Great! Maybe we can get the crazy deniers to realise that the economy won't implode if we spend money on something other than oil subsidies.

$10 trillion worth of jobs? Why isn't everyone piling into that bandwagon?

Arctic Ice extent expanding this year is no surprise--most climate scientists predicted that would happen this year. Why? Because it was SO LOW last year, it basically had no direction to go but up.

If you roll snake eyes on your first roll, don't be surprised if your next roll is better.

Someone PLEASE mod this up. :D

The shell company that holds the patents itself produces no products, but Apple and Microsoft certainly doâ"it's just that they hold the patents jointly through this 'Rockstar' entity.

If this weird patent system is still what we have in place, this sort of joint ownership should be allowed. Leaving aside the relevance and desirability of the patent system today, I can't really see a problem with this. It's not really the same as a company that's never been associated with any endeavour related to the patents they own and who exist only to bilk money out of other people.

You don't need to create a contact in iOS 7. Just find the number after the call is done and ask for it to be blocked. It's near the bottom.

This person may not have the right to make money off of their work, but if they don't want to give it away, you have no right to TAKE it.

If they choose to offer it up for donations, that's their business. If they want to charge for it, that's also their business. But the moment you want to use their product, you should be bound by their rules.

When you go to buy a phone, do you only pay the cost of materials? Apparently, that's all you think it's worth, since you're arguing that taking the 'bits' doesn't deprive anyone of anything. Well, if you go and get a phone, maybe you should just pay for the cost of the sand that it took to make the silicon and that's it, hmm? That's all that's really in there, after all: silicon, some plastic, some aluminum and a nice layer of bits. That's, what, $50 worth of materials?

The value isn't the bits, the value is the WORK. This is the same reason why I pay for a haircut, despite the fact that I leave with LESS than when I came in.

The only one imposing anything on anyone else is you. The author of a work that has posted it in an app store in an attempt to make revenue is playing by all the rules in their game--you're the one circumventing them and it's bullshit. You have no moral justification for your actions. If you use the application that was made, pay for it. If you don't, don't. But don't try to tell me that you get to use it and not pay for it.

Well, in benchmarks, Safari's rendering is faster, even if the UI isn't. :/

I turned off all the animations and things. I think it's in the accessibility section.

It's not bad. This is much better than when the iPhone 3G was upgraded to iOS 5 (I think? Maybe 4?)

I find the apps are generally worse than the OS itself...which means it's good that Apple is demanding that they optimise for iOS 7.

Parallax isn't available on the 4, just the 4s and up.

I've had my iPhone 4 for 3 years. I'll keep it until next year, so that'll be 4 years. I'm sorry that the first gen iPad got the short end of the stick, but it's the exception, not the rule. Android devices work in the other direction--I don't know of any that have been supported with the latest updates for 4 years.

I think they've properly settled into their groove. If you get a new iPad Air, it'll have a 64-bit processor in it and be fairly future-proof. You'll almost certainly get 3 or 4 years out of that.

This is WAY less of an upgrade treadmill than I was on for PCs or even my Mac desktops a few years ago.

This is really interesting stuff.

Can you tell me the name of your band? I'd like to hear your music!

And I'll end up reiterating stuff already in my reply: because in the short term, you want to cater to the people that are spending money, and it's useful to know what devices they're using for that. Maybe you should be providing an app if you want to encourage people to buy more. Or perhaps if you know what kind of device is being used, you can modify your site to be friendlier to them. Or, even more simplistically, if you know I'm ordering on an iPad, maybe you want to offer some iPad accessories to me before I hit the checkout.

To date, all pieces of evidence point towards iOS users being more willing or more able to spend money on their mobile devices, whether you're talking about apps or online sales like this. In general, it's probably easier to get people willing to spend money to spend a little more rather than trying to get someone who doesn't want to make these purchases to spend at all.

More data means more money.

It's important because money is involved, basically.

If you're trying to advertise and encourage people to buy stuff, it makes sense to know who's going to buy things and how they're willing to buy them.

I like buying things on my iPad or iPhone from sites like Amazon. The experience is good and there's not much hassle. I spend almost no time at my home desktop machine now that I have an iPad, so if Amazon puts more money into the iPad user experience, it benefits people like me and apparently has a return on investment because I'm not alone in being willing to buy stuff from them from my mobile device.

It's also interesting. Why is this happening? Is it because there are people like me that are now 'post-PC'? Are those people more likely to be iOS users? Also, I bought my Mom an iPad mini last Christmas, and I bet a lot of other tech-ish people did the same or similar just to save themselves tech-support hassles. So people like my Mom that aren't super good with tech might now be doing shopping on their favourite web device, and those people may disproportionately fall in the iOS camp.

It'd be interesting to know. Are you really not curious at all? It doesn't have to be an iOS vs. Android thing, really. There's clearly a dichotomy, but there's no value judgement to be made unless you're really invested in being partisan about it.

In the end, this benefits Android users as well. This is more a matter of who to target first, but a properly constructed mobile site is good for everyone with a mobile device.

I like how everyone takes this rumour as EXTREMELY credible, like this is definitely what we're getting next year. Apple works on lots of stuff. They've probably been working with the ergonomics of curved screens in mockups for years, but who knows?

I like Apple rumours as much as the next guy, but this is clickbait. Nobody knows what Apple will do for their phones next year. They'll be faster, and maybe they'll be bigger. They'll probably have a different design, but I suspect that the design will actually stay more or less the same. They've got a lot invested in their relatively iconic design. You may not like the design of the iPhone, but it's recognisable, and that's important.

I dunno, doesn't seem to help people being stung by jellyfish. :)

I think we might be able to engineer our way out of the worst of it, but it's clear that without the benefit of sheer numbers and biomass, jellyfish can wildly out-compete already struggling ecosystems. If we don't want to be eating jellyfish chips for the next 100 years as our main source of seafood, we're really going to have to do better with regards to the ocean.

The problem is that it takes whole ecosystems to successfully fend off encroaching jellyfish, which is why they're on the rise--the ecosystems are collapsing.

There are a few creatures that eat jellyfish, but they eat EVERYTHING. Once the ecosystem starts to crumble, jellyfish feed into the loop by eating larvae and fry and eggs and anything available. They're good in anoxic environments, they're not affected by acidification (since they have no hard parts that are vulnerable; the only hard part they have isn't impacted), and they provide low nutritional value back to the ocean despite their intake.

It's a bit of a miracle that the oceans ever moved past the jellyfish stage at all. They're very old, really adaptable, and very, very good at surviving.