There was a system out about 6 or so years ago that would allow anyone to post a virtual "sticky" note on a web page and anyone else who had the program could read it. Same concept as what Google is trying.

All I can remember is the amount of spam and junk that was written up, mostly on webpages that people didn't like or who were rivals. A lot of companies got VERY upset about the system, and the company what created the software pulled it.

Bad idea. Put this one back in the box and try something else Google. Bad idea.

Hulu has probably the best advertising model for web video content ever devised. And now that Disney has agreed to place their content on Hulu, I think the fight for premium content may be over and done with. Sorry Google, you lose this one.

Try http://www.hulu.com/ and come back and let us know what you think of this revenue model over anything that Google has tried so far.

I have been a developer for over 30 years. My first application (we called them "programs" back then) was on the TRS-80 microcomputer sold by Radio Shack. In all this time I have seen a very disturbing trend towards closed operating systems and platforms. If the automotive industry operated the same way, you would be forced to only buy service and parts from "authorized" centers and distributors. This was long ago outlawed by state and federal regulations. If Microsoft were to only allow "approved" applications on their OS (computer or mobile), the federal government would be looking at a major case against their anti-competitive behaviour. Is there really a clause in the TOS for iPhone developers that they cannot say anything about a rejected application? Wow. I cannot understand how any company in todays market can get away with that. Well, lets see... Microsoft: open and free development for their platform, and will run on multiple hardware configurations. Google: open and free development for their platform, and will run on multiple hardware configurations. Apple: closed platform with final say of any application developed, and with a percentage of all applications being paid to Apple Corp. Can someone tell me again why I should by an iPhone? Can someone tell me why Apple has not been taken to court? Can someone explain to me the hype on why Apple is so much better than MS?

"A Mozilla Plugin to Help Overcome IE Rendering Flaw"

Should it not read: A Mozilla Plugin to add Enhanced IE Rendering?

Come on. This old fight between browsers is becoming stale. IE included many things now in the HTML specs that were not available in any other browser, such as CSS Style for shadow effects, etc. Why is it that when something new comes out for IE that it is automatically described as a "bug" fix or a workaround to a "flaw"?

Please people, I like FF and IE for different reasons. At least write unbiased stories and stop bashing each other's code efforts.