In the second quarter of 2021, mobile devices accounted for 63 percent of YouTube viewing time worldwide. In contrast, consoles and connected TVs reported a share of views corresponding to three percent and 14 percent of the total, respectively.
Consoles I don't use either, but I mainly use my PCs for watching it. I find it so extremely inconvenient to watch it on my phone that I never do that at home.
Apple will sell you 4K downloads through iTunes. IME they're pretty good about getting you on to the latest/highest quality version of something if there is ever an upscaled edition released.
My MagSafe MBP still accepts charge via USB-C. In fact I don't know that I've used MagSafe at all with it other than a handful of times borrowing someone else's charger.
I continue to maintain that Excel is the single most important piece of software created in the history of humanity by sheer virtue of how much of the world runs on it, whether via intended use case or not.
I'm not so sure. To paint with a broad brush, Americans love fast cars and don't care too much for cycling. There's always been a large motorsport culture in the US.
DTS was a big part of the F1 rise in the states, but it is but one part of the story. Things really started to change when Liberty Media acquired F1 and brought in new management. F1 needed to make the sport more accessible by opening up on social media, giving away broadcast rights to ESPN, adding more race weekends both in the States and abroad, and of course (re)introducing the sport to many via Netflix. Which is all to say that there was a full on effort and strategy by the sport to change with the times.
The Tour de France was popular in America when an American was winning it. Then he was revealed to be a cheating dirtbag and the American public lost interest.
I'm not sure it was the tour that was popular when Lance was winning it... Lance was popular and his Live Strong brand was popular, but I don't think many Americans actually cared about world tour cycling.
I’m optimistic about the big tours’ “image” presence in the US because I think that
the future of pro cycling is represented by Anglo countries, plus a few Colombians and some European sporting “freaks” like Pogacar. Ah, and some Benelux guys.
Italy is as good as dead when it comes to pro-Cycling, the same goes for Spain, and France... France is always on the edge of the precipice and of “we’ll never ever going to win La Grande Boucle again! Long live Hinault and Virenque!”, so I’m not so sure about them.
Long story short, the big cycling money is in the Anglo countries, I’m sure California-based clients alone purchase more professional bikes in a year compared to the whole of Europe. And that’s good for Californians.
Spanish and French teams still haven't embraced the science like in England, central and northern European countries where the training is very monitored and using modern findings.
Looking at Frances most popular recent riders in the Tour, Voeckler supposedly just used to basically just go on long rides to train and was drinking Coke during races a few years ago. You never see Alaphilippe looking at his wattage and going at a steady pace when the race picks up instead he'll always be attacking, dropping off or catching back up.
At some point they'll embrace the 21st century and have real contenders again
While "pixel" was originally the 1x1 way back in the day, it's a generic term now used by industry to refer to analytics, often in tracking of user behavior and conversion events.
It's not just navigation, there are many local nuances like where in airports or large stadiums they're allowed to operate or not operate out of. Dealing with city and county ordinances at the scale of Uber takes some bit of human power.
That's their backup mode of operation as far as I know. Their primary mode is to disregard all rules. They paid for the drivers' fines for years in my country until they were flat out banned. Only a few places like China were able to really get rid of them. A seriously shady company.
Regardless of past behavior, there are many many locales that do in fact levy their rules on Uber who have made a business decision to comply, leading to localized experiences of the app and service that can change both between different cities and even within different areas of a city.
You're right of course. I think they attack a new market from two directions. First they just enter the market, rules be damned. But from a different angle they have a huge lobbying arm to make themselves legal in the long run and in favorable terms. That's actually not a bad strategy businesswise IF you can pull it off in enough places. Usually the public really likes the service so there is no push back.
This is the core of the issue. Many would-be competitors to Facebook over the years would lean on the technology aspect as if the average person would care. There's nothing wrong with a decentralized system if you can actually make it work better than the status quo, but many individuals implementing these systems get too caught up in the tech and not enough on the distribution and user acquisition.
