"I don't share these values, the person must be mentally ill. Wine is not at all the same thing, because let me explain my values which are obviously universal."
Because it is contradictory. Sure, in a vacuum where there's infinite land available and no rules, supply would meet demand. In a vacuum Antarctica would be a great vacation destination with amazing views of the ocean.
In reality Antarctica is freezing cold and difficult to get to. And in reality there is a shortage of places to build new housing at an affordable price in either location mentioned.
My guess is that iOS 11 is much more to blame for slowdown that users are experiencing, myself included. Unfortunately, that is unlikely to be resolved -- even if I replace my battery for $30, my iPhone 6 will still be worse than it was in August.
If you don’t know what you don’t know it’s hard to be pithy. You claim that one device in particular you happened to own has a certain characteristic failure, yet offer no discussion of the n on the issue, distribution, nor anything else really except “well I felt this way”
Then you claim that thermal throttling is somehow unique to Apple yet every device these days does such thermal management, and such things we’ve even visible at the user code level (e.g. selection of vector instruction use).
And when you look at the trade shipping any product, and what defects are considered acceptable... you write as if you have zero experience or visibility into any of these issues.
So what’s the relevance? Your argument is unconvincing because you haven’t made any effort to justify it.
> You claim that one device in particular you happened to own has a certain characteristic failure, yet offer no discussion of the n on the issue, distribution, nor anything else really except “well I felt this way”
What I wrote: "For option [c], it’s important to view this hardware crash as a problem unique to these phones. ... Admittedly, I don’t know that it’s unique to this hardware."
I've essentially invited anyone with better knowledge to knock down my posit, while giving my reasoning with the facts that I know.
> Then you claim that thermal throttling is somehow unique to Apple yet every device these days does such thermal management
What I wrote: "unlike any rechargeable device I’ve ever owned — the iPhone 6 and 6+ suffered hardware resets (crashes) when their batteries drop below a certain output"
For starters, this isn't about thermals, as far as I understand the issue Apple was trying to solve. And what I described as unique to the iPhone 6/6s is that the hardware crashes as the battery health degrades. I've owned a lot of rechargeable devices over the years. When their batteries degrade, the battery doesn't last as long. I don't recall that any of them began to experience crashes.
> And when you look at the trade shipping any product, and what defects are considered acceptable... you write as if you have zero experience or visibility into any of these issues.
There's a lot we don't know about this iPhone 6 + battery + slowdown, like at what battery health does Apple begin to slow down phones, how long before users reach that battery health (within warranty?), how can users identify if they're affected by this, and how many devices are actually affected. It is entirely possible that the problem is overstated, and not widespread. It's possible that nearly every device is affected within warranty. Probably somewhere in between.
But none of that is my point. My point is that -- on the assumption that this is a hardware/software design problem unique to these devices, and I invite you to kill this assumption -- resolving the crashing problem by slowing down devices is hostile in that it penalizes consumers for a problem Apple created.
I have had to use this exact strategy myself at the suggestion of a colleague. This was not invented by Apple, much less invented by them for this one piece of hardware.
Also have an iPhone 6. I didn't plan to replace it this year until iOS 11 made it frustrating to use. My primary issue was constant Bluetooth disconnections.
Now I have an Android phone. (Not especially happy about it.)
Yes, you can make an image that compresses to a smaller raster image vs. SVG, and complexity is a good way to do that. Especially possible if your image/logo isn’t just solid colors, but contains gradients or textures.
I would guess, though, that if you make a logo that is larger as an SVG than a compressed raster, you’ve probably made a bad logo. Logos should be simple.
Agreed. Simple but important things to also consider with Logos include "What does it look like if printed in black and white?" It's a bit outdated advice in some regards, based as much on letter headers, fax machines, and news print adverts, as anything else. You'll notice that almost all memorable logos work really well in black and white, though.
Black and white is a good exercise in general, eg also to check whether divers colourblind people will be ok. Or when you want to carve your logo into metal or wood etc.
Is there a way to quantify simplicity in terms of SVG? Can we say number of points & number of paths? What other constructs can be used to measure complexity?
There isn't really. Any of those things could be used as proxies (plus file size, number of XML elements, rendering time, and more), but the thing we are really interested in is subjective anyway.
File size after rendering to bitmap and lossy compression, like JPEG, might actually be one of the best quantitative proxies for simplicity, because lossy compression algorithms are designed to compress visual data that's interesting to humans well. Maybe an interesting experiment: take a whole bunch of logos and/or other images, let people rate them on a Likert scale or something on simplicity, and see if there's a correlation with JPEG file size.
My email preferences have everything disabled, double triple and quadruple checked to make sure, and I still occasionally get an email about one of my FB friends uploading a photo or some shit that is certainly (a) described by the settings as email I should not receive, and (b) not even what a notification should be. “A person with whom you’ve never interacted aside from accepting a friend request said something not about you on their own timeline.” ???
I don't understand why the scammer bothered to ship to an alternate address -- if Amazon is just confirming that the package was delivered and signed for, wouldn't that also occur if delivered to the buyer's address? The buyer would sign for the package before opening it and realizing the camera lens wasn't inside. (The weight difference could be made up with rocks.)
"I don't share these values, the person must be mentally ill. Wine is not at all the same thing, because let me explain my values which are obviously universal."