Yes, I (sometimes) connect to a gmail account using outlook... mainly to manage the mail. I usually just check email using the gmail website. I have used the gmail download feature that you mentioned, but it stores the mail in a XML format, that I don't have much use for.

Gmail is unique in that the folders aren't really folders, they are "Labels", sort of like tags. You can have multiple labels on an email, and it doesn't make multiple copies of the email, just multiple tags on the same email. Deleting a label just removes that particular tag, it doesn't delete the email.

Updates and Promotions are labels that Gmail automatically puts on incoming email, you can disable that, I think.

Because of the way that Gmail displays labels as folders in an email client (as opposed to the gmail website), you get weird results when you try to delete mail.

Yes, I have done the same with Outlook. Once the mail is downloaded, you can copy them to a PST (Outlook Data File) and archive it off. OR, you can connect to an new email account using IMAP, and upload them to the new email account.

In my experience with name brand computers (Dell, HP, etc), the License key is store (somewhere) in non-volatile storage, and you don't even need to enter it.

Nope, only the geosynchronous satellites are traveling in the same direction, right over the equator. The rest are traveling in all different directions (changing latitudes, even up over the poles). The older ones, with decaying orbits, don't even maintain the same altitude. Plus, collisions spread the directions out even more.

I think we are trying to address a different use case. I have plenty of ways to share data with myself or my wife. We use AirDrop or WhatsApp to share with more "temporal" relationships.

With Airdrop, if you what to share (quickly and easily) with a person that you just met or don't really know, they just turn their Airdrop to "Everyone" (with the latest iPhone OS versions, that will only stay on for 15 min or so). Their name then shows up on your iPhone, you select the picture and their name, click send, and they accept it. But, AirDrop only works for iPhone (Apple's attitude is: tell your friend to buy iPhones). AirDrop sets up a temporary phone-to-phone connection, so it doesn't require internet (WiFi or data plan), but the phones have to remain within BlueTooth range (15-30ft).

WhatsApp is similar; it supports QR codes (poor man's NFC): One phone displays a QR code, the other phone points their camera at it, hits accept, and it establishes a connection between the two people (or a group) that can be used for chat and picture sharing, etc. It requires internet, but the phones don't have to remain close together.
WhatsApp works for both iPhone and Android (and PC, but you have to start on the phone). Everyone has to install WhatsApp, but you don't have to agree to all use the same social media or cloud service.

We use both of these (My wife has a iPhone, I have an Android phone) for picture sharing with a tour group, etc.

AirDrop can be used for "on the fly" connections (never see the person again), but again: only for iPhones.

OK, how do you do it?

Can you send pictures from Android to iPhone (and Visa-Versa) using NFC?

If so, I would like to know more about it. But even if it could, It doesn't help my use case: A bus load of people sharing pictures... Not going to want to run up and down the aisle tapping phone.

Gee, kind of like iPhone AirDrop...

Unfortunately, AirDrop won't share with Android, and this Nearby share doesn't appear to share with iPhones, so it is still WhatsApp for interoperability. WhatApp requires a data connection to complete the transfer (not sure about the Nearby Share), but both devices don't have to have data at the same time.

Also, in WhatsApp, under "Storage and Data", make sure you change "Media Upload Quality" to "Best Quality" or it will compress and pixelate the Photos.

Some industries still need them:

https://www.businessinsider.com/last-floppy-disk-seller-airlines-still-order-storage-2022-9

"Take the airline industry for example. Probably half of the air fleet in the world today is more than 20 years old and still uses floppy disks in some of the avionics. That's a huge consumer."

He also said that the medical sector still uses floppy disks.

And they are getting "hard to find" because no one manufactures them anymore... despite the fact they we all have a few of them laying around somewhere.

They are peer reviewed, but the peer reviewers are volunteers, with no incentive to be critical. It is usually by a co-worker, or someone that doesn't have time or ability to take a critical look at it. 50-100 years ago, the standard was to independently reproduce the results, not just say "looks good to me".

A lot of time and money is wasted; many trials move to Phase 2, when they never should have passed Phase 1.

In the book "Science Fictions", Stuart Ritchie talks about "Meta-Science" (the Scientific study of the current state of Scientific methods), and reaches the conclusion that just over half of the conclusions currently being reported in Scientific Journals are incorrect. He gives lots of examples, and talks about what could be done to improve the situation to give people more confidence in the Science Community.

Briefly, there are a lot of reasons for that: "Publish or Perish" pressure on the academic community combined with Scientific Journals (being a type of media) wanting sensational results; somewhere over the last 50-100 years, the Scientific standard switched from replicating results to just peer review by volunteers (hey, buddy, I will peer review yours, if you peer review mine... no pressure to be critical there); and some out and out fraud (or at least studies being paid for by the industries that benefit from a certain result). Put it all together, and just over half of the conclusions are wrong. And, most Scientific Journals will no longer print retractions, so the wrong results stay out there.

He admits that his own scientific study could fall in that half, but there has already been one alternate study that came to roughly the same conclusion.

I agree. Your viewfinder probably isn't on for hours at a time like a TV or computer is.

FYI, even "tradition" LEDs get dimmer the longer they are powered on, but it is much slower. Something in the order of 10% after 1000-5000 hours (and it depends on how bright the LEDs are being operated, because they are pulse width modulated).

I don't remember what OLEDs were initially, and don't know what they are claiming that they have improved it to now.

OLEDs do get dimmer the longer they are on. They have improved it quite a bit since they first came out, but it is still an issue. It is similar to CRTs (and Plasma, IIRC) having an image burned on the the screen if they were left on one image too long. Most computer and TV systems these days use "screen saver" methodologies to prevent one image from being in the same place for too long. This should extend the usable life of the OLED systems.