These are grants and isn't meant to fully cover the cost. Depending on who is going to own the station. They also need to chip in the cost. Just like how EV tax credit works.
Well when congress passed the bill they have allocated 7.5 billion for charging infrastructure. They haven't fully spend the money. Of which 5 billion is towards states to apply for the funding. States need to apply for this. So far only Hawaii, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania have applied and built their stations(7 stations in total for 38 stalls) another 4 states have also applied and is under construction.
Twelve additional states have awarded contracts for constructing the charging stations. Then you have 17 states that have not yet issued proposals.
The remaining 2.5 billion is allocated for DoE, which will allocate funding based on proposals it receives.
My Sony Xperia phone had a cable that connected to standard usb charger, this was before the first iPhone. From my memory Moto Razr 2 used micro usb b cable to standard usb. There where plenty of phones before iPhone that had charging cable that connected to standard usb charger.
User never has to manage cache space which has always been the case. Also your normal user cannot do that, without system level privileges. Third party apps where to able to call adb directly on FireTV which is not the case on other Android devices with GMS. In fact if you build Android with access for third party to call adb, Google will never let you pass CTS and you cannot have Google Play on it. It’s a huge misstep from security point for Amazon sell devices with adb access for third party apps.
In WhatsApp you can enable save photos and videos to your phone gallery and then any backup app can do backups. Google Photos and numerous other apps are able backup WhatsApp photos.
It does. But cache clearing only goes to a certain point after that it will stop you from updating apps and installing new apps, until you free up space by uninstalling an app.
I been following the Tesla IR presentations. The slowdown was intentional. The key issues are Tesla doesn't have diversified model lines, price wars and the misstep with 4680 batteries. Currently Tesla Shanghai has more than enough capacity for global Model 3 and Y demand. The rate of growth for these models have also slowed down from 2yrs ago. Hence why Tesla is doing aggressive price cuts, also when your doing aggressive price cuts you don't want to increase production dramatically in order to keep the margins in line. You can also see that since they have done price cuts the margins are down. At the same time in luxury market, both Model S and X sales have fallen dramatically. Which btw is made in US and exported internationally. Going to Europe, from what I understand the battery production productivity isn't anywhere near China and lastly Tesla gets federal govt credit for making batteries in US and then exported to Europe. Last part is 4680 misstep, first of all 4680 isn't anywhere close to what Tesla said at the their battery day. The production is still expensive, hence why they cancelled the sub 39k$ CT. Which btw has been the biggest mistake. Tesla could have easily sold 250k units once fully scaled up, but now they have moved to timelines to maybe in 2026.
If you look at the production targets for F150 lightning, the total sales this year will be higher than CT. If you look at the sales/price bell curve of light trucks (note this is inclusive of SUVs, but Trucks make up at least half the dataset), you see a massive amount of area in the $40 -50K range, the over $70K range makes up less than 5%.
https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_artic...
In other words, Cybertruck sales numbers are going to hurt until the price is closer to announcement - A $39K Cyber Truck could (theoretically) sell millions based on category alone. a $100K truck could sell tens of thousands.
By the time Nokia N9 came out Android was the dominant smartphone OS. Nokia even cancelled releasing N9 in select markets due to this. Not to mention the api’s were severely lacking compared to Android. Maybe if they released it in 2008-2009, there might have been a chance. So the choice was either to go Android or Windows and Microsoft paid them 1billion to be stay Windows Phone exclusive.
Microsoft was still struggling with the fallout from Vista. Microsoft scrambling for that Vista SP1 and you would think they have time for Windows Mobile. Not to mention they were missing earnings and revenues going into 2008.
The issue is with billing and which mobile provider is responsible for the phone number. If your phone is dynamically switching between 5 carriers, does that mean you now need to have 5 billing account as well?
You will end up with something like energy demand response market. Where providers aren’t incentivized to build out the network for redundancy or QoS. Then you would need the Govt to step in to provide further incentives to build in rural areas where it’s uneconomical to build network. Naturally over time you will still have monopolies in certain areas because building the network is still costly, in the end winner takes it all. But those monopolies will be regional.
The thing is that Google has made Chrome really good that, there is less reasons for people to leave it for another browser. The only cons are privacy and fear of Chrome being the monopoly. I think other browsers should also compete on technical merits to stop haemorrhaging users.
Browsers do compete on merit. I use both iOS and Android. My Pixel 6 has an inferior processor compared to my iPhone 14. Even a 5 year old iPhone would smoke my Pixel 6 in benchmarks. But my day to day use Chrome on Pixel 6 is faster for JS heavy apps, scrolling and faster network loading. On a flaky network for sites with http3 the difference is day night between Safari and Chrome android. Chrome’s heuristics based rendering is far more advanced than Safari. I would say Safari a very good JS engine but Chrome has found other ways to make pages much faster.
Motorola phones where using Qualcomm modems. There is nothing really special about it. Even the Nexus had the same modems during that time period. Pixel phones didn't have widespread modem issues until they switched to Samsung modems starting with Pixel 6. Not sure what is there to tell about it other than Qualcomm makes good modem. Even the iPhones with Intel modems where inferior to Qualcomm modems and thank god they switched back to Qualcomm with iPhone 12.
Not sure why people thinks it’s a fork. RCS is only a standard, there is no open source implementation. Even to use it commercially you need to license it from GSMA. So every implementation of RCS is proprietary for the server side. On client side, Google has published the code in Android 12 sources. But most clients are all proprietary too.
No, For x86, They were fine when all mobile CPU's where Single and Dual core. Intel actually had upper hand for a short time thanks to hyperthreading. But once Qualcomm and other ARM SOCs jumped to Quad core, Intel CPU's where power in-efficient and slow compared to other ARM SOCs. So they gave up Smartphone and concentrated on tablet chips for Android and Win8 devices. Later they gave up the Android tablets mainly due to cheap ARM chips from Mediatek and others. As for MIPS they gave up on making SOCs for Android after Imagination Technologies acquired it in 2013. Also keep in mind Smartphone's where growing double digit market share in early 2010's and developers were definitely eager to support whatever new architecture to get market share. Even though there is no x86 smartphone or tablet anymore, the app support is quite good thanks to Chromebooks, Google Play Games for Windows and Android app support in Windows.
MIPS died for Android after Imagination Technologies acquired it in 2013. There is nothing for Google to do when there is no new SOC or new phones. As for x86, it is still widely used thanks to Chromebooks. Unless you use NDK there is nothing on your end to do for new targets.
I don't understand what opportunity was lost? They are still offering 0% financing which is still cheaper than Pixel Pass. On top when you add trade in, it's even cheaper. With Pixel Pass you cannot trade in.
Sony phones are really bad with updates. They have very short 2 year update and the updates are extremely buggy almost making the phone a brick. Look at Xperia 5 iv android 13 same with Xperia 5 iii. Nothing is good with updates, Motorola updates are stable but still have short update cycle and security updates are not monthly for most phones.
Android common kernels(ACK) are downstream of Linux kernels with so many patches which are not there in the Linux kernels. So Linux having short 2 years update cycle doesn't have much implication on ACK.
The link referring to 7 years of update. If you follow the leaker on Twitter kamila in the original leak tweet they mention it can be 5 years of OS update + 3 years of security updates or something along the lines. The leakers isn't sure if it will be full 7 years of OS updates. I think other people reporting on the leak are failing to differentiate OS updates vs security updates making people to think Google rolled back on updates.
I am not sure why people think it was scammy? Pixel Pass was a glorified device financing option. Unlike Apple iPhone Upgrade Program where you trade in your phone. The upgrade isn’t free you still need to pay monthly for next two years when you upgrade. You can still upgrade for much cheaper with 0% financing. Also when you subscribe to Spotify or Netflix is there an expectation that you get the same price you signed up for when they increase price? That is the same happening here. For two years people got the Pixel Pass were paying for the device financing + perks. They only paid for device they got and not for any future device. Take a look at Pixel financing cost it is much cheaper than Pixel Pass and when you finance you have the option to trade in old phone and get reduced finance rate.