ITGUYINSD

$100/yr for 6 users gets you fully updated version of all the Office apps plus 1TB of OneDrive cloud storage PER USER.  To get the same iCloud storage would cost as much as this entire Office Suite!

So, $17/user per year, how many years until you've spent as much as a perpetual SINGLE USER license?  10 or 15 years?  

But people say Office365 isn't a good deal.  If you have multiple computers, family members, friends, etc., can share the cost, it definitely makes sense to spend $17/yr for the apps plus 1TB cloud storage.  

Office365 is the deal of the century compared to Adobe's subscriptions and pricing.

It may not be a popular opinion here, but I like Spotify better than Apple Music.  Like so many others have said, Spotify has better playlists and I prefer their interface to Apple's.

I don't own a HomePod or anything that ties me to AM, so I choose Spotify.  

sflocal said:

M68000 said:

Do a lot of people see much difference with the 120 refresh rate?  Spec wise is one thing but real world is where it matters.  Any news or rumors about microLED?

While it's nice, like 5G, there's always that certain group of people that complain that suddenly it's necessary for them.  Like 5G.  It won't be mainstream for years at the speeds they market, yet all the commercials say otherwise, and people now say their next phone "must" be 5G compliant.

120hz displays are nice, but overrated for today's phone tech.  That some phones have it is irrelevant considering the balance between that and battery life.  I choose battery life.

If Apple included 120Hz in the iPhone12 before it was truly ironed-out, I will bet money the first thing these people will demand is Apple's head on a platter.

So best to ignore these people.

You make it sound like 120Hz displays are some sort of brand new, 1st gen technology that needs to be "ironed-out".  High refresh rate displays are very commonplace.  Dell has an Alienware gaming laptop with a 300Hz display that looks spectacular!  Just got my wife a Samsung S20 5G with 120Hz display and battery life is great!  Samsung seems to have "ironed-out" whatever issues you're talking about.

How many phones with 120Hz displays have you used to have an opinion that they're overrated?

cornchip said:

I thought the main benefit of the 120Hz display was for Pencil usage?

The main benefit of any high refresh rate display (phone, tablet, computer screen) is to make looking at it easier on the eyes.  Smoother scrolling (or better motion with gaming).

Beats said:

ITGUYINSD said:

Beats said:

I carefully read the article for a change.

I gathered,
Epic wants to bypass Apple fees 100% but want to set up a shop on Apple products and reap 100% profit.
Epic is complaining that Apple has a monopoly on Apple products.

It may be an Apple product, but it's not owned by Apple, it's owned by the user.  Epic should be free to "setup shop" on any device the owner of the device wants and Epic should not have to pay the manufacturer of the device a fee for the "privilege" of doing so.

Did you carefully read the article?  I think not.  It literally says "That power emboldened it to design restrictions to create and maintain monopolies in app distribution and in-app payment processing."  Monopoly of distribution and payment processing, NOT Apple products.   So, you gathered wrong.  Apple does have a 100% monopoly on distribution and payment processing.  No lies there.  Is it legal?  I think that is what this is about.

Nope Apple owns the iPhone and iPad.

Same as Netflix owns Netflix and Wal Mart owns Wal Mart. I can't just walk into Wal Mart and demand they paint the walls a different color and demand an organic juice bar and demand they carry my product like a crappy flea market.

"Epic should be free to "setup shop" on any device the owner of the device wants and Epic should not have to pay the manufacturer of the device a fee for the "privilege" of doing so."

Cool. Now go criticize Nintendo, Microsoft, Netflix, Wal Mart, Amazon. I always find it funny how Apple is always shi* on for things 99% of the industry practice.

You're making no sense.  Walmart doesn't own the TV that I purchased from them and walked out the store with.  They can't tell me what I can and cannot watch on MY TV once I purchase it.  Netflix?  I guess if Netflix sold a Netflix device and a service and locked the user of the device into only using Netflix then maybe we could talk similarities, but as it is, Netflix is not similar in this case.

The other companies you listed?  How are they like Apple?  Walmart and Amazon do not force buyer or sellers to have to sell at Amazon or Walmart.  My TV example above proves once I've purchased the TV, I can do whatever I want to do with it, not what Amazon or Walmart tells me I can do with it.