In principle, yes, and I believe a few small hobby projects have attempted to do this and support specific TVs. However, interest in developing a custom Smart TV platform tends to get siphoned away into a project where the output from your actual platform is displayed on the TV rather than running directly on it. Simply, it’s easier to develop and maintain support across different models.

Why would you develop a custom TV OS that runs on one TV when you could develop it for any mini PC and immediately support all TVs? You’d have to develop your OS to run on each specific TV model which will make it quite hard to reach a critical mass sufficient to attract attention from developers and users alike.

The juice isn’t really worth the squeeze. It’s not like TV vendors are publishing detailed hardware specs and drivers. Writing or even porting an OS is hard. Look at the state of the Android ROM scene, and that’s about as good as it gets when some vendors are actually attempting to open source their drivers. The difficulty is much higher and the interest lower due to the existence of a viable alternative.

With that said, motivated minds have done it anyway. You just need to have the right TV for it.

HIPAA.

And we’re made of meat!

Asking the big questions.

Microsoft: Our computer.

Maybe I’m being stupid but a trivial way to ensure this is just don’t connect it to the Internet in any way. No SIM card. Cut it off from the Internet after setup, and only connect to a LAN with your chosen services all physically isolated from any internet machines.

Interesting study. However, I think we’re past the point of studies informing our decisions here in the US. I still thought it was really interesting to read.

That definitely sounds like a feature that should be added. I remember when you couldn’t even export your subscriptions.

You’re mistaken. He is a king now.

Best wishes, and thanks for all the memes!

Different goals and different designs. Why are there so many Linux distro?

Snap is proprietary. Appimage does not include distribution and updates. It also doesn’t attempt sandboxing of any kind.

On the other hand, I find appimage very convenient to use.

That is definitely a sacrifice being made here I agree with you. It gives developers more control over exactly how their app runs, but it does mean less storage efficiency.

I don’t think Flatpak is going to be compatible with Steam anyway in the long-term because layering container solutions doesn’t generally work very well, and Steam is going to want to use its own solution for better control over the libraries each game uses. Earlier versions used library redirection and some still do.

But y tho?

I love what Flatpak is doing for Linux desktop. Let it grow!

More money tho.

That awful magsafe adapter design with no strain relief grinds my gears.

That sounds like such fun! We got none this year. Maybe next time.

Nothing doesn’t exist, by definition.
The concept definitely does.

To be fair she spends shy of $1000 on a bag, but they hold up to abuse and seem to be nearly indestructible. I doubt she’ll need more than one or two further in this lifetime.