All other things aside, which Logitech mouse are you talking about? Both my G Pro and my G 305 work out of the box. Logitech also advertises them as ChromeOS compatible and AFAIK the Logitech wireless dongles are USB HID compliant so seeing a Linux straight up refuse to interact with them sounds very weird.

I’d love to but on my gaming rig Wine/Proton will absolutely refuse to install the Visual C++ runtime, making me unable to play most games. On another, virtually identical, Linux installation it works without issue; in fact, I have fewer weird issues like a game randomly not connecting to EOS.

I consider it karmic justice for buying Nvidia; that’s the major difference between the two systems.

(Update: The latest Wine version seems to have fixed this. I’m certainly not complaining.)

When AMD introduced the first Epyc, they marketed it with the slogan: “Nobody ever got fired for buying Intel. Until now.”

And they lived up to the boast. The Zen architecture was just that good and they’ve been improving on it ever since. Meanwhile the technology everyone assumed Intel had stored up their sleeve turned out to be underwhelming. It’s almost as bad as IA-64 vs. AMD64 and at least Intel managed to recover from that one fairly quickly.

They really need to come to with another Core if they want to stay relevant.

To be fair, he also had an eye for good product design. Not the skills to implement it but the ability to see whether a design is good.

Of course he expressed this skill by yelling at his engineers and designers. A lot. Because he was an asshole.

“One of them is responsible for unspeakable atrocities and the loss of millions of lives. The other made some tweets that negatively affected stock prices. It’s hard to tell which is worse.”

The parliament has spoken against “chat control” as well AFAIK. The Commission, however, is probably still trying to find a way to eliminate privacy in whichever way they can.

I find it to be fairly similar. Most people I know either don’t care about VR or bought/borrowed a rig and ended up not using it much. It’s typically seen as kinda nice but not nice enough to really bother with.

In terms of interactivity, most see VR as little better than the Kinect – and that didn’t exactly take the world by storm, robotics labs excluded.

I think most people are actually happy with their regular screens so it’s hard to sell them on something that does more.

I dunno. People said the same about 3DTV and that never took off even when more affordable models became available.

I don’t think VR/AR has a killer app so far. There are some neat things it can do but nothing that makes people chomp at the bit to get their hands hands on it.

VR gaming is nice but most gamers don’t consider it sufficiently better to a regular monitor to buy a VR rig. For screen replacement it gets worse because the constraints are even harder - smaller budgets, weaker host hardware, lower expectations that are already exceeded by traditional screens.

Apple might pull it off but they have one hell of a battle ahead of them.

The problem is that demand will have to be generated first – something HTC, Google, Microsoft, and Meta have failed at so far.

So far it seems that VR/AR is behaving somewhat similarly to 3DTV: Some enthusiasts are really into it and a market exists but most people aren’t excited enough to spend any extra money on it. They’ll have to find a way around that if they really want mass-market adoption.

Given that most non-enthusiasts I know would consider 500 € to be way too expensive for a TV, prices will have to come down a lot for that use case. Especially for families where everyone would need one.

Apple is definitely no contender in that market; their prices would have to go down by 90-95 % to interest the mass market and they’re not interested in that kind of thin margin market segment.

Not in my opinion. The ports are barely adequate and I think neither RAM nor storage are user-upgradeable. The silicon is nice, yes, and they got rid of the touch bar. But I still think it’s forcing too many tradeoffs to be worth it. (And, as usual, their base storage is tiny and their SSD upgrades are way overpriced. Hence the lack of internal slots is a real pain.)

The preceding ones (iBooks, MacBooks, and aluminum MBPs) were okay for their time as well but not at the same level as the unibodies. Still, it’s been a long time since Apple hardware was worth getting excited about.

Mind you, this is purely from a computer perspective. I never cared about their phones so I don’t know how their quality holds up. I do acknowledge that they’re unbeatable in terms of duration of support, though.

The unibody MBPs were solid for the most part. From 2008 to 2012 Apple actually made really good, decently priced, upgradeable, virtually indestructible Unix workstations; I’ll give them that.

Too bad they then made the Retina generation of MBPs, which dropped most of what made the unibodies great and turned them from Unix workhorses to overpriced prosumer devices. And that’s where they lived ever since.