No his signature is correct. There seems to be a perception that Google is somehow an "open-source corporation." That's just not true. Google is no more open source than Oracle/Sun. Sure, they're happy to ride on the backs of other people's effort, but they contribute very little to the community. At lease MS has the guts to make their own programming languages, IDE, database, web server, cloud system, dektop and mobile OS and game console instead of stealing these products from open source projects.

Have you ever actually tried to use that "smash hit" Android OS? It's a terrible user experience. It's stuffed with all kinds of ugly, buggy, crashing apps. There is no consistency and no style. It's just a jumble of haced together code with no sense of design. I dropped my DroidX in one week and now I'm a happy WP7 user.

That's right, everyone's a shill. Now let's all go back to our rooms and calm down.

Use Google for search? Why, so they can censor my results and make everything rosy? I don't think so.

I think you are talking about Google here, the wolf in sheep's clothing.

They are all completely closed, even Google. There is no difference. Just because Google pays lip service to open source by using other people's products doesn't mean they care a lick about the community. Google is not your friend.

Apparently you do. You're here reading this article and commenting, aren't you? Seems to me like you can't get enough of the micro stuff.

You wish.

What about the OS I started working on in my garage? That's still completely untethered to any manufacturer. Of course, I've only written about 12 lines of code so far...

Something tells me Microsoft would jump at the chance to give the same deal to any of the other manufacturers who are interested in accepting it. That sounds pretty equal to me.

Romney in 2012!

Hey, I love my WP7. No "cruft" here. Meanwhile my Chrome browser won't stop crashing on CentOS so I'm ditching it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Andy never said anything about "open source." He said the platform was "open". How do you get "open source" from the word "open"? Neither Google or Microsoft make any of their core stuff open source. They both have quite a few libraries and projects that are licenced under various open source licences, but that is the exception not the rule. I don't understand why that confuses people.

This is exactly why plugins (or plug-ins) were invented. I would much rather code this up in Flash or Silverlight and have it run reliably and predictably on all browsers than have to write a bunch of one-offs. HTML5 was a giant distraction, in my opinion.

It just doesn't work to have two guys crammed in a cubicle huddled around a monitor. It's just like the human eye that sees by quickly moving about. The person who is 'driving' is the only one with any ability to understand the code. The other person quickly zones out. Meanwhile, the person who is driving gets self-conscious about how fast/slow he's going so he stops thinking about the code too. If either person says anything out loud it completely destroys the other's train of thought. It devolves into a dysfunctional group-think where each person says "I'm OK with it if you are...". For me it works much better to monitor the SVN commits and take my time to look at every line of code and work through it at my own pace.