Blademaster91

Because Microsoft would rather people replace their system instead of being able to do the upgrade on otherwise decently capable hardware. I'm not surprised people are defending MS for this, I remember plenty of people did when MS made the dumb decision of requiring newer hardware even though Ryzen 2xxx and Intel 7th gen are fine with running windows 11. The average user doesn't know what rufus is so Microsoft is simply unnecessarily forcing people to throw away a system when MS could push OEM's to release updates or list drivers compatible with windows 11.

I don't trust HP's claim of losing money on printers, given how crap most of their printers are, they have to be making money on them.

The problem with the 12VHPWR connector isn't plugging it in all the way, because its just a terrible connector design, as not all cables will plug in with a click that can be felt and heard, the 8 pin PCI-E cables didn't have this problem. Another problem is there is very little room for error with the connector, the cable can't be bent at all or you risk melting the cable or a fire.

If the 4070TI Super is only a bit faster than a 7900XT, then IMO the 7900XT is still the better value as you can find those for less than $800, more VRAM is a nice feature as well. I doubt the 4080Ti S is going to be available at $800 on AIB models, as Nvidia doesn't allow their partner brands to design cards with much room for margins.

That is a defective battery if the battery cannot provide the necessary voltage so the phone can function as it was designed to, if it has to be throttled then the device no longer functions as it was advertised to the consumer. Throttling doesn't make it work any better as its now slower, you only get a device that works longer even though it might be painfully slow to use, that isn't a viable ownership experience if the device is suddenly slower for no reason. The average consumer isn't going to realize their phone needs a new battery which is why the communication is important, a suddenly slow phone is going to get people to buy a new phone, not replace the battery which is an anti-consumer move. The failure to communicate is the main reason apple got sued for it, yet people here still want to insist apple did nothing wrong. Ah yes, when apple does something wrong, it's a "media pile on" not the media doing their job to report on the news. /s As for a toggle being in the settings, of course no apple user would actually use it as apple users don't go poking around in the settings.

Throttling the phone would help the phone last longer if the battery is so degraded it doesn't last a whole day, although IMO the lack of communication was very anti-consumer and consumers deserve the class action from it. And as weird as it might sound I'd rather have a phone that just shuts off if the battery is bad than my phone getting throttled with no indication of why it is suddenly running slowly. Because at least the phone crashing or shutting down tells me something is wrong with the device. I would rather buy something else because of the anti-consumer tactics apple has on repair, but buying something else doesn't always work when other companies are copying apple on a lot of things like non-replaceable batteries.

Throttling devices with no communication to the consumer isn't consumer friendly at all, and yes they do deserve to be criticized for slowing down phones when that isn't a fix for a defective battery. Throttling doesn't make it work better,just longer, which again isn't fix as the batteries still needed replacing.

I think if the 4000 series launched with those prices, with more VRAM it would've been better but IMO these GPU's are still too overpriced compared to past GPU's, like the GTX 10 series for example. These launches just don't seem exciting at all since Nvidia has increased their prices far higher than the rate of inflation.

I find it interesting that people are still defending apple on this, even though they were proven wrong and lost the lawsuit over it. It doesn't matter if the phone throttled or shut down because there was no transparency of phones being throttled down due to the batteries being defective.

Neither is telling people to "just use rufus" as most people don't know how to install windows, let alone making a USB boot installer.

Well its more of a safe option to assume all ads are bad, because these companies don't care as it is with scam and malware ads, I wouldn't expect that to change any time soon either so I leave an ad blocker on for everything. And I struggle with how people defend these corporations as if they need your money while they want to force intrusive and dangerous ads onto everyone. Ad blockers are simply a solution to the problem these companies have caused, people don't want to view ads and have lost trust with seeing ads at all given that even allowing them is a security risk. Most companies are going to sell your data no matter if you pay or not, especially with Youtube, so IMO people should have no issue with using an ad blocker, just support the content creators you watch if you feel like you want to support them. Except youtube/google will still collect data regardless if you pay for it, so it isn't free as a user. Also as Rossmann points out in the video ,YT/Google wants to verify your home address after you sign up for YT premium, IMO that sounds like an invasion of privacy. But YT/Google won't ask for that if you use an ad blocker instead of paying to remove ads. The point of the video is people shouldn't be so accepting of paying for things and still getting treated like crap or getting an even worse service than you could for free.

I missed that, looking at the tweet again yeah they weren't signed it I guess it wasn't obvious the first time I looked at it. I've been using an ad blocker for a long time so i'm not used to seeing an ad on youtube at all.

I'm reading it as they have YT premium but still get an ad below the video anyway, I don't see how people are reading that otherwise except wanting to defend youtube/google. So not only do you pay and google still takes your data, now you get an annoying ad below the video. It wouldn't surprise me if youtube is testing a paid with ads tier by throwing in ads even if you pay.

I agree upscaling makes games look worse once you notice the artifacts or weird glitches, it has its uses like on lower end cards or games with terrible optimization. But IMO it shouldn't be pushed on $1200+ GPU's just to run games in 4k yet Nvidia seems to be pushing the marketing really hard that every gamer needs DLSS in order to run games. Full featured until Nvidia wants you to buy the next new card, because Nvidia made upscaling features exclusive to the RTX 4000 cards, I would expect Nvidia to do it again with the next series. Nvidia is more of a software company nowadays, they're pushing software features on excessively expensive cards you'll have to replace if you want to use the latest features.

I agree, the article does seem very one sided, when first party repair has been caught violating user privacy. The other problem I have with this article is no mention of recommending people to remove the storage drive, or backup and do a fresh install.

The fault is not on people using ad blockers, and it's not because of ad blockers, ad blockers are just a solution to the problem. The problem is the ad companies selling scam ads, ads installing malware, and youtube allowing such ads, while also doing things like putting 10 minute ads in a 5 minute video. And no, i'm not going to pay $168 to remove youtube ads, every user is already paying youtube through analytics which google will still collect even if you pay $14 a month to remove ads.

A few more dollars in electricity per year for lightbulbs that could last twice as long, the trade off would be worth it in less waste of lightbulbs being thrown away. Cost of electricity isn't an issue if the electric company isn't ripping off the consumer on kW/hr. cost. Also heat load is only a problem in hotter climates, incandescent light bulbs are great at adding heat as electric heat is very efficient. Things designed to a cost usually means the cheapest component will fail, and to a cost means the company wants you to replace the whole thing sooner rather than fixing it because the company won't sell you the part or charges way too much for the part so most consumers will replace something instead of repairing it. With washing machines the whole thing turns to e-waste if something on the control panel fails, instead of replacing one switch or button you have to replace the whole control panel, getting a simple washing machine with a mechanical control panel isn't an option unless you spend more on a heavy duty washing machine. Overbuilt in a car meaning that things won't fail except basic wear items, and Toyotas are for the most part overbuilt, people whine that Toyota uses outdated engines and transmissions in their SUV's like the 4Runner for example, but the components are proven to be reliable. Other things I would rather have in a car are regular buttons and switches, and mechanical dash gauges. Buttons are easier to replace than a whole info screen that the manufacturer will probably just say is obsolete after the car is 10 years old. I think right to repair should be an option, but there are loopholes companies can get around with right to repair laws, also while Magnuson Moss does apply, there isn't much a consumer can do unless they can afford to sue the company for refusing to repair or trying to force anti-consumer anti right to repair policies.

IIRC there was a whole thread on this, and people were trying to justify planned obsolescence, that is the problem I have with people trying to justify crap like that, there are better light bulb designs but companies don't want to use it because it would cost them money. The issues with cars, or the example you use with washing machines, or light bulbs, the electronics are the thing to fail first and are usually designed cheaply down to a cost, a car or washing machine might last longer than it ever has before, but some $2 part can fail and e-waste the whole thing. A car or washing machine should be overbuilt, rather than down to a company maximizing their profits. IMO there should be some sort of regulation against companies designing things to fail on purpose because it is planned obsolescence.

That is not the same as the device working as it did before a part broke, if you replace the battery yourself you get a warning claiming "the battery is not genuine" even if you swap a battery from another new phone and the phone loses battery health stats. If you replace the screen or cameras you also lose functionality because Apple would rather treat its consumers like criminals than going after the people making low quality counterfit parts. What Microsoft is doing isn't even close to being the same, MS doesn't block you from reinstalling the OS yourself, OEM Drivers are easily obtained from the OEM or Windows automatically detects drivers through Windows update. What Apple is doing is forcing you to go to Apple for parts and to validate the parts, if you don't the device won't function as intended even if the parts are new from Apple. No the problem here is no one else blocks repairs on the level that Apple does, and a repair score should take into account the ability a user has to replace a part and have their phone work as it did before when it was new. The whole point of fixing it yourself is what iFixit is supporting with Right to Repair, the warranty isn't going to be an option especially when Apple has the reputation of charging nearly what the phone is worth to replace a screen or pushes their users to buy a new phone instead of repairing it.

There are well designed and built phones with replaceable batteries, most people aren't going to bother with repair guides which require special tools, and you're ignoring the fact that people don't want to go through the inconvenience of taking their phone to a repair store and not have a phone for a whole day or weeks if the phone has to be shipped back the manufacturer repair center. The alternative with a phone with a replaceable battery is buy a battery for like $30, spend less than a minute replacing it, then you have a phone with a new battery, no need to take it to a repair shop. Wanting to have things like a 3.5mm jack and a replaceable battery isn't "outdated" its having useful features without having to compromise with worse things because phone companies want to sell you cloud storage because you can't add a microSD card, or wireless earbuds which also have glued in batteries so you'll have to replace them with your phone in 2 or 3 years. Removing features for the sake of profit is called enshittification.

Your argument was someone falling off a building, except there is data of people falling off of buildings, there isn't any data of the Billet labs block compared to an EK water block. Again you keep repeating what Linus said because you're biased towards Linus, the point is to give it a real test on a 3090, not a 4090, the fact is the review is completely wrong and LTT should either take down the video and apologize to Billet labs or retest it. As for the car analogy it would be like comparing a Lamborghini Huracan to a hand built supercar, and what LTT did would be like fully testing the Huracan then only testing the hand built car by driving around a parking lot in first gear, then saying the Lamborghini is faster because it's a Lamborghini there isn't any point in testing any thing else. And I think a part of the reason Linus refuses to test it correctly is because Billet labs isn't a corporation giving LMG piles of money and a sponsorship deal, he is just fine reviewing a product when there is lots of money involved. The only people spinning things here are the ones continuing saying the block is crap with no proof on how the Billet labs block performs. Linus said he would rather give an inaccurate review than spend another $400-500 to review it again. But he has no problem reviewing other expensive things most people wouldn't buy. I have no trust in Linus reviewing things with a comment like that. Also why does it have to be a favorable review? All they would have to do is test it on the right GPU.

The point of retesting the block is to correctly test it, Billet labs sent in the block with the agreement that LTT would give it a fair test,anyone making assumptions on the block saying it is bad is just repeating Linus' opinion on the block. Making a guess isn't enough to say the block is crap. Someone else already proved you wrong on that analogy, I'm not going to repeat it. The Billet labs block was some one off prototype, it might not perform as well as a block costing a fraction of the price, but assuming its crap without any test data is an unfair assumption. A company like LMG making assumptions without any testing throwing a startup under the bus is unprofessional, and IMO shows Linus doesn't care about the ethics or integrity of providing an accurate review. The facts are the block wasn't correctly tested, and wasn't used on the GPU it was made for.

The purpose of deep dives is to call out companies for scamming the consumer or doing anti-consumer things, ie Gigabyte power supplies exploding, or Asus with their refusal to uphold a warranty because their BIOS was ruining CPU's. There isn't any standard to be held for tech journalism on youtube, so I feel like GN has a much higher standard compared to most people that will either be apologist for companies or accept sponsorships from companies doing anti-consumer things. No one knows how the Billet labs block performs until it is accurately tested, LTT's review was pointless as they tested it on the wrong GPU. And why waste money to test something at all? If Linus didn't want to even test a product in a fair manner then there isn't any point in testing it all, not testing a water block correctly or not taking the plastic off a mouse are mistakes a multi-million dollar tech media company shouldn't be making. Keep on spinning this, people keep going in circles over these things.

I think taking the video down was the right thing to do amidst all the drama going around, a bunch of other youtubers discussing it and putting their own bias into it isn't helping either, so I can understand why Steve decided to take it down. I watched all of the video and didn't find anything alarming or wrong with it. I'm not surprised people keep throwing GN under there bus here, people get emotional over it because of the parasocial relationship they have with their favorite tech youtuber, even after hundreds of pages in the other thread, people keep repeating the same things putting the blame on Steve and GN, there isn't any changing the minds of the fanbase.

The issues with Framework or Asus is more of a conflict of interest than ethics, I didn't trust the LTT review of the Framework laptop and don't trust their review on any laptop because Linus has financial interest in Framework. And LTT has been biased towards Asus for a long time, Linus being apologetic for Asus despite them not honoring warranty if people used a beta bios isn't a surprise at all. I haven't seen any apology to GN or HWUB for what the LTT Labs engineer said, either it was said in private or they're not on very good terms, and I expect LMG and GN burned the bridge since the "trust me bro" warranty fiasco.