I started developing for my Mac a few weeks ago and I'm blown away by how easy it is to make an app that feels Mac native and includes quality of life features like CloudKit sync across all your devices. It's become clear that most companies don't give the tiniest shit about any of that.
It's obvious why they wouldn't give a shit about that, though - the Mac is not their main focus. Most companies that make software for PCs are obliged to make at least Windows and Mac versions, and to build an application "The Apple Way," using SwiftUI, and things like "CloudKit" etc. would mean a whole dedicated Mac-experienced design team and Mac-experienced engineering team. This would result in an app that fundamentally works and behaves differently than their app would on Windows, because these operating systems have different conventions and standards.
Now, that would make people like you and me very happy -- but consider it from the big company's perspective. Now instead of supporting a piece of software which has a single set of features and a single consistent (and 'braaanded,' eyeroll) Electron UI (and, mostly, a single set of bugs), you're supporting two completely different apps with completely different UIs. Building a new Important Feature means building it from the ground up twice, and QAing it twice. And customer service needs to be trained to walk customers through both of these different apps which work differently, and some of the customers are so confused, they can't even tell you if they're on a Mac or not.
25 years ago, before cross-platform frameworks existed (other than Java, which wasn't often used to these ends then), that was sort of how they had to do these things, and in practice, the results were either that a ton of hardware shipped with no Mac support whatsoever (wasn't worth it) or with a bare-bones Mac version on the CD that was incredibly low-effort, and clearly still written by people who barely knew how the Mac was meant to work.
This very real phenomenon is why we are cursed with cross-platform everything. The difference between a single cross-platform codebase and even two dedicated good-citizen apps is a vast chasm.
>This would result in an app that fundamentally works and behaves differently than their app would on Windows, because these operating systems have different conventions and standards.
Not always the case. Sometimes the gui app is just wrapping some script written in a general purpose language. Button just calls a function. Yes writing the function to draw the ui button element might take a different syntax, but they might go on to run the same underlying function.
At least that is how I like to write my gui software.
I maintain a pretty complex app to draw 2D graphics for 3D objects. For packaging productions. Basically draw your packaging design with 3D preview. So this is basically a 2d3D editor with TONS of business and material knowledge.
It’s powered by react.
But it so decoupled from react you can slap mini gui in any other form / framework in a day
Mac apps often do various things on your computer. Just because you dragged it to Bin, doesn't mean there are no leftovers on your computer. I'd prefer proper uninstaller any day.
> Mac apps often do various things on your computer. Just because you dragged it to Bin, doesn't mean there are no leftovers on your computer. I'd prefer proper uninstaller any day.
I think I know what you're talking about. There are likely files inside the ~/Library/Application Support/ or ~/Library/Caches/ folders for example.
What is the proper, Apple way to make sure these get deleted when we delete apps? Because I fear there is no universal solution here. There are some files that an app creates that some of the time I would probably want to persist uninstalls. But then these files should be in a user home directory, not in application support according to XDG, right? I feel like the OS should detect dragging of an app to the trash can and clean up its app support folders? I don't think it does this today but I think it should.
It wouldn't be hard to display "remove configuration and cache files?" modal during uninstall/trashing process. But it would be hard to go against own simplicity of platform usage idea - that's the problem.
KDE's Discover after you uninstall a flatpak application shows small infobar (still really easy to miss) saying "appname is not installed but it still has data present." with "Delete settings and user data" button.
But then, all sort of software even on Windows leaves some kind of traces of own presence.
In a perfect world we'd have a standardized application uninstall procedure - either by dropping icon on trash (which is something still many people do - especially on Windows) or by bringing similar to mobile solution with "x" on longer click. All of this controllable by options for advanced users including optional configuration and cache files removal.
Yeah. But mac is still and I mean BY FAR the cleanest of all operating system when you got to uninstall stuffs.
Windows is as bad as Linux, leftovers everywhere without any sense whatsoever. Some company use a directory, other use another, makes no sense.
On Linux, at least there is some kind of uniformity but since all apps install with sudo permissions, they get put everywhere and you never really know where.
On macos, you got 2 folders to look for, all in the user directory (app, application support) and that's it.
This problem has been around for decades. An application installer doesn't just copy some files to a few directories. It may put them in hundreds of different places. In addition, it adds entries to the registry or other system files. Even the best uninstallers or cleaners miss something when deleting the app.
This is one of the many issues my side project is designed to address. Imagine if installing every application meant just dropping it on the computer. The software 'package' was just a list of data objects the comprised all the files, config settings, etc. Needed to run the app. All these objects would be copied to the storage drive(s).
Imagine further, that the operating system did not have a central registry. Instead, all configuration was managed via a set of configuration objects, spread all over (preferably in the app folders). The configuration manager was just a program that could find every configuration object and make them appear to the user (and the OS) like they were in a unified file.
If a configuration object was copied anywhere in the system, it looked like its contents were just appended to the configuration store. If you deleted an object, all its settings just disappeared.
Uninstalling an application would mean just deleting all the objects in its package. The files would be gone and any configuration settings with them.
This is just one of the features my 'file system replacement' project is designed to handle.
> Uninstalling an application would mean just deleting all the objects in its package. The files would be gone and any configuration settings with them.
Applications developers of the world. Please always make "keep configuration" an option with your uninstallers! I don't like the mobilification of PCs. For example, because of some issues, I wanted to try a different version of Thunderbird. I had the Snap version. Uninstalling it meant losing all its mails. I wasn't expecting that. Like at all!
They certainly can clean everything after them. And I'm pretty sure that many of them do. When macOS user drags application folder to the Bin, application does not have a chance to clean after itself.
Just because some Windows uninstaller are bad doesn't mean that all of them are bad, or that uninstaller concept is bad.
Now I'd welcome for operating system to be built in a way to let user to delete everything related to the application. Maybe android or ios are built this way, but not macos.
Sorry an advantage over what? What desktop operating system in common use _hasn't_ had decades of development of pet projects on obvious problems like system cleanup? Literally every operating system has these kinds of things
If you are aware of this not hard to manage. Grep. rm -rf. Done. Usually its pretty tiny folders at least. Heavier stuff usually software makes a directory under Documents. Kinda nice in a few cases having it set up like this. For example I can delete the app but preserve my config. Drop the app right back again and no setup its turnkey and works.
What's new with Pearcleaner? I don't see a comparison chart in the GitHub repo, and I don't care for features other than completely uninstalling an app.
Haiku package system has an unparalleled installstion, deletion, boot into previous states, data integrity (read only packages) and dealing with conflicting library policy. Its a technical crime that other systems are not copying Haiku packages … they’re several decades behind. IOS is half way there …
"Does it have a way to uninstall, and does that uninstallation clean every application artifact?" is such a great litmus test for just how much a software company actually cares about having a proper finished product that respects the user. Nobody forces a company to do it, but when they don't do it, you can probably bet that they're cutting corners and disrespecting the user's machine in other ways, too.
It's like "Do you return your shopping cart to the cart storage or leave it in the carpark?" You're allowed to just shove your cart away and drive off, but people who do that are highly probably assholes in other ways, too.
In the file menu of the installer, there is generally an option to see all the files it is placing on the system with full system paths. I generally note this down so I can make sure to clean things up completely if/when needed.
For app that just get dragged into the Applications folder, they end up doing all this additional file creation on first-launch instead of via an installer. That actually makes it harder. For those I tend to search the ~/Library folder for the name of the app and the company that made it, hoping I find all the remnants to delete. There are apps, like AppZapper and AppCleaner, which try to automate this process. I still think it’s ridiculous that Apple never solved for this. It’s one of the reasons I always do a manual migration to a new Mac. It feels like the only real way to clean things up.
> I still think it’s ridiculous that Apple never solved for this.
I think that problem, in general, is unsolvable on the Mac. The OS cannot know whether a file that an application creates is a user file that should be kept on uninstall or an application one that, maybe, should be deleted on uninstall.
(Maybe because Apple’s guidelines say (or at least used to say) uninstall ers, if you have one, should keep preferences files around, in case a user reinstalls the app later. Also, applications may ship with files (e.g. fonts, sounds, picture libraries) that users may want to keep around)
> For app that just get dragged into the Applications folder, they end up doing all this additional file creation on first-launch instead of via an installer
For quite a few things that an installer can install, applications cannot do that, as they want to install them into protected directories.
I think most of the leftovers whose locations you cannot gauge from looking at the file list in the installer are for caches, preferences, logs, etc.
Yeah, it's usually plist files for preferences and maybe an Application Support folder with whatever the app needed. Occasionally some other things. More recent apps end up with a container in there.
The upgrades process for some apps almost necessitates that the those files/folders are decoupled from the app and can live on, as the app upgrade ends up deleting the existing app and dropping a new one in it's place.
I get wanting to keep user preferences around in spirit, but in practice keeping them forever can sometimes be problematic. If I tried an app, then installed it again in 8 years. I usually want to start over. For users who don't know about the ~/Library, this is hard. Especially now that Apple hides it in Finder.
When having issues with an app, deleting those files (or simply moving them somewhere else like the desktop as a test) is a great troubleshooting step to see if its an app problem or something corrupt in your settings or support files. When most users reinstall an app as a troubleshooting step, they aren't doing much of anything, with all those files sticking around.
UTM buries their VM disks away in a container inside the ~/Library. I have a 20GB disk in there. It's not always trivial small files. If someone deletes UTM and forgets to check for old VMs first, that's a big hit.
What I'd like to see is a something, maybe in the Settings app, that lists all the applications on the system and 3 options.
1. Remove Application, keep Library data
2. Remove Application and Library data (have it give into on what files are in there)
3. Remove Library data only (this could be used to refresh an app to start over with it)
Maybe in addition to that, as part of the Optimize Storage feature, it could crawl through all those old orphaned application support folders and containers, and list all the ones without an app installed, show the size, and the user can choose to get rid of them.
Looking at how much junk I have out there now, I may just do a re-install of my OS to clean things up soon. I usually wait for a new system, but this M1 Pro is lasting a long time. I recently migrated off 1Password and it seems to have a bunch of junk out there, including 4 year old weekly archives of all my passwords that it took for a few months for some reason. The files are encrypted, but who knows how long that will actually be good for.
I'll have to check that installer trick the next time I use one.
Isn't the "Receipts" folder that so angered OP kind of that same thing? I thought those included the list of files installed.
In general, I think some worries about removing "every trace" are overblown, though. The receipts, for instance, are inert and they're not filling up the disk or consuming RAM.
Of all the things Apple does in the name of "security" it's funny to me that they've never even tried to build uninstallation functionality. Even though a majority of apps with "Installers" use, not arbitrary installer executables like Windows, but .pkg files that open with Apple's "Installer" app. That means it's Apple's code placing most of those files in place, and even if the install includes a "script" portion, it seems like a solvable problem that Installer.app could monitor the files being added or changed by the script process, to at least let you view a log of what happened if not reverse the changes.
There are two cases: I am uninstalling because I never want to use the app, or I am uninstalling because I know I currently don't need the app and will reinstall after 6 months when I do.
An example of first is a trial of an app but you don't like it in the end, an example of the latter is a game that you might want to play with the same settings later.
Now, I want the option. In the first case I don't want these inert files taking up disk space and in the second I want to have those files.
I stopped trying new apps as often, because I don't like how I can never really go back to a state before it was installed, unless the developer actually put effort into not spraying files everything and not leaving a trace once gone. I appreciate these developers very much, and am more likely to keep using their apps. The most junk an app install puts on my system, the more likely I am to want it gone.
Almost never, indeed, so you need some 3rd party trash utilities with databases and heuristics.
Though that's also on the gardener and his bad OS design where forced compartmentalization is's trivial, the weeds will never want to root themselves out!
> When a user mode application on the Mac doesn't just allow you to drag the app into the applications folder to install, it's a red huge red flag
But a lot of Apple first-party applications require installation. Packages for me and not for thee.
As do Chrome/Edge/Teams/Etc
It's 2026 and Apple still doesn't have an equivalent to MSI + the Add/Remove Programs control panel Windows has had for 30+ years.
Windows always saves a copy of the uninstaller package stub so if you trash the media you can always nope out (usually—unless the developer went out of his way to break it).
[ Thank you for "PartitionMagic" - crucially important for home / personal computer users, at least in my own history. ]
And, I wonder if a (corporate) development organization's overall cultural friction around critical / negative feedback -- in this case integration issues in the technical sense of pulling together modules built by subteams to compose a final product -- could be worth investigating when challenging metrics like the above are identified?
This "18 steps" seems like a problem. And I wonder if it's a prioritized concern at SAM.
SNARK: The "magic" could be how corporate culture is communicated to users merely through usage of Samsung Magician.
Thank you and to all the others who remember and liked PartitonMagic. It makes an old programmer feel good to know that something he worked on 30 years ago made a difference.
BTW: I am currently working on a hobby project called Didgets. It is an object store that does a lot of cool file system stuff and relational table manipulation and analysis.
It is available for free download at http://www.didgets.com
The install process is to unzip the downloaded file to a directory. The uninstall process is to delete that directory.
PartitionMagic was one of the first programs to make me feel like I was in control of my computer. I don't think about it much but looking back it was an important part of my development as a technologist. You made a difference in lots of lives I'm sure!
It was pretty important at the time to make room for dual-booting Linux. Linux setup tools couldn't do it back then, particularly shrinking FAT let alone NTFS filesystems. PartitionMagic made it super easy. It felt slightly wrong to need a Windows software to install Linux, but great tool.
I joined the startup making PartitionMagic after I saw a prototype. I had just wasted another half day repartitioning my 80MB hard drive so I could dual boot OS/2 while working at Novell.
What a blast from the past. Partition magic was a huge part of our journey discovering and loving computers here with my friends. Hello and thank you from France !
You were competing with Norton Ghost at the time IIRC. Partition Magic was an amazing piece of software. It was so good when you explained “called Partition Magic” I was like “called”? It was so clearly the best of its kind it didn’t even occur to me that these years later people wouldn’t know of it, it felt like reading “I worked on a search engine called Google”. Anyway thanks for the great software.
I mainly mentioned it that way because once the company (PowerQuest) was bought out by Symantec, the product was mostly abandoned. Unlike Google, most programmers younger than 30 have never heard of it.
Thank you for PartitionMagic. In the late nineties I cut my teeth repeatedly building and breaking windows PCs. PartitionMagic was a core tool. I regularly see its echoes today in GParted.
Since we had to shift (i.e. copy) blocks of data around in order to dynamically resize partitions that were formatted with FAT, NTFS, or HPFS file systems; we had to know the internal structures of each of them.
It's been a long time, but I seem to remember that there were a few areas that were not documented well by Microsoft and we had to guess what certain fields meant.
Because we often had to move file contents around, some files became more fragmented while others became less fragmented since we tried to be smart about where we moved file blocks.
My biggest takeaway was understanding file system architecture. For some features, I was impressed by what their architects designed. For others, I wondered why on Earth they did it 'that way'. I started keeping a list of things I wanted to be different and eventually incorporated many of them in my new object store design.
Our UI guy (a good friend of mine from college) did a really good job of making our DOS app look like a windows app.
The first version of our disk imaging product (Drive Image) was not so polished because I was the only one working on both the engine code and the UI layer. Once that started selling we'll, they assigned someone to help me with later versions.
Partition Magic was among the first utilities recommended to me by my more experienced water I got my first PC. It served me well for many years since!
I remember software, tools and some games shipping like this forever, typically they have a "portable" label slapped on them, bet you can find Windows software/games still shipped like this today, if you look for "-portable" or "-archive" rather than "installer".
One quick example, offers an installer or a ZIP archive, the "installation process" for the ZIP archive is basically "copy files out from archive && ./executable", installer does a bunch of other stuff: https://www.openttd.org/downloads/openttd-releases/latest
Sure, but it was (and still is, in some circles) relatively uncommon. I wouldn't claim "that was never the case", unless if you're only talking specifically about DOS I suppose.
It still is for a lot of Mac Apps. You download a DMG, and you get somethinglike [0] where you drag the icon over, and it installs. The last app I uninstalled also removed the matching Library Support folders, which was neat!
On a similar note, I wondered if my week Mac still called the main volume “Macintosh HD”. Yup. When is the last time Apple marketed their computers as “Macintosh”? And when’s the last time they sold one with a “hard drive”?
yes. obviously, if your whole entire being and everything known about your os is that the main drive where the os is installed is c:\, then suddenly changing that to a:\ because floppy drives fell out of fashion would being nothing short of absolute chaos. you'd be amazed at the number of times c:\ is hard coded into things. It would be like swapping the brake and accelerator pedals. It would be like switching the sky to green and grass to blue. It would be total anarchy. Okay, maybe it wouldn't be that bad, but it wouldn't be good. At least for the dolt that called their system drive a:\
This is what scares me the most about AI. You have a handful of really big companies trying to outdo each other as they race to implement it and deploy it as quickly as possible.
To try and justify their outrageous capital spending on data centers; they are incentivised to exaggerate its current capabilities and also what it will be capable of 'soon'.
There is no time to evaluate each step to make sure it is accurate and going in the right direction, before setting it loose on the public.
When companies are spending that much capital, they almost can't help becoming unreliable narrators about what the technology can do right now versus what they hope it will do in two or three years
I guess a counterpoint might be Apple's "strategy". Scare quotes because I truly don't know if it was deliberate or just a happy accident. But somehow they've managed to not get so intensively exposed to the downside risk--if the wild claims about AI don't pan out they're not going to lose very much compared with the other megacorps.
Apples plan has been pretty obvious. They invested in small locally running features that provide small utility rather than massive hosted models that cost a fortune and aren’t profitable.
There also doesn’t seem to be much risk in falling behind. If you wait longer you can skip buying the now obsolete GPUs and training the now obsolete models.
I have heard that you can speed up your favorite compression algorithm by 1000x, if you are not so concerned about what happens when you try to decompress it.
>At the global level, 2025 also saw a sharp rebound in non-renewable additions, which nearly doubled compared to 2024," IRENA noted. China led that drive, with 100 GW of non-renewable capacity added last year, most of which was coal.
Why is China adding so many new generation plants powered by coal? On this and other forums, I see claims all the time that solar is cheaper than coal. As the world's leading producer of solar panels, you would think that they would utilize it even more if those claims are true.
Is it just the need for power when the sun is not shining? Or is it something else?
My understanding is that China is planning to build a coal-backed renewable grid. Renewables, including storage, will provide the majority of the electricity generation, and then coal will step in when renewables aren't available. This involves building modern coal plants that can be spun up and down as needed, and then paying them not to generate. This is why actual emissions have plateaued and dropped, even as new coal capacity comes online.
We are (or were) doing something similar in the US, just using natural gas as the fuel rather than coal.
- They need something to provide electricity when the sun is not shining, while they install enough batteries and more than enough solar to use during the day and charge those batteries.
- They need some backup in case the Sun is dimmed for a few days, while they install enough solar to not need this anymore.
- They need some backup in case they grow too fast and the solar installations don't keep up.
- They need some backup in case there's some natural catastrophe, or some stupid dictator somewhere decides to start a war or something and destroy some vital energy infrastructure.
Their government has explained this a few times, but not on those words. It probably helps that those are government projects, and failing to deliver government projects is a very rude attitude that can end people's careers. But the rationale is sound too.
> Why is China adding so many new generation plants powered by coal? On this and other forums, I see claims all the time that solar is cheaper than coal. As the world's leading producer of solar panels, you would think that they would utilize it even more if those claims are true.
Because reality is very different of propagandists and lobby reports.
Currently, not a single major country right now can afford to have energy storage capacity large enough to pass, even a single day, without sun if running exclusively on solar power.
Not even China, the biggest battery provider world wide.
Considering that to get a stable and reliable grid, the needed capacity would need to supply for weeks during Dunkelflautes, this is realisitically not going to happen before multiple decades.
China has an energy problem it need to solve now: The country is developing so its electricity consumption is growing, rapidly.
Their solution is the most pragmatic on short term: Building coal plants.
Their long term solution is also the most pragmatic on long term: Using Nuclear energy to support the baseload and a mix of hydro, solar, wind for the peaks.
Mostly it's that solar doesn't work at night. That means you have to use batteries, which are impractical to store more than a certain amount of energy, after which you need another very large and stable energy source. So a nation-state that can't go dark must have a constant load source, such as nuclear, hydro, or coal. There's also limitations of geography, industry, production capacity, and other issues.
Part of China's "new" coal capacity is modern, efficient coal plants with lower emissions being built to replace old, inefficient, highly polluting ones.
Not trying to be offensive or throw shade, but I wouldn't be surprised if the older plants were built fast and cheap and have issues; emissions, efficiency, maintenance, safety.
I remember my company buying RAM expansion boards for our PCs back in 1989 so we could run OS/2. The 4MB boards (MB! Not GB.) cost around $2000 at the time.
Like everyone, I love getting tons of RAM or SSD storage on the cheap; but we have a ways to go before we reach the 'unaffordable' level.
I once read about a gas station that rigged their pumps. They discovered that the 'gas police' who came and measured gas to make sure pumps were properly working; always pumped a multiple of 10 gallons to measure.
They rigged the pumps to rack up more charges for the first 5 gallons, and then slow the charges for the next 5 gallons. That way it always read 10 gallons at those intervals, but overcharged you if you got less. Someone pumping 4 gallons (or 14) was charged as if they had pumped 6 (or 16).
They got caught when someone noticed that the gauge ran faster, then slower as you filled up.
In my opinion a 'civil servant' sees their job as serving the American people to the best of their ability even if they don't agree with the outcomes of the latest election.
A member of the 'deep state'; however, is ideologically driven. If their favorite party is in power, they use their job to push their ideology to its limits. If the opposition party won the election; then they view their role as a means to 'resist', 'thwart', or otherwise delay any policies the elected officials try to implement.
Their general view is that their own opinions are superior to those of voters.
> In my opinion a 'civil servant' sees their job as serving the American people to the best of their ability even if they don't agree with the outcomes of the latest election.
Sure, but a bunch of stuff isn't supposed to change just because the president changes. It's supposed to take laws to change it, or even amendments. If those haven't been passed and the President tries to do that stuff anyway, we should want our civil servants to resist that.
The contrary notion is the Unitary Executive, which is that the president should be absolute dictator of what the executive branch does, with legality to be sorted out elsewhere even in egregious cases. This notion is very bad and we should not let it become normal, especially in a world where we've already seen absolutely insane rulings that place the president personally above the law.
If the executive is empowered by the legislative, we should not want civil servants to do gladly do every thing a president might ask of them. If the president is instead possessed by default of unlimited power to direct the executive branch and it's the legislative branch's job to reign in that boundless power (until the president ignores the law, then it's the judicial's job to finally make the executive knock it off one or more years later) then we would want totally obedient (to the president) civil servants. However, this latter idea is stupid and bad, so, we should want civil servants that don't treat the president's word as law, but the law as law.
> A member of the 'deep state'; however, is ideologically driven
What you're describing is a federal employee. The kind that takes a massive pay cut, and loses out on paycheck stability (due to government shutdowns), because they at least start out earnestly attempting to improve the system.
How they define "improving the system" varies by ideology, but career civil servants, in wanting to follow their definition of improving the system, are ideologically driven.
What you're describing is still just "A collection of civil servants that aren't disillusioned and dead inside"
I'm sorry but no. "Deep state" is nothing more than enemy within propaganda to justify a purge of government departments to replace them with ideologues and to further concentrate power in the hands of the so-called "unitary executive".
The point of my comment is that Republicans have this habit of describing perfectly ordinary and normal things in nefarious tones to make them sound sinister. The real problem is people are so gullible in falling for it.
The deep state, for example, would tell a president that if you bomb Iran and kill its autocratic leader, the country might close the Strait of Hormuz. And that naval escorts through the strait will only get sailors killed.
Trump ran on vanquishing the deep state because all he cares about is personal loyalty, not loyalty to the country, the Constitution, or objective fact.
I am confused. The article claims that solar is the best, cheapest source of power. It also claims that the Trump administration is undermining it in the US by cutting federal subsidies.
If solar truly is the cheapest, why does it need any help from any government? It would seem to me that it should flourish in any capitalist society where money naturally flows towards the cheapest solution that actually works.
Solar still makes sense economically in the US without explicit subsidies - that's why it is still getting built.
But the Trump admin is also with-holding permits and cancelling long distance transmission that would allow it to reach non-local markets. The fossil fuel industry is also sponsoring astro-turf campaigns on the local level to ban new deployments.
Long distance transmission is part of the cost of production when the location of the production is non-local to the consumption.
With-holding permits is stupid, as are bans on new deployments, but neither are subsidies. You can cut subsidies to zero and at the same time give out all the permits people requests.
The USofA is a broligarchy not a capitalist society, so there's that.
Trump has his thumb on the scales, cancelling wind farms in progress via executive order, not cancelling the federal subsidies for fossil fuels, etc.
There are always transition overheads to breach - in China the government there subsidised the non existant EV industry into being, now that's going gang busters the government support has dropped back to near zero.
Only if they give that money to the fossil fuel industry ... bit of an important detail in the context of US energy subsidies and thumbs on scales.
Environmental groups denounced the deal as an alternate way to block wind projects, with one group calling it a "billion-dollar bribe" to kill clean energy.
"After losing again and again in court on his illegal stop-work orders, Trump has found another way to strangle offshore wind: pay them to walk away," said Lena Moffitt, executive director of Evergreen Action.
That is why we have slow, bloated software. The companies that create the software do not have to pay any of the operational costs to run it.
If you have to buy extra RAM or pay unnecessary electrical or cooling expenses because the code is bad; it's not their problem. There is no software equivalent to MPG measurements for cars where efficient engine designs are rewarded at the time of purchase.
Maybe Samsung used that when naming their product.
I am old, but I miss the days when the install process was copy . to /<appFolder> and the uninstall process was delete /<appFolder>
reply