I seriously wish Intel would pivot and stop being ultra worried about things like their atom or Celeron or whatever it's name is being competing with their own stuff and memory capping it. Lots of room for a really low power decently cored memory heavy CPU but they've always capped features and things like ecc memory away to the top skus which is really annoying.
Also not talked about but isn't Samsung and tsmcs fabs booked clear out the next 24 months?
Most cpu manufacturers do this. Binning, changing product numbers or lines around, and marketing tactics.
@GamersNexus on YouTube occasionally does stories on this. Recently they had a good intel slide deck trying to disparage AMD and muddying the water on their own product lines.
>Recently they had a good intel slide deck trying to disparage AMD and muddying the water on their own product lines.
To be fair AMD does this as well. A lot of modern CPUs series are older gen ZEN cores build on older TSMC nodes, rebadged as the newer major series with only the minor number identifying that it's older gen design[1], but AMD does not disclose this in their own comparison tables.[2]
They've been doing this since at least the Ryzen 5000 series(used to own one) so I'm not sure why everyone is so quick to point fingers at Intel but gives AMD a pass. It's not like one is more righteous than the other, they're both major for-profit corporations using marketing confusion to decisive buyers.
To be fair Nvidia Blackwell is basically the same thing, a doubled up Hopper chip that shares a few things between the two for slight efficiency gains.
Very few, however native desktop applications are becoming a rarity these days anyway. A small number of professional apps and games, but game engines are already targeting ARM due to phones.
But you can purchase a Spotify subscription on a different platform (say, Web), and then use your account on iOS, enjoying the same experience as every other iOS user. The only part of the experience that's different is the one time sign-up process, for which Apple wants to charge a permanent 30% fee for the entire duration of the subscription (even if after that you happen to primarily use Spotify on Desktop or Android).
This puts Spotify in a weird spot. Their only options are:
1) Charge more to iOS users. This seems unfair to them and of course they will complain and blame Spotify when they find out they've been overcharged since Apple explicitly forbids informing customers about their fees.
2)Charge ~10-20% (depending on the share of iOS subscribers) to users of all platforms to compensate for Apple's fees. Why should I as an Android user pay extra so that someone else can make purchases on an iPhone?
3) Status quo - disable subscriptions on iOS entirely, make customers jump through the hoops to figure out how to purchase a Spotify subscription.
I don't have the exact figure, but I imagine that quite a few Spotify customers use their subscriptions on multiple platforms. Apple just wants to take a permanent 30% cut if the the initial subscription was handled through an iOS app. Maybe this isn't such a huge problem for game DLC where there is no fixed unit cost, but companies like Spotify need to pay royalties to music labels, etc.
How many Muslims did China actually kill? I mean, what's happening in Xinjiang is obviously very concerning, however I don't think anyone has ever produced any evidence that a literal genocide is happening. Mass incarceration? Perhaps. Brainwashing? Maybe. Genocide? Highly dubious.
> How many Muslims did China actually kill? [...] I don't think anyone has ever produced any evidence that a literal genocide is happening. Mass incarceration? Perhaps. Brainwashing? Maybe. Genocide? Highly dubious.
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II:
“genocide means any of the following acts committed with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
“Mass incarceration” with children forcibly transferred to boarding schools run by people outside of the group and “brainwashing”, together, seem to qualify for (b), (c), (d), (e), even if (a) is missing.
Why won't 350 million American citizens do something about their own government first, before engaging in moral grandstanding in respect to other countries? No, this doesn't mean just getting rid of Trump - the entire political spectrum is complicit in millions of deaths every decade.
US calls itself a "Democracy", so you're supposed to be more empowered to make a change than an average Chinese citizen.
You're asking a very tricky "what if" question and implying a better result without evidence.
There are only 3 countries with the potential to become superpowers in the modern age -- USA, Russia, and China. Hegemony by one of the three is inevitable.
It is up to YOU to provide proof that Russia or China would be better choices.
President Roosevelt said "speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far." The US foreign policy has gone very far with that idea. A large military then economic pressure is what led to the collapse of the USSR. The same tactic has kept North Korea, Iran, and other despotic countries at bay for decades.
Today, Trump and Biden both have endorsed a similar approach to China. Build up the military presence around China and pile on economic pressure until they collapse (trying to walk the fine line to avoid war).
Unlike the US, China and Russia/USSR have killed tens to hundreds of millions of their own people. Do you really think there would be fewer deaths if China or Russia were the dominant power? If they're willing to kill their own so casually, they're going to be even more barbaric with foreigners.
I'd ask again, do you have any proof that the alternatives are better?
Yes, also impoverished and displaced several million people.
Consider the impact of all the regime change operations undertaken under the patronage of the United States in countries like Iraq, Lybia, Syria and Yemen, as well as devastating effects of economic sanctions on Iran, Syria and other nations.
