Not surprised, he's the kind of guy who blows his paycheck on several automatic boxes of fireworks and lights them all at once. "It's going to be huge!" but you can't see much and it's over after a couple of minutes.
Not directly, but it still does matter to me. I'd rather my CEO buy a new car instead of giving even more money to Microsoft, as weird as that sounds.
The real problem is that it makes it even more appealing for C-suiters to cut costs -- and C-suiters usually choose to reduce licence counts (read: firing people) instead of migrating away from Microsoft.
You're forgetting the 12% exception, but they'd probably need an even larger amount than that.
Dolly Parton or violet, who knows.
It feels like EU Directive 2014/109 chickened out in comparison to those pics. Especially all the warning labels regarding children or fertility... a large portion of the imagery is almost comedic, showing that your balls will explode, and that babies will mooch your cigs.
The figures come from Surfshark, one of the best VPNs on the market,
It's just an advertisement piece.
They're not thinking about the hardware in any way.
Yeah, but that's also because Apple doesn't even inform the user that their version of macOS is EOL. So unless you're an active follower of Apple news, most people won't care -- at the least simply because they wouldn't even know. Same thing with Android, etc... whereas Microsoft makes it annoyingly obvious that you're running an unsupported version.
Huh, the article implies that the FBI still owns it... or am I misunderstanding?
While the cabin itself now sits in the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., Barnes’s photos are housed in the collections of major museums throughout the country, including the Museum of Modern Art, SFMOMA, and the Whitney Museum of American Art.
Why does the FBI still have it sitting in an office somewhere? Does the US government usually just save everything related to cases, even long after the subject is dead?
This is exactly the kind of thing Jesus Christ would adore.
How about when they "accidentally" sent that email to all your users saying that they NEED to buy Plex Pass to continue to use remote streaming? Or when they had that "bug" in the app shortly after that, where remote streaming would give an error message saying that need to buy Plex Pass to stream your content?
Maybe they don't solicit from you, but they use dark tactics to trick your users, and that's not acceptable in my opinion.
Probably one of the "longest" hotels I've been to. BW in Linköping.
You give them an inch, they'll take a mile. There's no real desire to make stuff efficient when people just accept it.
A different example is that if you said 15 years ago that all of your desktop programs would actually be running each in their own individual web browser, people would look at you like you're crazy. Now it's somehow normal.