It’s not even that.

By and large, most industry standard softwares are only available on Windows and macOS. Take word processing for example. It doesn’t matter if there are open source alternatives that gets it 95% of the way there. Companies by and large would not want to run the risk of that last 5% (1%, 0.01% doesn’t matter) creating a situation where there’s misunderstanding with another business entity. Companies will by and large continue to purchase and expect their employees to use these standard softwares. People will by and large continue to train themselves to use these softwares so they have employable skills so they can put food on the table.

No one cares about how easy or hard it is to install something. IT (or local brick and mortar computer retailer) takes care of all that. Whether or not it is compatible with consistently making money / putting food on the table is way more important.

Until we have Microsoft Office for Linux; Adobe Creative Suite for Linux; Autodeks AutoCAD for Linux; etc etc. not even the janky “Microsoft Office for Mac” little cousin implementation but proper actual first party for Linux releases, it is unlikely we’ll see competitive level of Linux desktop adoption.

The article linked to the analysis and on a quick glance, it seems to be done entirely against the Android variant of the app. This makes sense because if the alleged actions are true, they’d never have gotten on to the App Store for iOS Apple users… or at least as of a couple months ago. Who knows what kind of vulnerability is exposed by Apple only doing limited cursory checks for 3rd party App Stores.

I don’t suppose you mean Altered Carbon, where the premise is people don’t die as their entire memory and consciousness could be captured in a tiny tube the size of a modern day fuse; and opens where they’re investigating the suicide of a young woman who jumped to her death but have registered as DNR or something like that?

They didn’t because it’s not their problem. Other platforms’ users have that problem; Apple users have iMessage.

You buy a Windows phone, you buy a blackberry, you buy a flip phone, you’re using carrier messaging, or whatever app you can run on those platforms.

You buy an Android and suddenly you feel entitled to demand Apple to go to bat for you on carrier messaging? That’s a very entitled hot take.

Apple users have iMessage… amongst other third party chat apps that works fine across different platforms. Apple doesn’t have any obligations to go to bat for other platforms on carrier messaging that they already support.

Again, Android problem, not Apple problem.

Apple stated clearly they’re keen on working with GSM Consortium (who owns RCS and has more sway on carriers than Google does) on bringing E2EE to the masses.

If Google’s reputation of finding new and exciting ways to sell targeted ads doesn’t precede them, then they might have a better chance of getting a first party solution like Apple does with iMessage. But alas, Apple is not responsible for Google’s business plan or public image, and that problem is Google’s to solve.

That’s the point. It’s not Apples problem. Apple supports basic carrier messaging. If someone buys an Android, Apple users can message them just as anyone who buys a Windows Phone or BlackBerry.

It’s either an Android problem — getting fragmented service and no E2EE — at which point don’t buy an Android; or a user preference problem — “Inprefer iMessage” — at which point buy an iPhone.

Vendors on both sides have gone up and down the market to cover the spectrum, it’s not even a “can’t afford the premium feature” problem anymore as it were decade ago.

WhatsApp (EU/LatAm), WeChat (China), Kakao Talk (Korea), Line (Japan/Taiwan) are the main ones I’ve encountered. I think Telegram is used more in Russosphere and Signal has a footing in some niche circles as well.

There is no E2EE in RCS, so no amount of EU push would’ve enabled that. Also RCS was not a EU play, it’s a China play. RCS features are dependent on carrier implementation against GSM consortium’s spec.

So no, everything there is basically wrong… but hey, it goes well with the echo chamber vibes so upvotes to you!

People trying to claim capitalism / consumerism is missing the point — no one is getting a magical piece of PCB for free; vendors on both sides have gone up and down market that they’ve basically all covers the spectrum, and people make their own choice as to which platform they’re on.

People trying to assign blame on Apple is missing the point — it’s the android users having sub par fragmented (depending on carrier) service that doesn’t have E2EE by default, whom desperately needs something better.

If people chose Android are finally realizing they don’t have proper service, then they need to petition their platform vendor to put in something better (arguably Google has, but their reputation precedes them in these circles), or vote with their wallet when it comes time for their next device.

Apple has no obligation for users outside of their ecosystem. Apple saw the landscape of carrier messaging being terrible, and they made iMessage to help their customers communicate with one another better, while continue to maintain support for basic carrier communication. They have now updated to offer RCS, the current modern carrier messaging standard, which as demonstrated is still fragmented and outright garbage.

There is a Google proprietary protocol that’s based off of RCS, but as demonstrated by the Android market, even Android devices doesn’t do that — so Apple isn’t likely to (and frankly shouldn’t) do it to give more information to Google (even on the alleged promise of E2EE, it allows Google to know who is communicating with who at what time, and potentially roughly where via cell tower origination).

Apple is not a charity and has no need to open up their proprietary protocol designed to better their clients’ communications to non-clients. Want to make a phone call? Pay your carrier. Want to have electricity? Pay your power provider. Want to use iMessage? “Buy your mom an iPhone”.

Strictly speaking, they’re leveraging free users to increase the number of domains they have under their DNS service. This gives them a larger end-user reach, as it in turn makes ISPs hit their DNS servers more frequently. The increased usage better positions them to lead peering agreement discussions with ISPs. More peering agreements leads to overall cheaper bandwidth for their CDN and faster responses, which they can use as a selling point for their enterprise clients. The benefits are pretty universal, so is actually a good thing for everyone all around… that is unless you’re trying to become a competitor and get your own peering agreement setup, as it’d be quite a bit harder for you to acquire customers at the same scale/pace.

I tend to recommend sticking with more reputable providers, even if it means a couple of dollars extra on a recurring basis. Way too many kiddie hosts popping up, trying to make a quick buck during spring break/summer and then fail to provide adequate services when it actually comes time to provide service.

It may also be a good idea to check LET/WHT before committing into paying longer than month-to-month term with a provider.

Apple community, we don’t care about android; sorry but not sorry. And yes, it is possible, I don’t think anyone is arguing that. The discussion is more what should happen in “the Apple way” where things just work — and that’s something Apple can mandate on app developers… something that might be pretty foreign and alien to the android crowd.

I use AdGuard.

There’s lifetime family plan (for more devices) to be had on stack social almost as a permanent fixture. You can occasionally stack it with extra coupons.

Sounds like that’s a bad experience resulted from what could’ve been avoided through proper backup management practices. Hardware failures are inevitable, and it is always prudent to manage backups appropriately. I’ll be the first to admit I’m not backing up my controller data properly, but at least mine is on a VM powered by a RAID array that I take snapshot semi regularly. Should the VM corrupt itself somehow, and I cannot get my backups deployed, I’d probably be hosed and have to restart from scratch, but that’d be on me for not testing my DRP.

For most SMEs, paying consumer grade equipment is out of the question, and paying for true enterprise grade stacks Meraki / Aruba might be out of the question due to budget constraints. Ubiquiti strikes a happy median for them, and residential users that want to opt for a bit more.

So how deep down the rabbit hole do you want to go? For most people, not going to lie, get a high end “gaming router” for smaller place, or a big brand “mesh network” and you’ll be set. Blasphemy for the networking crowd, I know, I know. But at the end of the day, if you’re not planning to spend time setting things up and tinker, there’s not a lot to be gained going further.

However, if you’re willing to put in the time to learn and tinker, Ubiquiti is a good prosumer entry point. Their product line up has gotten quite confusing in the last little bit but the general idea is the same: You’d need 4 parts to form an actual network:

1. A controller/manager — this is the “S” in SDN, Software Defined Networking; where you can manage your network settings
2. A router/gateway — this does the routing on your network and provides entry/exit from your network
3. One or more switches — this allows you to plug more hardwired devices into your network
4. One or more wireless access points — this gives your network wireless capabilities

Some Ubiquiti devices covers more than one of those areas; for example the UDM mentioned actually covers all 4 areas, whereas, confusing as it may sound, the UDM Pro only covers 3 (no built in access point). This is because if you’re planning to cover a larger site, you may not want your wireless access point to be situated where your gateway is, and you’d rather the option to have hard disk trays to help keep more recordings from your security cameras.

Figuring out what your needs are, picking out the components, and figuring out where to place them is going to be part of the process. If this doesn’t sound appealing, that’s perfectly fine, but it may help you figure out the path you’d want to take forward.

There’s also the problem that sadly Lemmy is filled with vocal users with skewed view of the world, and they tend to be extreme polarizing. The “if you’re not one of us, who firmly believes the world should work a certain way, and if you’re not willing to shoot yourself in the foot with a shotgun to prove it as a point, then you’re one of them; you should get the eff off of Lemmy and crawl back to Reddit” kind of way. They’re so scared of losing that pedestal that they’re going to go out of their way to alienate anyone who doesn’t drink their koolaid and push them off the platform so they can remain dominant. Sadly, these people also never really learned much of the real world, so those that are more experienced / educated gets pushed off the platform, and we end up with a bunch of weird superstonk culty kind of vibe everywhere.

I find myself more and more just make a comment and don’t look back. It’s quite literally futile and pointless trying to expect any discussion of any actual sustenance. You wonder why it’s just shitposting… well this is why.

It is probably best to think nothing on Lemmy is private. Any instance with at least one user subscribed to a community will receive updates (messages and votes) on the community. Instance admin can go into the database to see any private message between any user on that instance.

I know 1Password can detect the app ID and use that as a match criteria. The problem is that it is not user intuitive to get the app ID to key into password manager; also doesn’t change the fact that the app most of the time just front end to some website, which already has an entry for the website, and shouldn’t require the user to go out of their way to find App ID to work around the dev’s inability to surfacing basic metadata about their service.

Bitter that you’re not able to use new features much? Reap what you sow.