On top of it, if they do, it might be in a sub forum or community where the director did not look at.

Or its more like:

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 still has secrets fans haven’t reported online OR the director didn’t saw it

Which does not change how logical a decision from a company is. To me, the decision to cancel the game makes sense. I wish they would not, but I understand why. And my understanding is not affected by my feelings about how much I like or dislike the company.

To be fair, Ubisoft isn’t in a good position right now, to be able to experiment or do whatever they want. So the cancellation is understandable, if they expect it to be controversial and flop because of that. In the end, its the fault of the people who had political issues with prior games. I wish people would stop, so that companies can experiment and be more creative.

Which game? Or does no game work?

On the Github Issue Tracker https://github.com/Heroic-Games-Launcher/HeroicGamesLauncher/issues I don’t see any raised issue for the launcher itself. I personally don’t use Heroic Games Launcher, so cannot assist with detail or otherwise look into.

You have no clue what you saying.

I love the term “dumb TV” and “dumb phone”. :o)

The biggest roadblocks are the manual download and installation process of Linux, if we speak about casuals. I don’t know how important streaming services are, but besides the usual office and adobe application, certain popular videogames are also a blocker for casuals switching to Linux.

For your (or her) streaming, doesn’t it work in the web browser?

This is not a “loophole”, but normal business. Game Pass is not the only service who keep the old contract for current subscribers. This way people think twice if they cancel, because they would “loose” the cheaper price and day one releases and so on, its the same contract as before, which is a huge difference to the new.

https://www.ubuntu-touch.io/apps/ can run Android apps with Waydroid. I don’t know if Signal works with this, but Android apps run with good performance using Waydroid (I just read about it, never used it myself).

What part do you mean is the exception? Pinning a package version will lead to partial upgrades, by logic. So pinning the Kernel isn’t an exception itself, maybe its tolerable because the team tries to make sure this scenario works well? Otherwise I wouldn’t call it “exception”.

The pizza could depend on the Game Pass menu you are subscribed to. :D

At this point, with all the charts and videos dedicated trying to explain what Game Pass is and deals exist, I really think a DLC approach would have been better. Like with pizza, you would have your Game Pass + any number of DLCs to enable additional features. So everyone could have their own Game Pass setup and pay only what they are interested into. In example:

$10 Game Pass Base
+ $8 Day One First Party 
   (exclusives for a month, and added to Base after a year)
+ $8 Premium Streaming
   (shortest wait times, highest quality)
+ $5 Additional Library
  (EA Play & Ubisoft+ Classics)
+ $4 Loyalty Benefits
  (Rewards program, game specific benefits, icons, walllpapers, soundtracks, stickers etc)

Note: Online Console Play is always included.

I just made up price numbers, so don’t quote me on that as being bad or so. At least from marketing standpoint it would be easier to market, and nobody pays extra for stuff they won’t use such as some vbucks for free to play games.

I guess that’s the key takeaway for me from this post and replies.

No, because pacman -S will use the current package list.

I don’t know what you mean, the question is simple.

We can install a new package if it wasn’t installed with pacman -S firefox. That is not a partial upgrade of the system. Right? What i don’t understand is, when I uninstall with pacman -Rs firefox, delete the cached firefox package (only that file), then the system is in the same state as before I installed it. Then -S firefox should be okay, right? And it even looks up the new version. This is my question, if that would work correctly.

IF no dependency tries to update too. Off course in that case I would stop. Without pacman -Sy, I never do that anyway, only -Syu.

But I’m not doing pacman -Sy package. That is not what I am talking about. I am only talking about pacman -S package, which is not updating the system partially. IF the package depends on something else to update, then the system would need to be updated. But that is not what I was asking, because I only talk about the package with -S package. I just chose firefox as an example, it could have been any other package.

To make it clear, when I say -S firefox, then I mean really that without updating a dependency like libssl. The idea is to install only new packages without updating anything on the system. I guess as you say it depends on the dependencies of the package, if this is feasible.

No, pacman -S package is safe. Because the package list is not updated this way, and therefore the system is not updated and nothing else is affected. New packages can be installed with this command, perfectly okay. That is in the spirit of Archlinux.

I think my idea would not work because the nature of the command -S package, as no new version would be synced. This is not a partial upgrade and it does not need to be discouraged.

But pacman -S package to install a new application is not considered a partial upgrade.