That would be like throwing chairs on the deck of the Titanic!

... perhaps the lawsuit wasn't such a great idea? I believe it's likely the case that Apple needs Samsung. Also, the billion dollar lawsuit is like a tube of toothpaste in this scenario. Meaning that you squish one end only expands the other end (i.e. squishing does not change the volume if the cap is on).

I believe this is a trap to get everyone to enforce full justice in order to give them a case study for which to use as a basis for future lawsuits.

Tread carefully folks.

EXACTLY!

I think Ubuntu's changes had something to do with a drop. I know this from my many IT friends who went back to Windows because they "didn't want a phone interface on their PC". That said, Windows 8 in itself may drive them back. I advocate the position that Gnome 3 (and the way it was handled by the developers) directly and indirectly (causing Ubuntu to go with Unity) caused a large fracture in the Linux community which chased many away.

What really is killing Linux (or why it's never really taken off) is the fragmentation issues. Sure, choice is a good thing but in the present implementation of these available choices full QC (the boring stuff) is rarely done. This leaves a system lacking "spit-n-polish". A good example of this fragmentation is KDE vs. Gnome(2) libraries. Although different under the hood, are they really all that different to the average user?

Where Apple comes in is that "spit-n-polish" that is missing. If you create a quality vacuum, it will get filled. It's as simple as that.

I think that was haystor's point ... but in reverse.

This sounds incredibly unlikely. Maybe not impossible, but definitely unlikely. I'd wager your chances are better at winning the lottery ... not that what you're proposing isn't almost as good.

"When you earnestly believe you can compensate for a lack of skill by doubling your efforts, there's no end to what you can't do"
- Despair.com (http://www.despair.com/incompetence.html)

Personality is definitely important in order to "gel" with the current culture - your point here is definitely valid. However, if the aspiring applicant doesn't have skills out of the gate, your company (and product) is much less likely to excel. You can't just hire aspiring "go-getters" with great attitudes (and no specialized skills) and expect to blow the competition away. As Guy Kawasaki stated when discussing what he learned from Steve Jobs, A players hire A+ players. You can find other references to the same point in books like "From Good to Great," etc.

I'm not totally disagreeing with your rankings or statements, but I'd say that all three aspects (personality, ability/desire and skills) are go/no-go criteria rather than the "I'd take personality over skill" message.

I also agree that Office Space nailed it.

My conclusion here is that price is more important than specifications or features. At least in this case perhaps.

Wise man (Einstein) once said:

"As the circle of light increases, so does the circumference of darkness around it."

Which means that the more you know, the more you realize you don't know. The "realizing you don't know" could be characterized as doubt or even disbelief. From this angle, the premise of the article does make sense.

You are from Canada I'm assuming? In the USA, Radio Shack is still going and CompUSA is out of business. In Canada, Radio Shack was actually a separate company.

Essentially, it's a spin on the phrase: "A poor workman that blames his tools"