The limiting factor on a phone is what you can wrap your hand around. This thing looks so wide it couldn't be operated in a single hand. I notice that a lot of BB users are two-handers though, perhaps because of the keyboard, so maybe it isn't a problem in their target market.

Square screens aren't a Blackberry issue - they've had square screens ever since they used that godawful pager protocol.

The thing is, it was fine to use a blackberry two handed because they strongly considered the single-handed use case and developed around that.

The UI, etc, are designed to be used single handedly - back when it was a 160x160 screen, they had the scroll wheel that let you go up down and select. And things modernized, they used the central click-ball as a virtual 5-way controller (up/down/left/right/center) and as a left/right up/down scroller. That became an IR sensor (not unlike an optical mouse sensor) later on.

And that makes a HUGE difference in usability - it didn't matter you needed two hands to type - you could navigate and figure out if something needed an immediate response or could be deferred on the go.

And that's what big screen Android phones lack - they don't take into account the single-handed use-case. They assume your hand can reach all four corners of the screen at all times, which generally requires two hands.

Well, if single hand use is important, then you either have to use a smaller screen (impossible on Android as small screen phones tend to be crappier as no one seems to innovate at making flagship phones with decent high-res screens 4.5" or smaller), or use Blackberries or iOS.

Perhaps Google needs to rethink how we interact with our phones and impose a new paradigm for large-screen phones where all controls need to be reachable on the left or right (depending on handedness).

Because that's one way Blackberry excelled - it was a two handed phone that let you use it as a viewer singlehandedly.

But how many people actually reset phone and reset data? I'd imagine a lot of people simply manually delete their photos and unhook their Internet accounts from the phone. Hardly a wipe.

But it's so easy to do on iOS. You can do it on the phone - Settings->General->Reset

And it wipes the phone - the flash storage is encrypted. Resetting it wipes the key and generates a new one. It then reboots and reformats the user storage using the new key and mounts it. The old data is irrecoverable because the key is lost, and the new data is written using a new key.

Even prior to encrypted storage, iOS3 created the option to do it where it erases and wipes the storage - anything 3GS and newer wipes keys (so wiping takes a couple of minutes), older ones took a couple of hours.

No reason Android can't do the same - either by sending TRIM commands to the entire user storage area and then forcing a write-all-with-zeroes to be doubly sure.

Choice is good. You get to have your itty bitty little phone with it's itty bitty screen and I get to have my 5" phone with a beautiful screen I can actually see

Only if there was a choice.

I mean, the only GOOD android phones have huge screens, lots of RAM and powerful CPUs. The small screen android phones have shitty screens, shitty RAM, shitty CPUs, or all three.

And Apple is following this lead. It means I want a smaller screened phone I can use single-handedly, but I have to compromise something.

Be it iPhone, Android, or whatever, if you want something smaller, you give up a lot.

That's not a lot of choice there. Either I go your route and get a nice phone with nice everything, or I get a shitty phone with a shitty things. That's not choice.

It can be argued that an OS really isn't much more than a kernel and init with everything else as userspace.

init isn't all that special to begin with, either. It just happens that it's something the kernel looks for when spawning the first userspace process.

Other than that, it's just a regular program. Linux has a fallback to /bin/sh if it can't start init for some reason, but you can have the kernel launch any other binary as the first process.

Of course, if you're complaining about systemd, check out Android's init sometime. That's something that requires an incantation...

I wish the online maps "Google" would put those features in and allow you to push the trip to your mobile device.

It's such an obvious ad-selling feature, I'm surprised they don't. I mean, when you're planning your trip, it can suggest stop points based on ad sales. Perhaps there's a business having a lunch special, well, I'm sure Google will make sure to plan you a stop point right there.

Ditto gas stations and other things along the trip.

Even better, it can display a nice full screen ad on your phone when you push the route to your phone, thus monetizing what is a money loser right now for Google. I mean, once you reach the stop point, boom the ad can play using the navigation system built in.

It's so brilliant you wonder why Google doesn't do it. It sells ads.

I knew of Streets and Trips from way back when - it was one of the earliest available GPS packages that almost featured turn-by-turn.

Way back when GPS was horrendously expensive.

I didn't even know they still sold it - I suppose its advantage was it was offline and had everything or so in one box.

Guess that's why they killed it - people remember it, but didn't realize it was still around - you certainly don't see it advertised anywhere.

As the video points out, this is not limited to Google Glass, any video capturing device will work. But beyond that, this is really kind of obvious. Yeah, video recording someone entering their password on a touch device will give you a fairly accurate idea of what that password is. Record, playback at 1/4 speed, password. I would bet that security camera footage might even be better to work with due to the angle. The custom software I suppose is a nice achievement, but I would guess it's not all that necessary.

Except with Glass it's easier to do it by casually looking in the direction of the person. I'm fairly certain if someone has their smartphone or camcorder pointed in your direction steadily it's a little more obvious than someone just looking past you who happens to be wearing Glass.

I'm not sure that's true. These big publishers hire companies such as RightsCorp to "monitor and search for unauthorized usage" of their "intellectual property".

If their rights protection contractor(s) found a Superman statue: there's no way these greedy b****rds could resist that potential revenue stream.

True, but the media LOVES a sob story. Especially a David-and-Goliath one where it's a grieving family and a statue of their son vs. Big Bad Media corp.

Doesn't matter who's in the right, or wrong, Big Bad Media Corp will be vilified in every news, blog, and article from then on. Politicians will make or break their careers on it (not to mention there's going to be an election for Toronto mayor later this year - you can bet all the mayoral candidates will be all over themselves trying to be first to capitalize on it).

In other words, there's no way for DC (or Time Warner, owners) to win.

Even if it goes to court, too. They may win legally, but lose in the court of public opinion.

Judging from the drawings, and the statements that Airbus has made bragging about how they can now put the cockpit anywhere in the plane (because of the lack of need for front-viewing), I'm going to guess that's not in the plans.

The cockpit can be anywhere... including on the ground.

That is not how the trial lawyers work. They are not defacto regulators in most cases. The are far more often just parasites and are very much like the patent trolls, just using the legal system to extort money. They will sue doctors who did receive correct data from a device and who made a medically well informed decision. They will use the fact that the device is not FDA certified to sow FUD and confuse and mislead a jury who is clueless about medicine and devices. Every once in a while they will find a gullible jury and get a payday, and insurance companies/doctors will just give them money to go away even when their suits are baseless.

Why do you assume a doctor will be using this data?

From what I can tell, patients will be using this to avoid going to the doctor. The doctor is inconvenient, can cost money, takes a lot of time (hours waiting in the waiting room), etc., so an app that says "you're fine!" means I don't have to take a day off work, don't have to spend it waiting with 16 others coughing up lungs and germs and disease, pay whatever co-pay or deductible and make an insurance claim.

In fact, the primary use of health sensors so far is quantifying one's health - how many calories have I burned so far today, how far have I run/walked/biked/hiked/etc so far, what my heart rate is, etc.

The FDA came down hard on people that claimed "a special wavelength of light cures acne" and the apps therein. But why does that app exist? I mean, there are plenty of acne medications on the shelf, OTC and prescription. The app was easier, cheaper, and avoided a doctor's visit. And that's what's really going to happen.

A doctor might be alerted by oddities in a patient's readings, but they aren't going to rely on it anymore than "can you come in and we need to run a full diagnostic on you". The sensors may detect say, heart arrhythmia or potential diabetes, but it would be very stupid for the doctor to rely on those alerts and not perform tests themselves to verify the condition.

It certainly won't replace a doctor's periodic tests - it may help fill in the gaps between visits, what doctor and hospital will want to rely on tests and diagnoses by apps? Especially when you can do the tests again "to be sure" and run up the insurance bill?

Well, the problem is that Amazon doesn't have all the experience Apple has.

Why do you think there is a 15 minute timeout now? (iOS4)

Why do you think the 15 minute timeout is split between IAP and regular app store purchases (iOS5)?

Why do you think apps now have clearer markings on IAPs (iOS7)?

Apple ran into this, then implemented the safeguards - the 15 minute timeout because kids were clicking "buy now" without realizing it and running up thousand-dollar bills.

The split because mommy/daddy would get the app, and within 15 minutes the first IAP would pop up and the kid would run up charges.

The clearer text because the FTC, after seeing Apple settle the class action, decided Apple didn't do enough and fined Apple for what the FTC felt was more "sufficient" damages. (Apple did not contest this because of the legal costs).

Sorry, but for me to feel Amazon any sympathy, I feel they all should have the same restrictions.

As for banning IAPs? Well, the rise of IAPs and all that helped produce alternative business models for games, and created innovation (as well as exploitation, such is the world).

Stuff like free-to-play, ad-supported, etc., helps combat piracy (rampant in the Android and PC works) and revitalize those markets. The PC world was headed to an online-only world where the online component was the DRM part, and now we have it where it doesn't matter if you pirate anymore (because pirates can't do IAPs and can be put in a disadvantage).

Why can I sidestep most of the regulations for milk if I have 3 or fewer cows? New designs on airplanes are pretty much non-existent because it would cost millions to send them through safety testing.

Because 3 cows or fewer mean the milk is most likely for yourself - it's uneconomical to really milk 3 cows and expect to meet your demand and have leftovers to sell to someone else. The "raw milk" crowd would love you to believe that raw milk is better, but given how some producers of raw milk react, the public definitely needs a guardian. (E. coli was found in some cheese produced from unpasteurized milk by a farm specializing in it. Despite the alert, the farm did NOT issue a recall notice, stating they do not have the resources to handle a product recall, and they would basically prefer risking a lawsuit. I pity the family that gets sick, bankrupts the farm and gets a pittance because the owners walked away).

You can build your own airplanes, and in fact, a LOT of innovation is happening. Building your own aircraft is perfectly acceptable, and with minimal oversight (the Experimental Aircraft Association has plenty of documents on how to build your own aircraft, and encourages the activity). The FAA is fairly light on requirements, other than standardized placarding to ensure any passengers you carry are notified that the aircraft has not been tested to regulatory specifications.

Tons of innovations happen because of the light regulatory touch. Avionics are far more advanced for experimental aircraft, and experimental versions of radios and other equipment are far cheaper than the certified counterpart. The use of composites in aircraft generally started from experimental aircraft as well.

You can build your own aircraft just fine, the only license required is the pilot's license of the guy who's going to test-fly it. Many of the more popular aircraft are experimental class aircraft.

No. Just no. My god what a silly-ass comment. Most people wore watches well past 2000. The thing of ditching your watch and using your cell phone instead really only took off with the era of smart phones. So unless you're claiming that the time of segregation ended in the 21st century, instead of the 1960s & 1970s...

And ironically, we're heading back to watches because the smartphones are so damn big they're useless now at consulting often, so instead the phone must live in some deep recess because it's not so convenient to hold or carry anymore.

Or so big that every beep/buzz/text that comes in is too troublesome to check, and nomophobia (the fear of missing out, or the fear of not having your phone) means one must compulsively check it.

I honestly doubt physicians will base medical decisions on data from non-FDA approved devices. That is an enormous opening for the trial lawyers and their malpractice lawsuits.

And that is what would regulate the market in the meantime.

The FDA doesn't want to regulate because not only is it going to be hard, but it's going to stifle what is a tremendous source of innovation that's happening.

But even better is that the industry will either self-regulate, or will call on rules after a few court cases come out. I mean, you're going to start small, like those "this app produces lightwaves that will cure acne" apps that were blocked a while ago. Small wins, but even then you'll get some traction from those who wanted to go acne-free to prom or something.

Sensors are probably regulated under some other set of rules - after all, you can buy glucosometers, blood pressure monitors, scales, and a pile of other medical devices at your local Wal-Mart. Probably under a bunch of rules stating "This product only works in conjunction with regular visits to your physician" or something.

But apps that take that data and do stuff will be an interesting field. Like those "cancer detecting" apps where you snap a mole and it tells you if it's melanoma or something. Even without regulation those things will probably fall under a court case from someone who dies from it and sues the app maker.

As far as I can tell, the FDA should regulate against obvious snake oil, but some of the other stuff, it's probably a wait-and-see approach.

Hell, Apple consulted with the FDA too - they're wondering how far they're going to allow it as well, so between Apple and Google (both of whom have their own health related ecosystems now), I think that's where the main body of regulations may come in. After all, a lawyer will go after the app developer and Apple/Google for the latter have the money.

"Sapphire display glass." A Red Herring. The Corning "Gorilla Glass" product currently available is incredibly scratch resistant and costs 1/10th the price.

Guess what the glass on an iPhone is? Yes, Gorilla Glass!

Ever since the very first iPhone - Apple actually was the company that got Corning to resurrect it (Corning actually shelved the idea because it wasn't commercially viable), and the glass has been Gorilla Glass ever since then.