I really didn’t want to but their comment just reeks of it my guy.

Except that you did want to. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have done.

Unless by “doing this shit here as well”, you’re referring to the act of not reading the article, jumping to conclusions, and spreading fear and disinformation.

In order to be as fair as possible, I went back and read the comment again.

Is it inflammatory and excessive, while putting out an outlook of distrust towards a new technology? It can be understood as such. Yet, to a degree, I respect and understand that opinion.

Spurting out “okay boomer” doesn’t dismantle that comment; it’s a personal attack.

Either add to the conversation on just keep your peace. Makes the world a better place.

How is that?

As it is, that same argument was used by Apple to try to dodge from complying with the demand for having an industry standard for data and charge port/cable - the USB-C.

Planned obsolescence is a thing. Having law put in place to curb it is a good thing.

If you know you can buy something and you know that something will be repairable at least for a decade, it passes confidence to the end user.

Competition is welcome. Innovation as well. Legislation like this just means companies need to share standards and cooperate more and not aim to skin the client in an endless cycle of replacing expensive items that get thrown out before they are worn out.

Are we doing this shit here as well?

Your reply adds zero value to the thread.

If you want to make a point, try full paragraphs to express arguments.

Considering the serious move EU as made regarding right to repair and imposing that any equipment must be repairable and have parts for it for at least 10 years, this ia going to be another serious pain for this brand.

I’ve also read an article recently where it was reported that all cell phones circulating in the EU must have replaceable batteries. And from what I took from the article it was meant replaceable by the end user.

Serious anti obsolescence legislation.

This will hurt Apple again.

Why can’t I state that some place is a hell hole where no one should be stuck but, nonetheless, state the people living there - or at least a good majority - are actually good people?

Considering the stain politics is for the majority of places nowadays, with the growing effort for extremists/conservatives/right wingers/religious zealots trying to roll back civilizational conquests attained in least 50 to 80 years, it’s not hard to infer that a very small group can and will make life terrible for those unaligned with their views.

So, where is the contradiction?

The dog loved his bath but also loved to get everybody pissed off. It was a very stupid game of catch the dog played.

For the time, it wasn’t cheap.

In 2008, here, the minimum wage was €426, so about €2,42 an hour. So €100 for 4 hours of work was a very good pay.

I knew a person that had a Samoyed for which a simple bath was a two person, 4 hour endeavour, from start to finish, not including the initial chase and wrestle to get the dog in the bathtub.

The person had the groomers go to their house, where he had the bathtub already setup in the garage and all necessary towels and other assorted equipment.

The part of actually gettting the dog in the bathtub involved three person, with the dog’s guardian starting to chase the dog around the property from early in the morning, as the dog would do his best to hide, run and stay out of reach of human hands when the bathtub was set on the garage.

The grooming session would be anything between €80 to €100, in 2008, and still the person thought it was cheap.

You can dislike a place and have nothing against people living it.

Considering the mentioned locations are, boiled down, hell holes run mostly by angry white men, I’d risk the living conditions in those places is due to systemic racism and other outdated views on what a society should be.

People living in those those areas are victims and most probably poverty blocked to even consider to leave, regardless of melanin skin levels, although in the US being a shade over milk white is a detriment for having peaceful life.

Stating those places are a bad choice to live is not racism: is stating a fact.

Prices for food in a restaurant is not that hard to calculate: you figure the cost of one plate of food, multiply it by four and that is price to be charged before taxation.

One part is for the pantry. One part is for the kitchen staff. One part is for the room staff. One part is for the house.

Not hard to figure.

Drinks and beverages are basically all profit, unless you want to drink water with a refined meal (the healthiest/best option but most people won’t), so you will pay for a soft drink twice or triple what it costs you at the store and lets not start talking about wines, beers or, even worse, spirits.

The moment they deliver it and it is paid for, you can do whatever you want.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

My carrier has been giving me weekly data packs since mid May, with a use-or-lose-it condition, so I have been actively not using my home connection and connecting everything I can remember to my phone’s hotspot.

The moment you pay/receive the bandwith, it’s yours to use as you understand; the network can’t interfere with its usage.

That is gross overreach.

You’re trying to use an external hotspot or your phone built-in?

So lets stop to consider, regardless of that nazi memorabilia.

You live under a fascist dictatorial regime. There are very few options available for you to live a relatively uneventful life.

Either you’re an open, true, supporter, a passive one or a dissimulated dicident. Yes, there are more options available, but lets take these as the most broad categories.

Now let us consider that your regime an enacted several acts of domestic, unprovoked violence, internal purges and other assorted brutal and unpredictable actions against social peace and stability, in order to cement its unquestionable power over an entire nation.

Then, that same regime advances to a state of war, where all resources and infrastructure are comandeered to bolster the military.

At some point, companies are put a very simple option: either they cooperate and remain active or they refuse and suffer the consequences, that at best can be simple nationalization and purge of the heads.

Considering all of this, BMW supporting Germany’s war effort is understanble.

Do I agree with that decision? No. But do I understand it? Yes.

Cooperate and live or refuse and die? Not an hard choice, especially if a lot of money is put on the table.