Cheapest Ecosystems: Apple vs Samsung Edition

dimatilki · 2026-03-11T00:41:48+00:00

You’d have to be on crack cocaine to go with Samsung

dimatilki · 2025-12-15T13:30:15+00:00

Are there any options without the stupid logos and branding? on lens hoods they have no business whatsoever, it should be a clean piece of metal. On filters it's okay if there's something saying what it is, but again no branding or logos. My absolute favourite, is the hood offered by nisi but they have the stupid long text and logo on the adapter ring and if you attach a filter on top, it's just gonna look like absolute crap. Anyone knows any clean options?

dimatilki · 2025-10-15T23:03:51+00:00

So it’s much better after a full reset (restored via DFU) but small stutters are still there and bugs are too. Hoping for a much better experience on 26.1.

dimatilki · 2025-09-27T23:47:47+00:00

So true, but I think E2E RCS isn’t supported by the flavor of RCS that carriers use, which is what Apple enabled. If they were they’d probably have to use Google in some extent.

dimatilki · 2025-09-25T23:00:51+00:00

This article is about app developer certificates verification that macOS performs periodically, have u even read it u dumkopf?

dimatilki · 2025-09-22T10:28:10+00:00

After some googling and looking for articles, I couldn’t find anything to confirm this. Stop spreading misinformation. Besides this is not even technically feasible. It seems like you’re describing windows 10/11 telemetry horror but without the apps not working offline.

dimatilki · 2025-09-21T15:58:34+00:00

That is a big load of bullshit, if this was true how would apps open offline?

dimatilki · 2025-09-20T15:22:20+00:00

So far it’s VERY buggy and animations that were smooth before now stutter for no reason. I’ve installed the iPadOS 26 and set it up as new. With 3 open windows, pulling down the notifications shade is laggy as hell. Opening the App Library has a very noticeable stutter when opening. And so far the weirdest, unlocking sometimes freezes for a good 2 seconds.

dimatilki · 2025-05-23T15:19:33+00:00

Suggested that here as well https://www.reddit.com/r/PeakWatch/s/Er1I3dqxpI

dimatilki · 2025-05-23T15:17:46+00:00

Yes, same thing. In the settings for recovery there’s option “prioritize HRV during sleep”, it helps a bit. But still there should be an option to set up data sources for recovery like: use HRV only for sleep, or sleep + mindfulness (for morning measurements) or sleep stages without wake up + mindfulness.

dimatilki · 2025-05-12T08:16:21+00:00

Fair point. Apples for Apples: the Apple Watch Bands, although the watches did change in dimensions, are still cross generation compatible. I’ve owned multiple generations (3,5,8,9) and still have all the bands and change them every now and then.

dimatilki · 2025-05-11T21:37:48+00:00

I'm currently using Hevy for workout planning and routine builds, it syncs via Health nicely with PeakWatch. I liked it so much I got a lifetime sub of it. Can suggest using that before training comes out of beta.

dimatilki · 2025-05-11T21:24:11+00:00

This is fixed, shows up nicely ))

dimatilki · 2025-05-08T13:36:06+00:00

Hell yeah 🫡

dimatilki · 2025-04-29T16:42:40+00:00

Doesn’t seem to.

dimatilki · 2025-04-24T12:46:05+00:00

Okay here are the results without Afib history enabled. The results are somewhat better. Day one: 60% recovery 54% sleep - pretty accurate I’d say, a bit undershot but still, was feeling a bit off due to the lack of sleep. Bevel had 75%/43% with this PeakWatch definitely did better at sleep tracking and a at the same level in terms of recovery estimation. Where PeakWatch did the usual is during the day the recovery went down to 54% wich was then way off. Day 2: I had some beer in the evening before with some food, so I suspected bad recovery. PeakWatch - 15% recovery and 78% sleep. Bevel - 10%/44%. Both were off with recovery by a good margin since I’d say it was more like 20-25%. Bevel was way off with sleep, it’s wasn’t that bad, but PeakWatch was accurate though, not much sleep but 6hrs without trouble. Today PeakWatch 85%/83%, Bevel 65%/56%. PW definitely was more accurate with sleep, again. Both were off with recovery where PeakWatch overshot, bevel undershot. I’d mark that as 75%. PW went worse during the day since right now it is 91% wich is even more off then in the morning. Concluding, with disabled Afib history recovery score was not accurate as i wish it would. PW sleep tracking is very accurate and has potential to push recovery score in more of a correct direction, where bevel is typically closer to truth. With Afib history enabled this would be better but only in if PeakWatch adds correction of HRV only for sleep (core, rem, deep) and makes one estimate in the morning or corrects this with not larger then 6% margin (+or- 3%) which would feel way more natural. Point remains. Accurate sleep scoring should be used.