I also don't know the answer, but adding to the list of educated guesses:
Unless the xbox was doing dynamic shader compilation I would think some level of emulation needs to be done for the graphics?
For example even though the switch 1 and 2 are using basically the same OS and CPU architecture (and both systems use Nvidia SOCs), the switch 2 needs to do GPU shader emulation to get games for the original switch running (which leads to some games not working perfectly)
Steam also makes and distributes their own DRM but it's optional whether or not publishers choose to include it in their games.
It's still ultimately optional but definitely more than just "allowing games with DRM to be published". They are offering a ready-made solution for it as well.
Sorry had it the other way around, it uses gecko but then uses the Android system WebView as a renderer. I think it's similar in iOS (but with the iOS equivalent of WebView because of iOS limitations) Either way, mixing and matching like that is generally less secure
For the record I didn't downvote you, but if I was actually being serious about opsec I'd say not to use anything based on mobile Firefox at all :)
::: spoiler warning: info dump ahead
Firefox mobile is inherently less secure because on mobile because it's basically just slapping a new renderer on top of either safari or Chromium's browser engine. This is partially because, everywhere except the EU, Apple requires all iOS browsers to use the safari engine under the hood, so it doesn't make sense for them to develop their own mobile engine just for EU and Android. If you're actually serious about opsec, just use safari on iOS, Vanadium on GrapheneOS, or Brave (brave is also lame tho :/ There might be a better chromium fork I'm not aware of)
Fennec/Ironfox still have cookies, they won't sign you out of things every time. The improvements come based on actively blocking more telemetry (and hardening it with things like always-https and DNS-over-https, and tracking blockers on by default)
I don't actually have a 3rd thing I'm basically just trolling at this point. Rule of 3s and all. Have a good day.
:::
I'm realizing my wording might be vague, by "everyone" I meant the big tech companies that didn't implement it, like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe. AFAIK most of the open source apps actually implemented support pretty quickly, and obviously it wouldn't be the end users' fault because they can't change what formats are supported
Why are we sending someone to "Extra Hell" for making an improved image format that has better compression and is an overall improvement over all 3 of the existing formats it replaces (jpeg, png, gif)?
Shouldn't this apply to everyone the companies who refused to adopt it, thus breaking every normal image workflow? (Same thing can be said about JXL)
Is it possible this is because of extra memory/storage costs? I thought Samsung sold way more fold/flip this past year so it seems weird to cancel the whole flip line to me
The fact that the macOS usage is still only half as much as OS X after ~6 years is pretty incredible to me, especially since Intel macs have still been supported until the end of this release cycle
Not that I want to defend AMD but the reason they haven't been able to is because HDMI is a private spec and the HDMI forum specifically forbade them from releasing the driver they tried to publish a few years ago (even though the firmware with the actual implementation is in the GPU itself and still proprietary). That's why 2.1 works on windows and not Linux with the past 2 gens of AMD GPUs.
They are quite literally taking the "if you don't like it, fork it yourself" approach. Who said they aren't going to make changes/improvements on top of it?
I don't see anyone else mentioning it but this is also probably because brave browser is published under the MPL license so the licenses are actually compatible between projects. They don't want to implement completely from scratch because there is a compatible existing implementation that they can build on top of instead of starting from scratch.
Ok but there's a big difference between being on the bleeding edge of tech and releasing games which are borderline unplayable because of bugs and framerate issues to the point where Nintendo issues an apology on your behalf.
I think I'm cautiously optimistic after seeing the gen 10 trailer, but at the same time after ZA I'm ready to skip out on it if the direction looks bad.
I just want my black/white remakes so I can be done with this franchise -_-
Not that I want to defend Nintendo but Palworld barely even qualifies as the same genre as the mainline Pokemon games, literally the only thing they have in common is that you catch monsters
The dremmel is for the thing you plug the battery into
I didn't make it 😠Gonna have to try harder for the next one
I also don't know the answer, but adding to the list of educated guesses:
Unless the xbox was doing dynamic shader compilation I would think some level of emulation needs to be done for the graphics?
For example even though the switch 1 and 2 are using basically the same OS and CPU architecture (and both systems use Nvidia SOCs), the switch 2 needs to do GPU shader emulation to get games for the original switch running (which leads to some games not working perfectly)
Steam also makes and distributes their own DRM but it's optional whether or not publishers choose to include it in their games.
It's still ultimately optional but definitely more than just "allowing games with DRM to be published". They are offering a ready-made solution for it as well.
Sorry had it the other way around, it uses gecko but then uses the Android system WebView as a renderer. I think it's similar in iOS (but with the iOS equivalent of WebView because of iOS limitations) Either way, mixing and matching like that is generally less secure
For the record I didn't downvote you, but if I was actually being serious about opsec I'd say not to use anything based on mobile Firefox at all :)
::: spoiler warning: info dump ahead
Fennec and Ironfox are improved versions of Firefox with better privacy/security hardening so picking either is probably preferable to base Firefox
I'm realizing my wording might be vague, by "everyone" I meant the big tech companies that didn't implement it, like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe. AFAIK most of the open source apps actually implemented support pretty quickly, and obviously it wouldn't be the end users' fault because they can't change what formats are supported
Why are we sending someone to "Extra Hell" for making an improved image format that has better compression and is an overall improvement over all 3 of the existing formats it replaces (jpeg, png, gif)?
Shouldn't this apply to
everyonethe companies who refused to adopt it, thus breaking every normal image workflow? (Same thing can be said about JXL)Edit: fix vague wording
Is it possible this is because of extra memory/storage costs? I thought Samsung sold way more fold/flip this past year so it seems weird to cancel the whole flip line to me
The fact that the macOS usage is still only half as much as OS X after ~6 years is pretty incredible to me, especially since Intel macs have still been supported until the end of this release cycle
Adding to the list of bundles, my new 3ds (still annoyed at that name) was bundled with animal crossing and it was digital as well
Calling reddit the last bastion of internet quality is a crazy take no matter what time period you're talking about
(preface that I've never actually worked with wasm before)
It seems like wasm64 exists though? Does it have any crazy limitations or is it just not well supported yet?
I can't believe we're doing little endian memes now
Not that I want to defend AMD but the reason they haven't been able to is because HDMI is a private spec and the HDMI forum specifically forbade them from releasing the driver they tried to publish a few years ago (even though the firmware with the actual implementation is in the GPU itself and still proprietary). That's why 2.1 works on windows and not Linux with the past 2 gens of AMD GPUs.
They are quite literally taking the "if you don't like it, fork it yourself" approach. Who said they aren't going to make changes/improvements on top of it?
I don't see anyone else mentioning it but this is also probably because brave browser is published under the MPL license so the licenses are actually compatible between projects. They don't want to implement completely from scratch because there is a compatible existing implementation that they can build on top of instead of starting from scratch.
Ok but there's a big difference between being on the bleeding edge of tech and releasing games which are borderline unplayable because of bugs and framerate issues to the point where Nintendo issues an apology on your behalf.
I think I'm cautiously optimistic after seeing the gen 10 trailer, but at the same time after ZA I'm ready to skip out on it if the direction looks bad.
I just want my black/white remakes so I can be done with this franchise -_-
Not that I want to defend Nintendo but Palworld barely even qualifies as the same genre as the mainline Pokemon games, literally the only thing they have in common is that you catch monsters