slow n easy

I guess I never thought of amazon as an ad site. When I go to Amazon, I’m specifically looking for something, so I don’t really scroll down the homepage. I just type what I’m looking for in the search box. If I’m searching for AA batteries, I expect to see search results from EverReady, Duracell, Energizer, Rayovac, etc. I don’t think of the search results as ads. If I want Energizer specifically, I just ignore everything else and focus on the specific thing I’m looking for. To me, this is totally a non-issue. 

Yeah but the thieves will get a message on their phone informing them of the AirTag following them, so they would likely find and get rid of it.

Xed said:

I enjoyed both seasons and fully expected a cancelation. It's not something you easily keep rehashing. If I have one question is why hadn't anyone thought to do a Rashomon-style narrative for a murder mystery a long time ago?

Each episode was also filmed in different ways, using the language of film genres to differentiate between the retelling by each suspect.

That wasn't until season two, where they mimiic different directors filming styles.

At least I have the next Agatha Christie murder mystery directed by Branagh to look forward to when it hits streaming.

The article probably didn’t phrase it in the best way, but both seasons did each episode in a different genre or sub-genere. For example: Action, Mystery, Animation, etc. The last episode of season 2 did Soap Opera which would be more TV than movie genre.

Yeah, this is a totally ridiculous charge. It's not Google's fault that consumers are refusing to change search engines. No one seems to care that in most communities, there is only one choice for Cable TV. Sure, they can switch to Satellite TV or Online Streaming, but if they have their heart set on Cable, there is only one option available. That Versus anyone can switch to any number of search engines they want. I don't get it.  

applebynature said:

slow n easy said:

Another good point is that the Watch has a significantly lower resale value compared to the iPhone. If I could get a 57% trade-in value for the Watch, I would probably do it.

What are you talking about? You can EASILY resell the first gen Ultra for 57% of original value. Unless that was a typo and you meant 75%. In that case, you could still possibly get that for it. I see people selling theirs for $600 all over the place right now. The ultra is almost in line with the iPhone Pro on resell value. 

And I'm not talking TRADE IN value. If you're trading in your Apple gear to APPLE, you either don't really care how much you get for it or you aren't very bright. Trading in your iPhone to your carrier could be a good deal with their inflated trade in values, but then you're locked into 3 years with that carrier and no real upgrade potential for those three years.

Apparently, you didn't read my post very well because I specifically stated "Trade-In". You gave 2 reasons for trading in, but missed a third reason, which is super easy and uncomplicated. Not every person in the world enjoys selling stuff. Apple offers a 57% or higher trade in value for the previous generation iPhone. Last year I received a 60% trade-in value which made my cost $400. It's so great that you can get $600 by selling your phone and you imply that basically the vast majority of other people can also do it (except the stupid loser people of course), but I have no confidence in my ability to do that. You say in your reply that people are selling for $600 all over the place. But if Apple is buying for very close to that, why would that be dumb? It's super easy and convenient with no hassle. I didn't check the trade-in value for the Ultra. I just remember that Apple only offered $155 for the Series 7, which is less than half.