That's a "port".
A "remaster" is traditionally more focused on a rerelease with improved graphic fidelity - details, resolution, possibly lower-effort improvements to models and geometry, but basically the same game, slightly modernised with better modern compatibility.
A "remake" would be a complete overhaul of the modelling, QoL improvements, or reimagining some systems potentially including game engine. Eg, the FF7 remake.
The thing is, as we learned with Netflix (and... everything lately), even if it starts off convenient and reasonable, that will last only long enough that they think they've cornered the market. So unless something changes to guarantee an ongoing reasonable proposition, i will never trust them again.
I feel like the type of person reading your comment on Lemmy isn't the type of person that stays on a platform after it pulls shit they don't agree with.
Close, but 2000s had some very intrusive and malware ridden advertisements. Popups everywhere, aggressive banners, malware and random browser toolbars being installed to your system. Complete wild west of unrestrained advertising. Online ad blocking didn't start with Ublock Origin, the first tipping point was in the 90s and 2000s, where famously clean and effective search engine Google swooped in to "save us" with their Chrome browser blocking popups by default, and their own concept of 'ethical ads', which were mostly unobtrusive and text-based (what happened there?). Which was nice for a while before Google exploited the popularity that bought them to turn into an inescapable ad monster.
I agree with everything you wrote, except as a designer I wanted to point out that the lack of scope limitation is not usually due to design, but rather product and marketing who drive new features, because their job is to increase new customers, and improving life for existing customers is a far second -- only so far as potential new customers may be impacted (reviews, comparisons with competitors, or churn). So long as they can mostly keep existing customers they will always fight against spending development time on improving their experience, when they could add a new point to the feature list for marketing.
The issue is the drive for infinite growth is counter to a human-usable quality-focused UX (with a focused scope and focused target audience).
I actually pay for Premium at the moment, but still would need to sit through baked in sponsored messages, and YouTube Shorts or other internal YouTube big banner service advertisements. So i still have uBlock (and sponsor block) anyway to remove that stuff. At which point... Why am i paying for Premium again? They made their site awful to use regardless of if you pay, unless you use adblocking and other extensions.
Would be better if it were optional. The little key in the status area is more than enough indication for me. A persistent notification is not a notification, it's a hack.
Maybe they should bring back some form-factor diversity that niche consumer segments could gravitate toward, instead of every manufacturer targeting only the largest (and blandest) portion of the pie and ignoring the rest of it. If it's not clear, I am holding out for some decent "mini-sized" Android option.
If they would have committed to the "small phone" thing and made it significantly smaller, it would have differentiated it from the competition and I (at least) would have bought it immediately. Instead it competed against S23, iPhone, Xiaomi, Pixel 7a with nothing to really set it apart, except for more questionable software support.
I'm sure the cost to the consumer will remain exactly the same, or somehow increase.
Maybe because it's using "slams" in the title.
I'm trialling it already as my main browser. I like it.