomatic, I believe the sensitivity is improved, so if it comes back negative, you can be pretty assured that you just have a regular cold, right?
All current evidence says infection confers temporary immunity to the vast majority of people infected. It’s not clear how long immunity lasts, but it’s most likely on the order of years. And even if you lose immunity, the reinfection will likely be more mild.
I’d say it’s a relief if you test positive and then 14 days pass and you experience no or mild symptoms. But I know for me, personally, I’d be a nervous wreck during that period waiting for the symptoms to come (but I also have an underlying respiratory condition so that’s a big part of my anxiety).
That’s a fair question. I do think some people may buy and take the test if they’ve been in an area where the potential for exposure is high and they worry they are an asymptomatic or presymptomatic carrier.
Aren't those inconsistent across platforms? Also you must use the "super" key/combo, and there's only one. Not to mention the internationalization concerns.
