It's still fairly early days, but it's SCREAMING fast and I find it very intuitive to use. :)

Lots of customization and power, but the defaults are all quite reasonable.

Hahahahaha. That's hillarious.

Oh god, you're serious?

Do you have any idea how much of Windows, and user software would break? Any idea at all?

You really want MS, who has built backwards compatibility as a core feature of Windows, to break countless thousands of pieces of software that run on it?

I'm sure there's some idealized fantasy in which that change gets wrapped in a neat little abstraction that prevents anything from breaking. I promise you, there is no way of encapsulating or abstracting that change that works for everyone.

If I could wave a magic wand and make it so without breaking it, I would. But it's a fantasy.

You could tweak it, but humans are incredibly good at anthropomorphizing anything - even without an apparently dialog. I think it's a lost cause until we move away from LLMs completely to a more generic intelligence.

If we're talking shorter scale, people have traditionally hand-waived it with 'Oh, these jobs will go away, but they'll be replaced with other, higher-skilled jobs!'.

That's an economist's idealism and doesn't fit reality.

Getting reliable, consistent, meaningful performance numbers is in fact, extremely complicated:

* You need a consistent way to reproduce the exact same outputs - accounting for things like the game's RNG. You can't just walk around and snap the FPS counter in the corner of the screen and call that good.

* For Windows (and occasionally Linux) you need to ensure nothing is running that will taint the results (updates, AV scans, etc)

* Sometimes individual driver versions work very poorly with a specific game. Just because it ran badly doesn't mean you got good data, it may just be a bug in that specific driver version

* You can't just run the benchmark once. You need to run it many times, establishing run-to-run variance

* There are often a good dozen-to-hundred individual OS settings which can impact performance, and in some cases run-to-run variance. You need to know which to tweak, and which to leave alone.

* Sometimes the result of individual in-game settings differs between driver versions. Just because setting X had a big impact once, doesn't mean it always did

* FPS is not a great metric - it's an average. You need to check and see if there are huge frametime spikes. If there are, the game will have a 'good' FPS but feel horrible to play due to stuttering.

* You need to decide if you're benchmarking more GPU-heavy or CPU-heavy - those types of benchmarks require drastically different settings. If you run a CPU-like benchmark you may see a wildly different gap in framerate compared to a GPU-heavy one for the same game.

Benchmarking properly means accounting for thousands of tiny variables. Only a handful actually do it right.

This NTSync stuff is very impressive, but I haven't seen a lot of end-to-end numbers versus Windows. The last comparisons I saw showed pretty much every distribution on the order of 5-30% behind Windows, varying on the game. And Nvidia GPU support was still not great.

I WANT to swap. Please give me cause to do so. I'm sitting here with my finger on the button waiting for it to finally get good enough to make sense.

I have a 360 and when I play something I can actually get a full 360 out of, it's wonderful! Though honestly anything over 100 I'm perfectly fine with.

Plenty of people who test monitors also compare things like color coverage, brightness, latency, contrast, viewing angles, etc, etc, etc. If you mean the entire monitor, they generally also cover things like how the display swivels/mounts among other things.

But man, I would hate to be the one dealing with Gmail. It's a nightmare for the reasons I listed above.

Someone can in fact hold both of those opinions.

I was also actively telling people to de-Google and go elsewhere for a mail service.

Does everything need to be black and white?

They've essentially gotten roped into maintaining a huge chunk of internet infrastructure, for free. If they ever shut it down the whole world would end up rioting because it's so widely used.

But it's expensive, complicated and time-consuming to maintain - and both a source of and recipient of endless waves of spam and scams. It's an endless pile of data to hold onto, FOREVER, as well.

I enjoy hating on Google when appropriate. But when it comes to Gmail, I understand what they're dealing with.

It's honestly why I believe the idea of free e-mail is just bad, fundamentally. You can't expect a free e-mail service to be good or have any kind of support. The fact that it still exists is more out of shear fear of the repercussions than any good will on the owner's part.

Just get a paid e-mail service. They're better, and offer a lot more peace of mind.

As a household of 1, it just doesn't make sense to buy that much of most things, unless I'm sure they're almost entirely non-perishable. Maybe it would be fine for my cereal or something, but not a lot of what I buy. And, by design, they limit their SKUs a fair amount.

So ultimately I end up in a situation where I can buy a couple things at Costco, but then still need to do regular grocery trips.

Now I need to drive to 2 separate stores, which is extra trips there and back.

The math just didn't work out. If I could truly do 100% of my grocery shopping there I would.

You also never know what you might experience from talking to someone. You may make a life-long friend. Or learn about something you didn't know.

It doesn't mean blab about things you shouldn't, being insensitive, etc - but isolation is not the answer.

There's no way it's either of those, because both would be bulky. And if it was RO, you'd have a separate wastewater tank you would need to empty very often.

All that to say, that humidifier is still blasting minerals all over the surrounding area (and into carpet if you have any), which will leave deposits on everything. And if it's near electronics, it can fry them given enough time. Be warned.

* HDR vs SDR mode

* Different monitors have different color replication ranges

* Monitor and OS color and brightness controls (brightness affects color perception)

* Interior lighting

* Monitor technology (LCD, OLED, etc)

Meaning even if a color was meant to be X, it just won't appear that way given the combinations above.