Well it was, but then I measured my speed, and now my position is a little uncertain...

I would have thought that extracts of books on Google would be the best possible advertising that you could have for a book - you do a search, and find a useful extract from a book, naturally you want to know more, but google won't give you any more, so you follow the handy advertising link at the side and buy it off Amazon - everyone wins.

I cannot believe that google extracts are in any way damaging book sales, and therefore causing harm to the authors or publishers.

So what are they complaining about?

That person had a manifestly unfair trial, someone else actually admitted to the crime in question (BBC link) and thus the pardon was not hypocrisy by any stretch, just proof that a fair trial abroad is hard to get (true of foreigners in the UK as much as Brits abroad).

First rule of MSE. You DO NOT talk about MSE. Second rule of MSE...

Sorry, I meant on fewer phone types, not fewer actual units. And in the market for phones as a whole OSX is still tiny. My point was to correct your statement about netbooks and redirect it to phones, and that still stands, albeit with your qualifications about the success of Android on phones. I realise that this is /., but I am sorry you felt it necessary to be sarcastic rather than constructive - I was trying to add to the debate, but I clearly failed.

In its target market of smart phones it has several major releases, and they appear to be making the news. One might say that OSX mobile is on fewer phones than Android, and has a tiny market share, both of which are true, but in its target market it is still making a splash. Anyway the point was that the OP was probably not talking about netbooks, but phones, which still stands.

I suspect GP means Android on phones, which is being offered to phone companies and is doing ok, after a slow start.

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that this referred to the problem Nvidia had with their mobile chips that led to recalls and product failures. It was fairly well documented. A quick google suggests: this is what he is referring to.

Spelt is fine in British English Spelt (2) (www.merriam-webster.com)

This is basically the entire teaching method of Oxford University science and maths undergraduate degrees, and even to some extent the arts courses. You have a week for 6-8 questions, have to go away find out what on earth they are talking about, have your "gotcha" moment, and then report back at the end of the week in a 2 student to one teacher tutorial. You are not even expected to be able to do it all - you are expected to do what you can and learn from the tutorial the tricks and tweaks from what you could not.

If I had mod points I would be modding you two up simply for the most constructive conversation I have seen on slashdot for ages. A post followed by a correction (that could be taken as the start of a war of words) and instead, an admission of error in what you had typed, a request for reference which was provided and a thank you! Thanks for improving my view of online discussions

He does not state that there is a causal relationship, he links to a study showing that there is a correlation and says that in light of this he doubts that it can be shown that every download is lost revenue. The onus of proof is surely on the person who is making the statement, not the one doubting its veracity, and showing data at best inconsistent with the hypothesis that each download is lost revenue.