Remember the browser-version wars? I think that IE jumped from 2.1 to 4 in a matter of weeks. Eventually, Google and Firefox took it to the logical extreme, changing major revision numbers ever 12 minutes. I guess it's still going on...

I'm mad as hell that they didn't release version 4!!!1!

Wait. What day is it? Apple's release isn't for 8 days. Sorry... wrong product.

....this is how it ends.

Should I apologize to my kid before or after he's old enough to understand that humanity has no future?

"Dude, I'm going down to Mickey D's to pick up a burger. Want me to pick one up for you? Yeah, you can pay me later."

People buy McD's from third parties all the time. "Analogy fail" fail.

Yes, but regardless of what you say to your wife, you're stopping at a particular restaurant that's run by a particular franchisee. I wouldn't be surprised if the bigger corporation were forced into setting some policies following this lawsuit, but for the time being, it is indeed that franchisee who is being sued. Think of it this way: if the owner of your local Nissan dealership was up on murder charges, would you say, "Nissan is being accused of murder!!"?

Sorry, just had to get a car analogy in there.

I'd settle for "open".

...and the story has less than 200 comments hours later.

Meanwhile, any normal story about Apple doing some perceived, intangibly wrong thing usually gets 500 or more.

I'm somewhat of the mindset that deep understanding helps developers apply the tools more intelligently. Without understanding the underlying math, some of the work would be trial and error, and while that might lead to a working system, it might have very difficult to debug problems based on poor logic. To use a metaphor, you can certainly build a bridge, given the right tools and equipment, but without math, it might fail suddenly and catastrophically at an unpredictable moment. I'm thinking of that famous wind-wave bridge collapse you've probably seen on YouTube.

Some may call that mindset pedantic, but I think deep understanding separates the experts and artisans from the low end technicians. Some of that deep understanding can be gotten on the job, but there is something to be said for a formal mathematics training if you're going to be using advanced mathematics tools.

It's entirely possible that the only way to "sort it out" with today's technology would be to make something too heavy or clumsy to wear for any length of time. All design is about compromise; in six months or a year, battery technology will be better, but for the mean time, perhaps Google is trying to optimize the wearability and useability of the thing, and battery life is something they're simply not concerned about. Don't like it? Don't buy it; it's not for you yet.

Maybe if people really do want to wear it for all their waking hours, Google will offer a battery pack. I'm sure someone will want to have an electrical cord going behind their ear into their inside jacket pocket.

I was thinking of some sort of a piston attachment which would generate power every time you took a bouncing step. You could even have four or five of them on your head to ensure that you get optimal power throughput regardless of your angle of attack. Now that would be awesome.

I disagree. Early adopters willing to spend their hard-earned money on this product should be smart enough to know that they're buying a bleeding-edge product.

Seriously. I'm not a huge fan of a cyborg future, but proclaiming the death of a future technology based on today's battery capacities is just silly. Once upon a time, most people only had 2400 baud access to the Internet; imagine if people had just looked at that and written off the possibility of high-bandwidth applications because they weren't feasible at the time. Just to name a couple, the Skypes and the Netflixes of the world exist because someone looked ahead and saw a time when bandwidth would be plentiful, and built technologies to allow its use.

If I were a Glass engineer, I would build everything assuming that one day there would be a way to hold a full day's charge at constant use within the frame. To assume otherwise is to artificially limit what will be possible when society is ready for mass adoption of this sort of technology.

Simply put, Amazon are the Wal-Mart of the Internet. Through economies of scale--as well as the fact that the management is heavily rewarded in the stock market for not making any profit--they are putting extreme pressure on small local businesses (as well as some other major players like Target, but I'm not shedding a tear for them), all the while subjecting their employees to slave-labor conditions.

They are like a weed, growing quickly and killing everything around them. I've got nothing against corporations that succeed, but I'd rather see Apple and Samsung battle it out and have one of them come on top (while we're all really rooting for HTC to make a scrappy come-back) than to watch Amazon killing the local bookstore, toy store, and other shops who simply can't compete. The long term effects of this sort of disruption are only now beginning to be felt, but it's going to get worse.

So in short, I despise Amazon because they are a massive juggernaut, destroying small economies and abusing their employees, and they do it by appealing to people's preference for short term benefits over long term investment. Me, I'd rather pay a couple of extra dollars and buy my kid's birthday present in a local shop from someone who will then spend the money locally than save a couple of bucks and basically water the weeds. What I fear is that there will one day come a time where the only place to buy a significant number of consumer items will be via Amazon.

I know that some degree of the same arguments could apply to a number of other large corporations, but for me, Amazon is one of the companies that is far enough over the line that, where possible, I try to avoid them completely.

This is what I was going to suggest. Doesn't Windows have the same thing? And Ubuntu? I can't imagine that it'd be patentable to build a gelded guest account...

Yeah. I understand Apple's policy, but the only people who really lose are the consumers. I remember after this went into effect, the first time I went into my Amazon Kindle iOS app and tried to buy there. No button, no link, no freaking hint of how to buy a book. How do you do it? You buy on the web, then tell Amazon to synch to your device which you've registered.

Works for Apple, I guess. I ended up just going to iBooks and buying there. I kind of despise Amazon anyway, but it would have been nice to have the choice while maintaining a similar end-user experience.