They used to email prompt you for reviews, or prompt you for reviews whenever you signed in. Now they don’t do either, and even if I manually check the backlog of orders, the review time windows have all expired. So I never review anything anymore.
Seems like a strange decision. I don’t understand how that is helping buyers or sellers.
Forgot they used to do that. The receipt emails also fail to mention the time limit policy, causing many more people to miss their chance. For one-off handmade products, reviews are more important than most other marketplaces.
The time limit also prevents you from calling out fraudulent import resellers when you later discover the fraud.
The transition seems well underway, for Apple at least. How long does it take though, a decade?
It doesn’t seem unreasonable to think iOS devices will replace 95% of all Macs, with exception to professional users who need massive workstation resources, unfettered system access, etc.
I don’t recommend Macs to family or friends anymore, they’re completely unnecessary. The new iPads with the keyboard are enough for normal people. That trend seems to be solving the problem, gradually, leaving the technical system for technical people.
Siri understands contact relationships if you fill out the "related names" in your contact cards.
Go to your own contact card, and then set a related name for mother to your Mom’s contact card. The next time you ask Siri to “Call Mom” it will do it.
It’s unnecessarily complicated, it should be able to infer which one, but there’s the workaround.
I wonder what their bounce rate was. Seems like such a strange decision to put a community behind mandatory registration… should have dropped you into some public topics instead.
Curious how this will affect Oculus, if much at all.
In the long run, I don’t think Oculus is good for the industry. Their room scale tracking hardware is inadequate, and their exclusive titles are dividing a fledgling market. I say this as a Vive owner and enthusiast. This along with the lawsuit… maybe it’s for the best.
I haven't tried the Oculus Rift, but I do own the Note 4 Gear VR, and recently tried the Vive. I felt the Vive was clearly inferior, with a much closer and much more obvious and shallow feeling of depth to it, what felt like a worse field of view, and just more primitive VR games.
I was severely disappointed, considering how great the reviews of Steam VR games were, how much I looked forward to finally trying them out, and how primitive and demo-like the Gear VR games and apps were. It felt like the Gear VR games set a relatively low bar that the Vive should easily exceed, but sadly the games for the Vive were even worse.
If the Rift is actually better than the Gear VR, as I have expectation it is, then the Vive must be really awful in comparison.
It is nice that the Vive tracks you as you walk around your room, but that doesn't make up for the poor game quality and other issues I mentioned.
Overall, though, I think VR as a whole has a very, very long way to go. I was stunned and blown away when I first tried the Gear VR, but that sense of amazement wore off after a few weeks, and after that all the fun was in letting other people try it and vicariously enjoy their amazement. That lasted a few months, and ever since my Gear VR has been gathering dust, as it's just too much of a hassle to use, especially for long periods of time, when it gets too uncomfortable.
The main problem, though, is that all the games and apps are way too primitive, and all feel like bare-bones demos. If any of them were great, all the hassle and discomfort would be worth it, but they're really not.. at least not after the novelty has worn off.
There wouldn't be any or many great VR titles if it wasn't for some initial investment. That is a chance for developers to actually make some money.
Yeah Vive is still better in large rooms, but the Rift beats it on most other fronts, such as controllers, image quality, atw and asw, comfort, and of course apps.
I think you meant "subjectively" - if it were objectively better then you could surely provide some evidence!
I for one like the new logo - it's less staid, a bit more playful, and more indicative of Mozilla than the previous one (which was just the name rendered in some font). But that's a subjective opinion, and I'm not going to pretend there's an objective truth to it.
Honestly, @dang, can we enforce that all links to jwz go through archive.org? Then everyone could see the content, jwz wouldn’t get the unwanted traffic, and people wouldn’t have to deal with "why did you just have a NSFW image open at work"
I should clarify, the logotype “mozilla” and not necessarily the dino logomark. The original is more legible, less cryptic.
They also based their new typeface Fira Sans off that original logotype, which is what they use to brand Firefox. So they also fragment that brand association.
Seems like a strange decision. I don’t understand how that is helping buyers or sellers.