Wait, there are people who actually use Siri for a serious business-related use? They don't just ask it dumb questions in attempt to get silly answers?

"Siri, will you marry me?"
"Siri, where can I hide a dead body?"
"Siri, ***k you!"
"Siri, what is your favorite color?"

That's the only use for Siri that I've been able to (and many of my friends for that matter) find.

I've had a bunch of 4G Androids on Verizon. 4G itself is mighty fast but Verizon bogs them down with so much bloatware that the additional speed feels pretty useless. I recently ditched the Android for an iPhone and even with the "slower" 3G service it feels comparatively fast. I've been told a million times "You need to use an alternative version of Android". I work in insurance and handle a lot of private data. I don't feel comfortable downloading some random alternate install of Android from who-knows-where on my phone.

But yes it will be a neat day when you can get a 4G iPhone for Verizon.

I wonder if the "old" generation of microcomputers - the TRS80, the Sinclair, Commodore 64, Apple II - were more inspirational to young programmers and coders than what we have today. The old computers were all command line. You *had* to know what you were doing to make the thing do anything! You couldn't break it because you had to know how the thing worked to make it do anything! And there was a joy or satisfaction of "Hey, I made this machine do 'this', exactly how I wanted it to do it!" Today's PCs/Macs/pads? Anyone can pick one up, use it, maybe even cause a lot of damage with it but never understand the inner workings of it because all you had to do to make it go is click on some icon somewhere. There is no command line to use (at least that most users would choose to work with). You can become a proficient user of it but without some real digging you will have a hard time writing any kind of usable software for yourself, even as rudimentary as a "Hello, world".

I liken it to giving a car to a starting driver. The Sinclair and other older microcomputers were like giving a kid a 20-yr old Honda Civic with a manual transmission. Slow, dependable, bland, hard to get in trouble with it, you have to know how to drive it to make it go, you can really get a feel for how the thing wants to drive. The newer, much more powerful computers of today could be like giving that same kid a Porsche - powerful, fast, stylish, easy to get in trouble with, easy to wreck at high speeds, you may never understand its inner-workings because they are too much to learn.

All of this water is great! But with all of the corrupt governments throughout Africa who will ever get to benefit from it?

I've always felt that Africa is the richest continent. It's chock-full of minerals, oil, diamonds, arable land (some land better than other land but with the right techniques just about anything is possible)... The climate is warm to hot throughout much of the continent facilitating growing. Its people? If you go to the right places hard-working, skilled and eager to work. But its corruption is widespread. Without targeting that (much easier said than done) this water will either stay in the ground or will go to benefit some dictator or other "politician".

Just when I thought Iran was the safest place to stash my money now THIS happens? Where should I go next? Somalia?

OK so the idea may have existed in 1991 but was the technology to make it work "like" an iPhone as we know it there? NO! Without the wireless data (or really data at all!) it is useless. In fact nobody really even knew what the Internet was back in 1991. This is like having an idea for a helicopter but no motor to power it (a la Da Vinci). They may have had CDPD data back then but it was pretty slow. But without the Internet how could you really share with anyone? Was everyone supposed to use, oh, Compuserve?

Some may argue "yeah, well they could have at least bought the idea and held onto it until it was feasible." That's like if I bought the idea for a warp drive or transporter and held onto it until it becomes feasible. So many other things have to be invented or perfected before anything like that could work. I don't think I'm going to be around long enough for that to happen. And maybe Microsoft felt the same way in 1991 when presented with that iPhone-like idea.

I can't record my own audio on my Android phone but a malware app can? So let me get this straight - to get what I believe should be a regular functionality I have to have someone install a malware app? Ridiculous. This is almost like giving someone syphillis to cure them of AIDS!

OK good one. We all know that Google likes to prepare its annual April Fools day gag but they got this one out the door too late!

No matter what they do to fix this, no matter what they do to reduce the latency I NEVER win any radio call-in shows. You would think this would help me be caller #25 but it never works. It's always busy or I just don't make that number :(

Has anybody thought this through? Is this safe? Is this going to be one of those things where we find out it gives everyone cancer in 20 yrs and it is too late to do anything about it?

I think the IT world collectively owes Merijn Bellekom some beers. Think about how many of us his tool has helped out over the years!

Yeah I suppose they do ;) I've never thought very highly of MS's apps for mobile though. They all still feel kind of sloppy. They still don't feel very mobile-centric. Windows Phone feels like it is trying to emulate a Windows PC way too much rather than be a mobile device (a la iPhone or iPad). Windows Phones and other MS mobile devices have always felt like a computer with mobile computing and phone functions as an afterthought .

Let's just say it doesn't feel like going to the Android or iPhone apps stores. I've never heard anyone say "Hey, did you get that new [game/app] from the Windows app store!!!???"

I think this signals a fundamental change in mobile computing. Microsoft has clung to a (now outdated) model of forcing the same Windows apps on all "Windows" devices. Apple saw that there needed to be a differentiation between desktop applications and mobile "apps" in order for the mobile apps to be the best for that device. Their Tablet PCs aren't the answer. The day that Microsoft figures this out and makes a way to easily create a mobile app of some kind and separates the desktop and mobile platforms they might have a chance against the iPad.