Honestly, I doubted this, and looked it up.
Why do you think in only a few years AirTags have become so ubiquitous, while tile has had nearly a decade on them, and are so barely known?
Really? Because the only ones I've seen have been based on the "Tile" system.
At last check: Requires everyone to have the system on the phone and turned on (Opt in vs opt out), and don't have user replaceable batteries (manufactured ewaste).
And your implied claim that Android is an open system and lets any developers in while Apple do not is also false, for example: https://www.momax.net/en-us/products/br5
I believe it was originally to do with focus, and applying "Shallow depth of field" effects, aka blurry backgrounds.
But now you can get cool features like, being able to scan things with your phone (for say 3d printing), but it's far more accurate than anything else on the market.
You should rethink how the "hostile" thing works, because that's not how interpersonal relations work.
I'd think of defending its accessories as things like; lightning/USB-C to 3.5mm jacks... which android phones also have.
At this point, airtags are all but a product unto themselves, except that you need an iphone to use them. But they are an incredibly cool product, which I can't use because I am not in the apple ecosystem (and haven't been since shortly after Steve Jobs kicked the can).
I could also point out that including LIDAR in their phones is cool, and has opened up new features and functions within various apps. You could also say that Crash Detection and Emergency SOS via satellite are "Killer Features" too.
But with all that said, attacking people over their opinions is very much a fanboy thing to do.
Iphone does have some cool, closed garden things, eg, airtags.
Yes. Android has alternatives, none of which are nearly as good as airtags.
Being able to use your phone with multiple screen sizes and formats depending on what you're doing.
Also: being able to put the phone at 90degs and use it as either a camera or flash light stand.
Nope. I got nothing.
That's not even the biggest level of "we told you this would happen."
They pulled this shit previously with other standards (WebHID). Where they proposed a terrible standard, and then implemented it ignoring all feedback. Only last time it played out over months, and this time... weeks?
Sweet jesus.
Mozilla and Firefox opposed this change. How much impact this has on if you if you use Firefox is yet to be seen.
If this change goes in, and has wide spread use, then Firefox won't work with those websites, and you will be impacted. If this change goes in, but enough people use Firefox, then you won't be impacted.
As for what this change does: Its a little murky, but the short version is it allows for a remote web server to verify if you have messed with the local version. This could be as simple as preventing Ad block from working, as useful as ensuring it's not a bot interacting with your website, or as idiotic as breaking all accessibility tools.
TL;DR; Use Firefox.
view more: next ›
Goodie
joined 1 year ago
It depends on how bright it is where you are.
When it's very very dim your color sensing part of your eyes, which are less sensitive to light, don't work. Only the black and white parts of your vision work.
Kind of.