Do you honestly believe that the content cartels have not thought of that? All one would require to disable this is to embed an invisible (to the naked eye) watermark in the video stream which can be detected by the video camera which causes your camera to record nothing.

And don't think this is impossible. Have you ever tried to photocopy certain government documents on newer photocopiers? They simply will not allow you do so.

Actually, that is their search engine. What the GP was talking about was Yahoo's directory, and can be found at http://dir.yahoo.com/.

The sad part is that is that the directory page is now mostly "The Spark Blog" and advertising links, with the "real" directory occupying a tiny column on the left side.

I can remember a time when that directory was actually one of the few *useful* sites on the web. Now get off my lawn.

You are waging a losing battle my friend. Just as the distinction between the terms "hacker" and "cracker" has been lost upon wider usage, "virus" has now come to mean any type of malware.

Great, so if I want decent performance out of one of the most popular internet video services, I am tied to Windows. Yuck.

I think even Microsoft has seen the writing on the wall for Flash. However, if you no longer need Flash to view videos on the web that's just one more reason why you don't need Windows. Luckily for us, Microsoft wants all of us to replace the horrible Flash with the new and improved Microsoft Silverlight. :p

Thanks, but no thanks. I'm one of the ones hoping for HTML5 video to take off.

It's true that Microsoft gave Apple an infusion of cash and guaranteed software support for the Mac platform just when it needed it most, but Microsoft was not doing it to be benevolent. It was just beginning to defend itself from the accusations of being a monopoly and needed a "harmless" alternative to the Windows ecosystem they could point to. At the time, Microsoft needed Apple to survive.

Microsoft never thought in a million years thought Apple could ever be a serious competitor to their core business. After all, Microsoft's main business was selling software to computer manufacturers, while Apple sold consumer computer systems directly to a limited subset of consumers. To Microsoft, Apple's competitors seemed to be the likes of IBM, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, HP, Packard Bell, etc., all of which purchased their software from Microsoft. With an over 90% market share, Microsoft didn't seem to have anything to worry about from the "beleaguered" Apple.

Fast forward about a decade and a half. The internet has exploded and become the primary way people get and store information. For the first time in computer history, you are less tied to a specific application written by a specific company to access information. As a result, Apple's computer market share is over 10% for the first time since 1994. More and more people are even using non-PC devices to access information. In the exploding smart phone market, Microsoft is now in third place behind Research In Motion and Apple. And with Google now throwing its hat into the smart phone market ring there is even more competition in that sector.

Microsoft is competing with Apple the mobile music device market, and losing. Microsoft is competing with Nintendo and Sony in the home video game market, and losing. Microsoft is competing with RIM and Apple in the smart phone operating system market and losing. Microsoft is losing on a lot of fronts.

Sure, Microsoft is winning is in PC operating systems and PC business software. But as more and more people realize that they don't need a PC with Microsoft software to access and process their information, that market will become less and less important and will lose "share" to seemingly unrelated market areas.

Make no mistake, Apple and Microsoft and Google and Sony and a litany of other technology companies are direct competitors in the, as yet, undefined "electronic information access" market.

As much as the iPhone is locked down, Apple still seems to remember that it is damned near impossible to make a successful computer systems or information access devices without successful third party support. And it gets real complicated when your third parties are also your competitors. Which competitor should Apple help gain a foothold in a market they are nearly dominating? Microsoft? Google? Of course, the simple answer is neither, but that just would hurt Apple in the long run.

Now that we are emerging from the dark ages of the Microsoft monopoly of computer tech, we are headed into very interesting times indeed.