I think you’re underestimating Apple’s chip performance. Going by https://browser.geekbench.com/ the best performing Android devices(Samsung’s special thing for single-core, Snapdragon 845 in a OnePlus for multi-core) appear around even with an A10 for single-core and an A10X with multi-core. If this/last year’s Android chips were enough to make Dex viable, you’d expect last generation’s iPad Pro and the iPhone 7 to be capable of running Apple’s solution.
Oh not at all. Apple chips are beasts and surpass anything out there.
But it's likely a greater chance to see a snapdragon head into a convertible desktop format than an iPhone or iPad, neither even allow a mouse. Still have hope for an A12X powering a MacBook tho.
Right. Moreover, they announced at this September's iPhone announcement that they would be supporting devices for longer, as part of their environmental impact reduction efforts.
These sorts of things interest me so I went though a few of his posts. It’s interesting that his “God says” messages are all 32 words long. Makes me wonder if it’s a cypher, just gibberish or some combination of both.
> Some of the supporters of open source considered the term a “marketing campaign for free software,” which would appeal to business executives by highlighting the software's practical benefits, while not raising issues of right and wrong that they might not like to hear. Other supporters flatly rejected the free software movement's ethical and social values. Whichever their views, when campaigning for open source, they neither cited nor advocated those values. The term “open source” quickly became associated with ideas and arguments based only on practical values, such as making or having powerful, reliable software. Most of the supporters of open source have come to it since then, and they make the same association.
> The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement. For the free software movement, free software is an ethical imperative, essential respect for the users' freedom. By contrast, the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make software “better”—in a practical sense only. It says that nonfree software is an inferior solution to the practical problem at hand. Most discussion of “open source” pays no attention to right and wrong, only to popularity and success
Chris-Chan is arguably the most documented person in history(click around sonichu.com for some idea of the scope of documentation), but there's still so much of the minutiae of their life which is unknown, but they would probably consider those things incredibly important.
