Office 365 is garbage. We had to ban people opening documents in share point through the web because absolutely destroyed the formatting of templated documents.
Office 365 is more than just the web versions of the office components so stating that the entire platform is garbage because you have a specific issue with a specific feature of a specific part of the platform is ridiculous
The web versions of the office applications are the weakest due the nature of browser-based applications that does not however prove the OP comment that the entire platform is "garbage"
Have you played around with what region you're downloading from? You can change it manually and it may be worth checking out whether or not Sydney/Melbourne offer better download speeds than Brisbane.
Interestingly, when testing Steam downloads from Syd and Bris servers just now - 4:10am local time - (downloading Control Ultimate Edition this time around), both of them were able to give consistent download rates of ~50MB/s.
That's in line with "line speed" for my current NBN plan through Launtel. Might try bumping that up to the 1000/50 plan at some point and see if the download rates go that high too. :)
Trying the same test (downloading Control Ultimate Edition) from the Brisbane server at ~3pm rather than the dead of night gives the same download rate too. ~50MB/s.
---
After bumping the NBN connection speed up to 1000/50, and confirming that was effective (eg through speedtest.net), I've retried the download of Control Ultimate Edition.
Downloads from the Brisbane server are still mostly around 50MB/s, though the peak download rate was 72.7MB/s (very briefly).
Downloads from the Sydney server were mostly around 20MB/s, with a brief peak up to 43.7MB/s.
Downloads from the Melbourne server were mostly around 10MB/s, with a peak of 17.1MB/s. Seems like some kind of artificial restriction is in place now, though it could turn out to be something else (tcp buffer config of some sort maybe?).
Anyway, it seems like the local server (Brisbane) is now easily the fastest download for me, so I'll be using that from here on. Might as well drop the NBN connection back down to 400/50 as well, as there doesn't currently seem to be an advantage using the higher 1000/50 plan.
You could change the license for future versions and charge for said updates, for the market that godot targets that would be more a little screwing to them.
How long would it take for someone to take over the project (if ever).
And it's at exactly this moment the community would fork the project and development of a free version would continue. This is not a real risk for a community-driven project, only for corporate-driven projects where a single entity owns copyright on the on all or close to all of the codebase.
The important distinction isn't who owns copyright. It is rather that there needs to be a community opposed to the license change and able and willing to do the work.
One could even imagine scenarios like an originally MIT-licensed software splitting into a commercial company offering commercial paid licenses, plus a community (or even the company itself) offering a GPL-licensed fork. Of course one could then still maintain an additional MIT-licensed fork, but if the rest of the community is happy with GPL and all the development just happens there, your MIT fork will "starve"...
While I'm able to understand your argument, IMHO the MIT license is not displaying that well. Community is plural, and fork with MIT could be like Windows: Closed source. End of the (fork) line.
Given the project itself is still strong, this might not be a problem, but then I see no reason why it has chosen it in the first place if not for that specific option.
They don't though, if any developer had the means to take it to court it is incredibly likely that Unity would lose.
While TOS are rarely worth the toilet paper they could be printed on, I'm curious about whether arguments could be made about whether existing subscribers from 2019 could now sue for breach of contract and costs associated with (re)development.
That's the big issue. This is going to hurt smaller developers more because they can't afford to fight it.
The big question is: to what extent to Unity games need to be able to talk to Unity's servers? If they're looking at number of installs (and apparently that includes pirated copies even?), serve ads, and probably provide other services, that sounds like the games need a connection to the server. In which case they may be able to disable your game if you don't pay. And then even if you could sue them, the real damage is already done.
