First, I disagree with the RIAA's conclusion. However I also disagree with your analogy. It is illegal for me to steal from you, yet the fact that it is illegal doesn't mean you should leave your door unlocked. This proposal is more akin to adding extra locked doors to the building your apartment is in to prevent unauthorized or questionable people from getting in. Again I want to point out that I disagree with the RIAA's conclusion, but there is SOME logic involved, only a little.

Sure, if you take away the rounded corners, the black with aluminum bezel, the array of icons with four at the bottom on a dock, the fact that multiple icons on the Samsung phone use the same or incredibly similar coloring and iconography. Its about more than just the physical shape of the phone (althought thats part of it) and trade dress lawsuits are completely merited. The availability of devcies like the Droid or even the Nexus One that bear little to no physical and interface resemblence to the iPhone demonstrate it is not hard not to copy, Samsung absolutely copied the iPhone look and feel.

"WE CAN'T play online together because the matchmaking server was killed (because of Halo3 & Reach no doubt -- bet they'll eventually get killed to force migration to other new games too). " No, they will eventually get killed because resources are not infinite and the cost of maintaining and supporting those servers to allow for continued game play is no longer worth the effort to the company. Considering how long Halo 2 multiplayer was supported, more than 6 years well into the release of the next game in the franchise, I'd say you got your money's worth out of it. Its great when private servers are set up, but the idea that a company is screwing you over because they don't support online play indefinitely is absurd. Unless they advertised the multi-player feature would be available for a given amount of years and came up short, you knew what you were getting into.

Why should an end user be expected to be incredibly knowledge about the dangers (yes dangers) of the free Google marketplace in order to buy an Android powered phone? Clearly the marketing is not pushing out a message of "for experts only, be ware!" but "hey this is a great consumer phone for everyone!". The reality is that in order to safely and effectively use Android the end user should be at least somewhat familiar with the territory, on that we agree, However Google is not positioning the device that way, and really thats not exactly a fair thing to expect of someone who is buying a consumer level device.

Actually it has been rising steadily this past decade. So yeah, you are completely wrong. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

So don't read them and Slashdot will stop posting them. If people care alot about Apple then there will be more Apple stories. Plus Apple is making newsworthy announcements and decisions. The continued growth of its product bases, the success of its various platforms, continued high user satisfaction, stellar financial performance, industry leading products are all indications of a newsworthy company. Before Steve Jobs was hired back they were on the verge of collapse, now the company is worth more than MIcrosoft and Intel COMBINED. Clearly they are doing something, no lots of things right. That doesn't mean you have to go out and buy their products if you don't like them, you still have plenty of choices, but it would be stupid for slashdot to ignore such an influential and newsworthy company because some whiners don't like Apple for whatever childish reason. Apple is a major tech company with impact in the marketplace, if you visit a tech site thats not specifically devote to a different platform you are going to hear a lot about them, if you don't like that I suggest you stop following tech and pick up a new hobby. I hear knitting can be quite relaxing.

Which isn't illegal. Microsoft, Nintendo AND Sony all have the same thing with their consoles and have had it for decades now. It's called an integrated solution. As long as its not the only one, there's no problem. If you don't like Apple's system you get an Android phone, or a WP7 phone, or a Blackberry.

Yeah, he's so greedy what with that $30 charge for Lion, and that $0 charge for iCloud. iPad is as cheap or cheaper than its competitors and iPhone is compeitively priced too, cheaper than many Android phones. Of course Apple is going to try and make money, but where does the villain part come from? Because of the AppStore on iOS? Then I guess Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are evil (not to mention Sega once upon a time) with their consoles. I guess Toyota is evil for not giving you the option to put a Ford engine in your car? Damn, making the product the way you like and letting the consumer choose if they want it or not is EVIL. If you don't like Apple's approach thats fine, but calling it evil? You come across as nothing but a biased fanboy with talk of evil.

Microsoft didn't do anything here, they don't control Skype yet. But since when did accurate information get in the way of a good bias.

I don't have to hack my phone to get Netflix to work, why is my device somehow the "crippled" one. Lots of geeks like Android and thats fine, they like to tinker, but most people just want a device that works. You think customers are going to be happy when they buy their brand new Android phone and find out that half the apps they want to use don't work on it unless they do some arcane hacks to it? I don't. "Open' doesn't matter to most people and problems like this are why. They want a device that works. It's fine to prefer an Android device as long as you're willing to accept the tradeoffs but pretending they don't exist is just pig headed.

I don't care if Google wants to pursue the open and fragmented path or a more closed and cohesive one, but acting more closed while claiming to be open is B.S. yet Android/Google fans let them get away with it while railing against other companies that are atleast upfront about what there devices can and can't do.

For the record I do enjoy my device, alot, its one of the best things I've ever owned, and it lets me do what I want to without getting in the way or requiring extra effort. I think thats a good thing. So do most people.

Once again the fragmentation of Android rears its ugly head. For the commenters above who talk about rooting their device, here's a hint: the vast majority of the population don't know how to do that, and more importantly SHOULDN'T have to.

So will Google continue to stick to its "open" (although not really cause the actually control the carriers and let the carriers control the users) mantra even though it leads to problems like this? Or will they admit that "open" has its disadvantages, and for a consumer product in particular it may not always be the best approach and they need to reign things in a bit?

Actually they seem to be picking a third option, going for tighter control of Android while simultaneously (and hypocritically) still trumpeting about how great Android is because its "open".

Enjoy your headaches Android users, the rest of us are going to be busy watching Netflix movies.

There was an open source smartphone that dominated the market before Apple's iPhone? There was an open source search engine that dominated the web before Google? There was an open source digital music format that was widely used before Mp3? No, just no. Open source has played a part, but it hasn't been the driving force.

How exactly does the iPhone pale in comparison to open source alternatives? Aside from supporting Flash and letting you side load apps, what fundementally superior ability does Android have compared to iPhone? They are comparable platforms, with different strengths and weaknesses but not all that different. However if you go back and look at what Android looked like BEFORE Apple introduced the iPhone, its clear that Apple was the one pushing the boundaries in the phone world. No they didn't invent all the various pieces, but they put them together in a way that hadn't been done before and COMPLETELY altered the mobile landscape. Anyone who disregards the impact Apple had on the smartphone world, whether or not you prefer their product or Google's, is delusional.

Yup, Open Source is the reason things changed.
Like how Linux became such a strong force in the desktop OS market. Um, wait, let me try that again.
Like how Google's open source search engine revolutionized the way we find things on the web. Nope, that one didn't happen either.
Like how Apple's open source iPhone reinvented mobile phones. Hmm, I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Like how Adope's open source Flash platform brought video and interactive content to the internet. Damn, I know I'll get one.
Like how open source Mp3 technology revolutionized digital music. Fine, I give up.

Look there have obviously been open source projects over the last decade that have had an impact. Linux on the server side (especially coupled with Apache, MySQL, and PHP) for example. But commerical server offerings are still a major part of that landscape. And Android has had strong success in mobile, but before the iPhone changed the landscape it was just a Blackberry look alike. Windows (and too a lesser extent OS X) are still what most people use for their daily computing needs, and frankly it wasn't the open source that led the way on new tablets. Open source has contributed, and its a good thing to have around. WebKit and Mozilla/Firefox on the browser side are the biggest factors in re-igniting the web and HTML 5 looks to do away with the decrepit old Flash hopefully sooner rather than later. But Open Source was NOT the driving force behind inovation the past decade, sorry but it just wasn't.

Yeah so? Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have both done the same, does that make them saints we shoudl always listen to on anything tech related? I have a feeling you might disagree with them on a few things.