With that in mind, a battery health tool is probably the fastest way to tell how old a phone is going to feel. Otherwise nothing else is going to suffer wear and tear. If the phone is in good shape, and the specs are agreeable, then it doesn’t matter how old it is.
Hey there, I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “first activated”. In general, you activate a SIM card, not a phone. This would be associated with your current phone plan, not the device itself. Your carrier would be able to provide that info. If you’re referring to when your phone was first purchased/turned on, then most folks tend to add their Google account during setup, which might be why there’s a suggestion to check your Google account to see when the device was added.
The IMEI is potentially useful as it’s a device identifier, but generally doesn’t matter to anyone except your carrier.
deleted by creator
It’s quite good. It helps a lot with making minute adjustments to aim that the control sticks can’t quite manage without dropping sensitivity substantially.
The controller has gyro, and games like Horizon Zero Dawn/Forbidden West do make use of it. There are others as well, but I’m not familiar enough with the library to recall specifics
The launcher is a fair point. Though for me at least, not having the spotlight-esque search hasn’t been a problem. Appearance is an odd one, since the best part of Both Gnome and KDE is the wonderful flexibility in visual customizability. At the end of the day, I suppose I’d happily use either. Right now, I think Plasma’s big features for me has to be window snapping and, once 6.0 releases, hopefully HDR support.
Maybe I’m missing some of the nuances between KDE and Gnome, but I’ve enjoyed the out of box experience with KDE far more than Gnome. That said, perhaps I’ve simply timed my switchover to Plasma such that I missed its teething pains. I say this as someone who used pretty much exclusively Gnome over the years.
What would you say sets Gnome apart?
I see this comment every now and then, and it always forgets the cost of the transaction, confirmation time, and of course, the need for miners to exist to process these confirmations/transactions. The energy cost is extraordinary, and the end user is taxed for the use of their own dollars.
It’s not really feasible on a broad scale. Bitcoin is a holding stock, not a valid currency. Its value only increases because it manufactures its own scarcity. And as its scarcity increases, it naturally moves toward centralization since mining becomes too large an activity for the individual to reap any benefit. You can argue for proof of stake to eliminate the need for mining, but then you open the doors to centralization more immediately.