I’d double check that language you need isn’t already on iPhone. They’ve added pretty much every language spoken by at least 100k people.
iPhone is really the only choice for the computer/smartphone illiterate. You can’t easily put the device in an unrecognizable state, you can’t install a launcher that drastically changes the GUI from the app store. iPhone justifiably gets tons of shit, but this is the exact use case it’s designed for. They also have really good accessibility features, and they actually work in apps.
Android has tons of benefits, and I’ve had only android for the last 14 years. I think if you are planning on removing the settings app all together, you know it’s not a great choice for them.
I think they get around this by having the pharmacy hours be a few hours offset from their actual business hours. My local Sam’s opens at 8 for “plus” memberships and the pharmacy doesn’t open until 10 when the poor normal members can start shopping.
The fact that it’s video or a game is irrelevant to the argument, but I have amended my comment.
Second, I specifically said how they “understand the terms” because like .01% of customers read the terms and conditions before buying, even for super large purchases like cars and houses most people don’t read the entire contract. It’s a flaw in the legal system that allows companies to hide shady practices like what Sony is doing and force customers to just take it. Even if you read it, you’d need a law degree to properly understand what the document is conveying.
Most people understand the process of buying media as “I give you money, you give me content” not “I give you money, you give me a license to watch the content” it’s not explicit about the lack of ownership. If someone asked you "what movies do you own, hopefully you’re not going to be a smart ass and say “technically production studios are the only ones who own movies anymore”
You’re still jumping the moral argument and going straight to the legal one. I’m not arguing the legal one because it’s clear that privacy is not legal (by definition)
However if you sell someone a movie and hide a clever contract (that you know for a fact the customer will not read) in the deal so that you can invalidate the content at any time you feel like it, Don’t expect me to cry you a river when your customer bypasses your asinine contract by making a local copy for personal use.
If the terms are not explicitly explained in understandable language, then morally terms are non-existent and the deal should be revoked with both parties receiving their property back.
I think those make sense as deviations. I’ve heard “my sequel” but you’re absolutely right about postgresql.
The name is kinda irrelevant like hard vs soft g in gif. People know what you mean when you say either.
But in that same vein, the creator of the “graphics interchange format” says the pronunciation is soft g, but basically everyone says hard g… So “official” pronunciation is kinda irrelevant.
I don’t judge anyone who uses whichever term they want, but I’ve just noticed the general trend in my smallish interaction bubble.
Gotta say, I agree with your main point… But that is kinda the thing people point at when saying the government is inefficient. The large parts of the US infrastructure is decades past it’s expected lifespan, and the US government is not allocating enough funds to fix it quickly enough.
It’s irrelevant if it’s in the terms or not if Sony knows for a fact that most people will not check the terms. It doesn’t matter if people should read the terms, it doesn’t matter how the terms are specified. That information is buried in a 10,000 word contract no one is going to read (the PSN Store terms and conditions is actually about 10,000 words, over an hour to read)
Customers could “buy” a product with the understanding that they owned the product in perpetuity. Sony then removed the product from the customer after the purchase without providing a refund.
You’re not even trying to understand the opposing view, so I’m kinda done with this conversation.