Mihle

100% fine with that.
 
People just want shit for free without regard to the cost to get it to them.
 
People are the issue, not Youtube.  

Does not need physical locations to operate somewhere. For one they spesifically build their site to be used there with languages/translations and stuff. If Facebook and Twitter did not want to operate in EU they would have to for example not let EU IP address log in to their site.
 
When it comes to blocking websites, I believe that possibility would have to be done by nation by nation, yes. But I am not totally sure.

but to guarantee free travel of goods tot he same standard across europe, it is important that such laws are made on a level that guarantees the rule applies across our very open borders.
 
i could bring up a lot more, and much more impactful and complicated examples, but to steer away from politics i took a very simple to understand example that is very on-topic to a tech hobby, because most of us get our parts from online stores.
 
PS; EU isnt perfect, not by a long shot. but it's not as bad as the alternative.

I don't wake up if I use a single alarm in the morning. But my solution to that is that I have an alarm going off every 3-5 minutes, and then I will be awake after the 3-5 alarms usually, sometimes longer but usually not.
 
My light in my room also turn on about 10 min before the alarms, don't know if it makes much difference but I started doing it and don't want to try to stop doing it.

I don't wake up if I use a single alarm in the morning. But my solution to that is that I have an alarm going off every 3-5 minutes, and then I will be awake after the 3-5 alarms usually, sometimes longer but usually not.
 
My light in my room also turn on about 10 min before the alarms, don't know if it makes much difference but I started doing it and don't want to try to stop doing it.

I don't wake up if I use a single alarm in the morning. But my solution to that is that I have an alarm going off every 3-5 minutes, and then I will be awake after the 3-5 alarms usually, sometimes longer but usually not.
 
My light in my room also turn on about 10 min before the alarms, don't know if it makes much difference but I started doing it and don't want to try to stop doing it.

That's not how bitlocker works and very very very few would ever turn it on, even by mistake.
 
You can't get Windows editions above Professional any other way than through a subscription, that's literally what Volume Licensing is. And you have to own a base Windows license as you are subscribing to the right to upgrade the Windows edition to Enterprise for example, you cannot and do not buy "Windows Enterprise" full license, that isn't an option offered. Outright full Windows purchases under VLSC was removed after XP.
 
Misleading maybe, but that stems from misunderstanding what is going on and just jump to rather big assumptions. People like myself in the know as to what Microsoft does in regards to licenses would and are assuming very different things. Microsoft has already been communicating to Volume License customers that the way Windows is licensed and how this is managed is changing so our natural assumption would be this is it. Integrating Windows licensing and activation in to Microsoft 365 where the licenses are already managed from cutting out the need for self hosted Volume License servers which is an inbuilt Windows Server role btw.
 
The biggest mistake people can make is assuming everything is "about them". Microsoft's biggest customers are corporate, home users "don't matter". By don't matter I mean strategically for Microsoft as a business. You'll all keep using Windows regardless of anything anyway and there is very little revenue opportunity within Windows itself, Office is worth far more to Microsoft in the home user market and that is already widely subscription based as it is.
 
Windows yearly revenue is 21.51 billion and Office is 44.73 billion.

I highly doubt Microsoft will have Microsoft Defender behind a subscription.
Microsoft Defender is probably one of the reasons why much less people think Windows --> viruses now compared to what it did before. I don't think they want that go come back.
 
Also, for windows I think it would be a stupid idea for them to have a subscription for the consumer in general. No matter if you like it or not, Mac marketshare have been increasing, and requiring windows subscription would only have increased it even more.

What specific purpose do you want to use the VPN for?
 
A lot of people tend to over-embellish the benefits of consumer VPN services. Are you using it for security? Privacy? circumventing geo restrictions?

I actually think the conversion rate is more like that of mail spam. It costs almost nothing to include it and is worth it, if you find one idiot every 10.000 users or something like that.

have you heard about totally different market for which there is no 30 years of history to show it can be done without a subscription service?
 
regulators dont understand tech, but they understand that if it worked before, it should still be able to work that way.
 
and - microsoft has *NO* reason to make windows a monthly service for anyone except the people for which they have already been doing so for YEARS.

Worth noting that with services like that, if it transfers lots of tiny files or few big ones you will see large speed differences. Folder with thousands of kB sizes files will be a lot slower than if you have a single file that is the same size as them.

It might look tiny bit more soft than a native 1440p monitor, but it will still look a lot better than a same size 1080p monitor.
 
More and more games let's you to set seperate monitor resolution and gaming rendering resolution. If you do it that way, I am pretty sure AA will still be done at 4k but the game renders at 1440p. Maybe it's different from game to game.
 
But another option is that if game supports DLSS or FSR you can set it up to render in 1440p ans scale up to 4k. That will look better than just 1440p.

Worth noting that with services like that, if it transfers lots of tiny files or few big ones you will see large speed differences. Folder with thousands of kB sizes files will be a lot slower than if you have a single file that is the same size as them.

I think it could be either or. Or even bad port on the GPU. I would try another cable first tho. And plugging it in to another port on the GPU if you have other ones.

copy some unimportant stuff onto it and see what happens.  numbers before any actual use are not always reliable.  

Is there any specific reason why you want to switch to a different OS? Windows 10 has support till October 2025. Whether Linux is a viable option depends fully on your mom and if she is willing to cope with the differences (using MS Office vs LibreOffice is certainly not the same). I would suggest to simply use Win 10 up to the year 2025 and then look for a better solution.
 

As long your bandwidth and system can handle, always stream the highest quality. 
 
4K doesn't mean display must be 4K. Higher resolution video always give better image quality even the display is lower resolution than it. 

I am more surprised by how much people care about the hole punch. 
95% of the time, it's basically just an "icon" on the notification bar.
 
I'd much rather have that, than a fairly big chunk of the front of the phone not functional (a bezel). 
There are some rare instances where the hole is in the way, but if something is better 95% of the time, and annoying 5% of the time then that's a fair trade in my opinion. 

For speed, no, but just in case a drive fails, yes.
 
If you ned lots of storage I would not go with any HDD lower than 8TB personally.

Hole punch > Bigger bezel > Big notch.

That's not how that works, like at all. Why the hell would you have to increase the distance?!
That's not how scaling works, scaling doesn't stretch the resolution or anything, it just says that things should be X size bigger. If you have 150% scaling on a 4k display, the overall resolution doesn't change, things are just told to be bigger.
There can be little issue with some old programs but 99%+ of cases its not an issue.
After having used higher ppi displays like 1440p 27" or 32" 4k, no way I am going back to 1080p 24", because the pixel density. That's an subjective opinion tho.
I will also say that as long as you have normal eyesight, something having twice the pixel density does not necessarily mean you have to have 200% scaling. When you have higher ppi it's easier to read smaller text, compared to 1080p 24" because the text is less blurry.
 
I am running 125% scaling on 4k 32" and don't find it any harder to read than 1080p 24"
 
That is if you have normal eyesight and not poor eyesight tho, if you have that, you can probably do with 150%.

But why would you do that? I don't get what your point is, if things on screen is too small for you, increase scaling. Problem solved.
You confuse sending lower resolution signal to higher resolution screen with scaling in windows.
They don't work the same way at all.
 
If you set scaling to 125% in windows, it just tells everything to be 25% bigger but at the same output resolution.
For example, if you have 200% on a 4k monitor and put an image to fullscreen, it will still render properly ar 4k, NOT 1080p and you will see it as 4k.
 
And for example text, is vector graphics, they are still rendered at 4k when it comes to pixels, they are just larger.
Other GUI elements too, they aren't images with pixels, they are still rendered at 4k, just bigger.
 
Same thing with icons or whatever, they are still rendered at the 4k resolution. They aren't vector so conversion happens, but it's not from a lower resolution image that gets stretched, it's from a higher resolution image that gets converted to something lower.
 
Or when it comes to games, games see your screen as a 4k screen just fine, no matter if it's fullscreen or borderless mode.
 
Exception is if a program is old or shitty made but that is less than 1% of programs.
I know, that wasn't the point. My point is that I think 1440p is too low resolution for 32", and the next step up that manufacturers produce and is common is 4k. If 3k displays had existed and been common, maybe I would have said that should be the minimum at 32" but it isn't, so 4k it is.
I know, I used "blurry" as in "less sharp", and when it does when it gets less more pixelated.
See what I wrote above, that is not how scaling in windows works. Setting scaling to 200% does not mean text is rendered at 1080p. Text is basically vector graphics and is simply told to be bigger, it's still native 4k output.
 
If you will you can think of it as increasing font in word, it doesn't start getting  blurry/pixelated because it's vector graphics and output resolution is still the same.
Text on my 4k 32" is way shaper than 1440p or 1080p 32", no matter what I set the scaling to. Doesn't matter if it's 125% or 250% or whatever.
 
If you still don't understand what I mean, you should really go and look up from other sources for an explanation you understand, because what you are saying is just false.

I would recommend sticking with 27" for 1440p because pixel density. I wouldn't go 32" without it being 4k. The increased pixel density is very noticeable.
 
If things are too small you can just increase scaling in windows.

I would recommend sticking with 27" for 1440p because pixel density. I wouldn't go 32" without it being 4k. The increased pixel density is very noticeable.
 
If things are too small you can just increase scaling in windows.