Always Angry, Never Happy

There has been Quite A Lot of Discourse on Bluesky in the last 48h and while it's too much to talk about here and arguably outside the scope of this blog, I wanted to talk about a component of it.

There's this sect of people that I've seen called the Always Angry and Never Happy crowd. The terminology is definitely apt, because the defining characteristic of this crowd is even if you give them what they're asking for, or start to move in the direction they want you to move, instead of acknowledging this in any capacity they'll instead move the goalposts and act like they got nothing for their efforts.

Maybe I'm wired differently, but if I were on the receiving end of this type of criticism my response would be to go back to doing what I was doing previously, because it's clear that even if I make an effort to do what is being demanded of me, nothing I do will ever be good enough. Why bother?

That said, don't misconstrue this as me saying that if a company or individual starts moving in a direction you like that you suddenly have to shower them in praise and act like they're suddenly the best ever. What I am saying is that you have to acknowledge their efforts. Praise them doing the right thing. Ease up on the gas a little. But continue pushing them. Don't act as if they gave you absolutely nothing and continue being just as angry at them as you were prior.

This is one of those things I'll agree with Louis Rossmann on, because he said the same thing throughout many of his Apple videos. He'll rightfully criticize them, but also praise them for when they move in the right direction on right to repair. I do this, even. I will be relentlessly critical of them over their handling of AI, but one of the things I will gladly give them is--well, at least for a bit--that AI was entirely an opt-in affair. They didn't force it on you like everyone else is. (But now, sadly, they are. You can still shut it off after the fact, though, and it's unfortunate to admit that this is still better than Apple's contemporaries.)

Point is, if you're not willing to stop and at least show someone some appreciation that they're taking steps to do the thing you want them to do, do not be surprised if they just stop listening to you entirely and/or go somewhere where their efforts will get some level of praise. 

Apple's Comeuppance

I really, really hope the day is approaching where Apple finally, finally gets the comeuppance they so deserve. The day is near, I can feel it, but Apple being what they are won't go down without a fight.

I am referring to the ruling as of recently that Apple could no longer do their anti-steering bullshit (in the US) with the App Store. You know, that thing where apps were not even allowed to so much as hint they could take payment outside of the app, or they'd be kicked off. All because Apple forced you to use its payment processor, which takes 30% off the top of all transactions, to start.

I've long felt that Apple's payments system could very well compete on its own merits. Apple Pay is extremely convenient, you've likely got your cards on file with Apple already. No need to enter new card info or anything. Apple manages your subscriptions, and is generally pretty good about canceling when you ask them to.

But, nope. Apple until recently forced you to use their payment system, and forced you to take a gag order saying you couldn't tell customers to go elsewhere to get a better deal at the cost of convenience.

This was bad enough from the start (for example, you can't buy ebooks from Amazon and the like because Apple believes it is entitled to a 30% tax on those items), but it became worse once Apple entered the services game and began competing with TV/Music streaming services.

For example, if we compare any music service to Apple Music, Apple has an unfair advantage with this 30% fee. Apple doesn't charge itself the 30% fee, of course. So if Apple Music is $10/mo, to compete and look good, I have to also price my service at $10/mo. Except in this case, Apple is now making that full $10/mo (minus credit card processing fees) where I'm only making $7 (minus credit card processing fees AND the yearly $100 I'd have to pay to Apple for the ability to deploy apps).

Apple is forcing me into a losing situation. Either I take a loss to look competitive, or I raise my price by 30% to make up the shortfall and look worse by comparison. This isn't even considering that Apple's services come preinstalled on their phones. Feels like Internet Explorer all over again. Services that compete with Apple's are at an inherent disadvantage from the get go and the 30% fee is just twisting the knife.

It was only a matter of time before Apple got taken to task for this, and thankfully, the ball is rolling. The EU did their thing with the Digital Markets Act, and now the US is (thankfully) catching up. Apple has tried to play their malicious compliance card, by allowing external transactions but trying to say those are also subject to a 27% fee, but fortunately it seems like the legal system isn't about to let them get away with their hubris.

Now, with regards to this, there have been a number of Takes(tm) and I wanted to talk about those.

Apple should be entitled to SOME of that money, after all, they provide so much value to developers!

They sure do. And those developers pay for it. That's what the $99/year pays for. That's what it always paid for. Yes, I'd argue there's room for change here, specifically that bigger companies should pay a higher fee, as $99 is a rounding error to them. That much I can agree on. Other than that, app developers are already paying the fee Apple has asked of them for the services they provide, that $99.

This take also implies that developers--even paid ones--are freeloading off Apple's ecosystems. Hardly the case. Developers themselves provide value in the apps they develop for Apple's platforms, giving people reason to buy iPhones. You know what happens when you can't get developers to bring their apps to your device? You die off like Windows Phone.

Apps in and of themselves provide value to Apple. They enrich the ecosystem. To act like they don't is a vast disservice to developers.

Why is it okay for Sony and Microsoft to do this, though?

1. A game console is not a general purpose device like a phone is, or a computer. The two are not comparable. A game console does games and maybe some media, but not anything near what a general purpose device like an iPhone can do.

2. Sony and Microsoft don't force you to use their stores for subscriptions. 

For the sake of this piece, I actually went and tried to purchase a Spotify and Apple Music subscription on my PS5. You know what happened? Both apps directed me to go to a web browser and sign up there. Neither app directed me to process my transaction through the Playstation Store.

Sony nor Microsoft issue a gag order on developers telling them they can't inform people to go sign up in a web browser. Apple, until recently, did.

To make matters even better, you can also purchase games outside of the consoles' respective stores. Both consoles (if you buy the appropriately equipped versions) can take physical media which you can buy from your store of choice. And then resell. Or lend to a friend. Try that on the App Store. 

But what about Google?

This is less of an issue on the Google side because of multiple factors: Android has always been friendly toward sideloading so you can do a complete end run around Google if you so please. Look at Amazon, they made their whole damn Fire ecosystem on top of Android with their own app store! 

But even if you stick with Google Play, one could argue this is less egregious because you know what Google charges to allow you to deploy apps to the Play Store? $25. One time. No subscription required at all. And far as I know, it isn't illegal over there to tell users they can sign up for your subscription in a web browser.

(Some apps used to even allow you to sign up using an in-app browser, but I think Google began swatting that down.)

Nonetheless, this isn't really an issue over on Google's side if only because you have a mechanism to get around Google if you so pleased. Apple doesn't have that luxury. 

But Apple is going to take such a loss on the App Store! They can't possibly afford to keep it running!

Eh. Debatable. Apple makes money hand over fist. They're one of the most valuable companies out there. They'll be fine. They're not some plucky indie startup that needs to keep the lights on. Apple is a monolithic megacorp. They have loadsamoney. They'll be fine. This ain't the 90s.

But I'm an Apple investor and--

Oh, please, pull your head out of your ass. 

I vehemently hate the Xbox Controller.

There is a special kind of hate that I have.

It's toward those things that are actually excellent pieces of equipment on the surface. Something that gives you bliss, but due to something dumb, some little flaw, it's completely unusable. It's 99.99 percent of the way there, but it's that 0.01 percent that kills it.

For me, one of those things is the Xbox controller. I originally wrote this with the Elite Series 2 in mind, but really, this extends back to the original Xbox One controller.

I think the Xbox One/Series controllers are--ergonomically--some of the best controllers ever made as far as my hands go. The button action is nice and tactile. The grips are comfy. The stick layout mirrors that of the GameCube, where the left thumbstick is right where your left thumb naturally rests. (This has been one of my gripes with Sony's controllers for ages now, I have never EVER liked where the thumbsticks are on their controllers. I've grown to mostly tolerate them.)

This isn't surprising, after all--the Xbox 360 controller was one of the best controllers of its time from an ergonomics standpoint. The One/Series controllers merely build upon that.

Where the whole thing utterly falls apart, though, is how the internals are designed. Rather than having the entire controller on a single PCB, the One (and Series) controllers all use a sandwiched design with a front and rear PCB, splitting the controller's functions between the two. For the most part this works, but where it gets weird is the face buttons.

I assume to accommodate the very aggressive curve in the design of the One controller, the B button interfaces with the rear PCB, and is the only face button to do so. The other three face buttons interface with the front PCB, and those are the ones that gave given me trouble.

You see, my main issue with the One controller is that you really have to press down on these buttons to get them to register a consistent press. If you press them slightly off axis, the button may not register properly, even as you've gotten the tactile feedback that communicates yes, you've pressed the button. This may not be an issue if you're a gamer with bigger hands and a tendency to press down hard on these buttons. But if you're someone with a lighter touch and smaller hands, this becomes a problem.

I've noticed this problem getting worse with wear, yet it doesn't seem to be fixed with the usual refurbishment process. I've cleaned up the pads, cleaned up the rubber membrane, but yet the problem persists.

I first noticed this with my Xbox One X's controller back in 2020. The controller was well out of warranty, so I took a leap and bought a Series controller from Target because they were on sale and they had a blue one. Initially? It was much improved! 

But a few months later, it started happening again.  This time, damn it all, I was going to make Microsoft answer for this. Except that never happened. You know why? Because--at least at the time--Xbox controllers purchased separately from a console only have a warranty of 90 days. You heard that right. (Verge article talks about extending the warranty for the Elite S2, but it's there to confirm that yes, the warranty was at one point at least 90 days.)

I threw the controller in a drawer and never really thought about it again for a good long while. I picked it up to play some Elden Ring mostly because the way it fudges inputs doesn't really affect that game so much, but it's still just disappointing to look at. The Xbox controller is such a damn comfy controller and would be one of my favorites if it was just internally designed better.

But how? Simple. Look at Nintendo and Sony, and look at how the PCB contacts for the buttons are designed, and copy them. The way Nintendo and Sony design their contacts, it's able to detect a button press even if you don't press it perfectly. As long as you press the button down and get that tactile bump, the button has been pressed. It's not intermittent at all.

Microsoft themselves are capable of this, because they've shipped good controllers with good buttons! Yet for some reason, they've lost the plot entirely with the One controllers.

Anyway, this would have ended here, but I'm a glutton for punishment and acquired an Elite Series 2 from a good friend of mine. As you can probably expect, in short order, it began having the very same issues, except much worse. I had to press the buttons dead on or they wouldn't register properly.

But instead of just shrugging, I decided I wanted to try and fix this. No one has found a real fix for these, but there was a promising one of trying to find some way to put a spacer in between the membrane and button to try and increase pressure on the membrane when it pushes down. I tried this, and while it improved the problem, it didn't fix it. It just went from "significantly worse than my Series controller" to "a touch worse than my Series controller".

As insult to injury though, I decided to try dusting off the Elite S2 to give it a run in Helldivers 2, since I could see the paddles being immensely useful. Guess what happened? The damned sticks began to drift.

I simply do not have words for the level of rage I felt. Not at the friend who gave me this controller, but at Microsoft, who seems hell bent on designing great controllers with a tragic flaw that they seemingly just completely refuse to fix. People have been talking about these issues for years. Years! And nothing has changed. The controllers still have the same damn flaw. And considering the Elite Series 2 retails for $180, this is downright criminal.

If you go looking on reddit for people with problematic controllers, they're everywhere. You'd think these things have damn near the failure rate of the Xbox 360. And Microsoft's solution is to just replace them with something that is just as defective.

Guess they never understood the definition of insanity.

A quick journey: The Compaq Deskpro PD1005

This is one of those posts I'm writing down more for my reference, but hey, you might get some enjoyment out of it, too.

I wanted to make note of this because, well, Compaq wasn't super great at differentiating their Deskpro line, at least from the front. There were so. many. computers. that only said "Compaq Deskpro" if you looked at the front. The only time you'd get a model number is if you looked at the bottom, or the back, and oftentimes photos didn't have this information.

But before we go on, why do this? 

Because the PD1005 was my first "real" computer, so to speak. It was the family computer we had as I was starting the journey into becoming a computer nerd. Sure, I had an old Macintosh LC as my "personal" computer, but that machine couldn't go on the internet or do anything modern by early 00's standards. Or play any "modern" games.

I cut my teeth on it in a LOT of ways. I learned a lot on it. I played a lot of old games I cherish to this day on it. I wouldn't necessarily call it a grail machine (mostly because I'm not actively seeking it out, it's a behemoth of a machine), but it's one I've been wanting to know the exact identity of for a minute due to the aforementioned thing about Compaq being not-so-great at labeling their machines in an easily identifiable way. 

I set out to Google, knowing only the CPU's specs: It was a 450-500MHz Pentium III, Slot I. Desktop form factor (so it lays horizontally, such that a monitor can sit on the chassis). After scrolling through a bunch of models that definitely weren't it (have I mentioned that Compaq called a LOT of computers "Deskpro"?) I eventually landed on something that looked like an exact match on eBay. And there, on the underside, barely readable was the model number I was after: PD1005. 

With that number in hand, I refined my search, and found more pictures. This was it. Everything matched. Including the motherboard, which had a really interesting layout (and the slot 1...slot laid on its side rather than vertically like most motherboards I've seen). 

You might ask why I care so damn much, and yeah, this really is a personal thing. Like I said, this is more for me, not for you. But this Deskpro in particular seems to be one of the less common ones at least, because if you try to look for a Deskpro you're either going to get the tower model, or the SFF model that seems to be extremely common. The big-ass desktop model doesn't seem to come up super often.

The only missing piece of this puzzle was what video card mine had: These Deskpros don't have onboard video, and used this weirdly proprietary AGP slot for video. It used this oddball double-wide half-height slot that I think is very proprietary to these Deskpros: 

 

(Once again, thanks eBay for having this info, somehow!)

And given the timeframe and seemingly relatively few cards made this way, I think this is it: It was this very card, a 3D Rage Pro Turbo.

Interestingly enough, the card still seems standards compliant otherwise, as I've seen (whilst searching) other cards with the same PCB dimensions and Compaq markings but with a standard bracket on them. I do wonder if it would be possible to finagle a standard AGP card in here some way, some how. 

Maybe if I ever stumble into one of these systems. And, y'know, if I had the room for it.

But with all that, I now know the identity of the computer that really got me started out on, well, everything. The computer that saw me through many, many, MANY hours of Diablo II, UT99, The Sims, and Planescape: Torment. That damn Compaq Deskpro PD1005.