> Like “what are some quotes famous athletes have said about Usain Bolt”.

What are the newer searching techniques that make more sense?

I don't see how exact search string can lose its sense. But it does yield "no results", more often than before even if the string has to be publicly available somewhere, in a source I could make sense of.

I can see how google can be seen as better in some ways, but brushing all case where it's worse as irrelevant looks like an easy shortcut to shut down complains without caring if they might be legit.

> I've seen is folks using older techniques for searching that don't really make sense anymore.

Like typing what you want to search in the search input and hit enter?

> we were looking for a robot vacuum cleaner

For this kind of product search, may I suggest Consumer Reports. It's one of the very few sites I'd consider unbiased since they (a) do testing with actual technicians and extensive laboratories, (b) anonymously buy all the products they test and they don't take gifts or manufacturers' sponsorships, (c) don't take advertising. They are funded by subscriptions, donations, and grants, and have been in existence for 89 years.

Specifically for robot vacuums, I looked just now and Consumer Reports has reviewed 46 different models from 14 manufacturers. (I knew about Roomba but had no idea that robot vacuums had become such a big category.) I'm putting the robot vacuum link below to give an overview. It's worth subscribing to evaluate options for a big purchase.

https://www.consumerreports.org/appliances/vacuum-cleaners/r...

Productivity apps would be MS Office, yes, as well as separately-purchased licenses for Publisher (and I'm sure there were several other apps at the time). I do not know whether this category would include Visual C++ or Visual Basic licenses, but I suspect it did.

I think you are correct on the OEM vs Consumer split. Long-forgotten memory: For awhile people would resell OEM software licenses online. OEM software licenses could only be sold as a bundle with PC hardware. But that limitation did not specify /what/ PC hardware or that it had to be an entire working system. So resellers would collect outdated 1MB SIMM memory cards or other small, cheap, outdated components and package them with the CDROM.

I'm a mostly-satisfied iPhone 13 mini user, but I'm considering moving back to Android for my next device. No one reason is the deal-breaker, but it's just a pile-up of stuff:

- My main compute platforms are now Linux and Windows, but even when I had a MacBook, I didn't really benefit much from whatever integration there was between the two.

- I tried and did not like Apple Watch, and I'm upset at Apple's treatment of other wearable makers like Fitbit and now Pebble.

- I'm frustrated that my iPhone 13 is still not USB-C when basically everything else I carry around is.

- I don't like how the Epic/Apple case went, and I wish Apple had been made to allow competing stores on their devices (the EU got this one right).

- With Apple having discontinued the "mini" models, physical size is no longer a differentiator— the Galaxy series phones are basically indistinguishable from modern iPhone models.

>The iphone has lacked innovation under Cook. Last 3 iterations (since 13) have been virtually identical.

Why do things need "innovated" constantly? Why keep making the phone slimmer rather than replace the battery with something more efficient, maybe add back the headphone port?

The original iPhone was a great leap forward, UX wise, but much like with a pickup truck at a certain point you'd expect minor tweaks with the yearly models.

Apple has some serious talent working on this stuff but they aren’t willing to rip apart user privacy to do things quickly like other companies.

    > the failure of Apple Intelligence (oversold promise) has seriously hurt the brand

If it ain't broke, don't fix it?

I am a former Android user, but the quality of apps on iOS is just so much better. The apps "just work", and the integration with Mac, iPad, and watch is just simply so far ahead of anything Android offered, even if people think there is no innovation. IMO, it's so much better and the whole mobile space is stagnating, I think they will be fine even if they add features 3 years later.

It does what I need it to do.

As opposed to Google Search which does what I need it to do (and could do before) less and less

I’m just upset they don’t make small phones anymore, but I don’t think that’s relevant to their revenue.

> has seriously hurt the brand

You're forgetting the Apple Vision Pro flop.

Doesn't that include Google Workspace though? Sure, a dollar is a dollar, but presumably a huge chunk of that money is Workspace, meaning it's not going towards raw compute.

But if we represent it as a percentage we can pretend it's relatively not a big deal and minimize their stranglehold on society.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Cloud_Platform

Google Cloud Platform is a part of Google Cloud, which includes the Google Cloud Platform public cloud infrastructure, as well as Google Workspace (G Suite), enterprise versions of Android and ChromeOS, and application programming interfaces (APIs) for machine learning and enterprise mapping services. Since at least 2022,[9] Google's official materials have stated that "Google Cloud" is the new name for "Google Cloud Platform," which may cause naming confusion.

(Yes it’s a Wikipedia link. But if you go to the article it includes citations)

Microsoft does not include Office sales with its Azure revenue.