jamstruth
jamstruth on Hacker News
Why would Microsoft behave any differently to this new API when they have not officially supported previous open attempts?
Adding another standard to the mix just seems to be compounding the problem to me.
Its not running x86 like the PS4 and XBone that's for sure.
Its apparently running a Tegra chip[1]. Exact specs... well we can only guess at this point. So its more similar to an Android tablet than the other consoles.
So the hardware is more standard but its still not the same standard as the other boxes. That could hurt 3rd party adoption.
[1] https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/10/20/nintendo-switch/
Android 6 introduced individual permission prompts when they are needed.
It's also much bulkier than the watch and has no screen. It has a lot less to deal with and they can carefully control what apps it's running since the user has no input.
They state in the Kickstarter that the Core runs Android. So basically it runs the Spotify android app. Chances are that support could be added easily for other apps.
I agree, every Android Wear watch I've seen has the same issues of lag, screen time-out time and battery life. They feel like they're trying to be something that can't exist yet because of power limitations, whereas the Pebble watches embrace their limits and don't try to be more.
And here I just bought a Pebble Time. Guess I know why it seemed so cheap.
Hopefully this won't fragment the app marketplace and it will maintain universal app coverage across all the Pebble watches.
I wonder if it would be possible for an Android Wear watch to do something similar to the Pebble: Long battery life, no touch screen, e-paper display and run alright. I imagine the colour space differences between e-paper and LCD would cause issues though.
There is an option when you turn on Google photo to backup "High Quality" (Unlimited) or "Original" (with limited capacity, I think it uses Google Drive capacity but am not sure)
The companies get to sell the distribution rights more than once. Its more chances to get a good deal for the producers of the content.
Then they need to maintain this barrier so that the deal is good for both the Producer and Distributor involved. If they don't force Netflix to do this then the deals don't look as good to the distributors.
In this case though the statement about "privacy" is seriously marred by the marketing of the product as "Hey, find out if your partner is cheating" rather than going "Hey, see how much we could find out from some vague details?"
"I wanted to make a statement about privacy" - Charges $5 to search a "public" database.
No. You wanted to make money. Get off your high horse.
I seem to remember seeing a lot of commenters in the iPhoneSE announcement thread saying that they'd completely forgotten that 3DTouch even existed. It may be "smoothly" integrated but so much so that nothing has visibly changed, nothing to indicate that there is a new feature or where it's usable.
I'm interested in collecting old machines, mainly older British machines like the ZXSpectrum and BBC Micro. I have nowhere near the space required though.
Then there's also the question of what would I actually do with them all? Especially if I got into collecting old mainframes
Definitely think there should be some way of sharing the revenue with devs, especially indie devs.
Take "Life Is Strange" for instance. I watched a Let's Play on it and it killed any interest I had in actually playing the game. It was a story based game without much in terms of gameplay and I realised after I'd finished watching someone play episode 1 that the story was all that would keep me interested and I'd already seen that. Narrative games don't translate well into Let's Plays format of helping game sales.
Yes but they won't accidentally pull a malicious version of the tweet pretending to be the original. They'll just stop working
So I'm a little confused by this. Is he running Fedora as the main boot operating system or something on top of/beside Android (which he can switch to like an app within Android)?
There was a little while when AMD had the advantage, wasn't there? Putting out 64-bit and dual-cores while Intel was struggling with the Pentium 4 architecture.
Doesn't the WiFi standard already do this for devices running in the same channel? I.e. if 3 devices are on Channel 1 they will talk to each other to avoid conflicts. Hence why you should only use one of 3 channels (the only 3 which never overlap)