You’re kidding right? You think this is going to make a difference in the cut?
The word you’re looking for by the way is “financially”. Fiscally is to do with taxes.
-23 karma · joined May 10, 2016
The word you’re looking for by the way is “financially”. Fiscally is to do with taxes.
Removing an app from the App Store, and removing it from user's devices are two very different things. When any app is removed in this fashion, all users who already have the app still have access to everything they had access to before. The app just isn't listed on the App Store for new downloads.
I am an app developer for iOS. It does directly affect me.
By maintaining control over which apps can be sold to end users via the App Store, Apple is able to offer a layer of control over how these apps can access (or not) your personal data.
There's nothing ridiculous about wanting to maintain data privacy/security on mobile devices, and that being of a higher priority with mobile than with a PC.
This shows clear counter evidence to the claim of hospitalization rate being ~20% for all age groups. This CDC data shows a steep increase in the hospitalization rate as age increases.
Not sure where you are getting your information.
To provide a devils advocate to your last point, people could be most likely to respond on keyboards because a keyboard is an cost - efficient option for the majority of potential responders.
However there could be other tech that is more time - efficient. And for someone with an advanced condition such as ALS, it would be extremely inaccurate & inefficient in terms of either cost or time to use a keyboard for any sort of input where a high level of accuracy is required. Whereas a speech-to-text software connected microphone or some other system would be far more efficient in those categories for them.
All this to say that no, simply because one person replies to your post with a keyboard adds not one shred of validity to the vast over-generalization that "the keyboard is the most efficient input device we have".
I shall also now further assert to, in addition to disproving your central claim by counterexample, to have also disproved your ending statement (also by counterexample), by first, disproving your absurdly general central claim, and second, having done so using a keyboard as the input system for my response.
The math he refers to is simply high school level probability math.
You'll almost never hear any seasoned jazz players refer to a chart like this as a "score", unless they have a very very classical background, or are sort of making a joke about the quality of a particular lead sheet. Scores are for orchestras and films and things like that. It's strange to see people keep referring to these sh*tty transcriptions as 'scores'.
It's like calling Kraft Mac 'n' cheese "pasta". Like, ok maybe technically it could qualify as a pasta, but you don't really refer to it as that in practice.
Isn't the nominal size of a slice of cake more important than it's percentage relative to the overall cake?
Sure, it would be great if developers got a larger chunk of a large market. But what if they got a smaller chunk of a much bigger market? 70 % of a hundred million is a lot more than a hundred percent of 500 bucks. Worrying about percentages can sometimes just be about jealousy/ego.