Sloppy focus doesn't even make sense in the MacOS metaphor where the active window's toolbar is always at the top of the screen (IMO).

I know this is tu quoque, but Windows 7 is far worse on that front. You can only have ONE wallpaper and it duplicates on each monitor even if they are different resolutions. And simple image files don't preview in Explorer. It's 2012. WTF. OS X has some great hidden tricks if you learn a few keyboard shortcuts, but Finder is the biggest issue. So I use PathFinder (http://cocoatech.com/pathfinder/), which is awesome.

Why are we not hearing from WebM and Google anymore? Is the industry going to fall in like with h.264 the same way they have with other royalty-encumbered standards?

Let's see... SAMs shouldn't have a hard time shooting a target of this size down. I imagine it would be difficult to move this thing out of the way of a storm as well. They should be looking at arrays of weather-balloon type devices or something. Perhaps just use satellites? This seems bald stupidity.

I don't get the third paragraph. Ever since iOS finally cut the docking cable you don't need a PC to get going, just iCloud credentials and a network connection. It's cool that you can download BitTorrent clients but neither platform has enough storage to go nuts with BT, especially the tiny storage options on N7.

Are there not Phandroid cultists too?

...which shows that you aren't very thoughtful, dismissing an article out of hand. Irony much?

"OK, now that folks value crowd-sourcing over professional editorial reviews, let's corner the market on professional editorial reviews."--Google

Ack, better than 3/4 now apparently

You, sir, are correct. Profit share is about 2/3 to AAPL.

There goes that old "patent litigation stifles innovation" cliche. You always hear this assertion and never an explanation for it. (I say this as someone who isn't even sure there should BE patents, BTW). Copying someone is the OPPOSITE of innovation. If Apple asserts patents for UI/UX elements successfully against Samsung, they will have to INNOVATE a new way to provide a good UX. If you look objectively at the document where Samsung analyzed the iPhone competitively you have to admit it looks like they were slavishly trying to copy the UI/UX. Imagine if you invented something and then someone took some of your ideas and created a copy of it. How would you react? Wouldn't you be pissed someone copied your ideas and is now making money off them without licensing them? Apple's sue-happy but they've looked pretty good to me in this case so far, and Samsung's council has been an embarrassment. I do think they are within their rights on some of these suits, including this one, as IP law stands today.

Yeah... and BMW is about to go out of business if they don't expand from their single-digit market share. I think they'll be able to sustain a niche market with their margins, they always have.

I've presented PPT and PPTX on mine trivially on a projector. It's used prevalently in business. It can be a toy, but it can be more too. Same could be said of Nexus 7.

As the post says, that quote by Ballmer is telling: "'Things work better when hardware and software are considered together,' he said. 'We control it all, we design it all, and we manufacture it all ourselves.'" This is a COMPLETE reversal of everything Microsoft has always been about (excepting I guess the Xbox), and if Microsoft's actions didn't deliver the "FU" to OEMs, then this explicit statement did. He seems to be saying "Apple was right all along," or at least "Apple is right when it comes to devices." This is a huge statement. The idea that a hardware manufacturer and vertical integration have won out in a world where software margins are so huge and hardware margins so thin is a sea change in the world of technology. Perhaps MS saw the death spiral of diminishing margins, the proliferation of a buyer-confusing myriad of options, and the continued failure to make iPad-competitive devices in the PC industry and decided angering OEM partners really didn't matter at this point. They saw IBM spin off Lenovo, and HP flirt with spinning off their PC division, and spinning off webOS. They saw that the value of these OEMs was diminishing enough to where they could threaten those revenue streams by offering their own hardware.

Despite being primarily an Apple user, I don't feel comfortable with this increasingly integrated model. It will be interesting to see if Microsoft can make the transition. It will be critical to be able to command greater margins than the OEMs can on the hardware, though Microsoft clearly will subsidize a platform in order to build out a network (as they did with Xbox). They obviously have the advantage of not having to pay licenses, so that will help. They will probably sell a lot of these--they have an inherent advantage. With a quality MS option, why purchase from a third party who probably can't compete on price anyway? This will hopefully mean purchasing power for parts, again helping margins.

I agree: sometimes, you get what you pay for.