You don't know what you are talking about. Dell went private because they wanted to switch the company's focus on enterprise services and software, but the short-term agenda of shareholders was preventing them to do that and was forcing them to keep wasting energy trying to increase their PC sales.

So that must explain why Apple had to go private to switch the company's focus from selling computers, to selling mp3 players, music, phones, and tablets....

oh wait...

All those companies won. They made great profits from an important product. So what if many are no longer in business. Many steam engine companies are out of business. That doesn't mean that steam engines were bad and we should have invested more in horses or blimps. Life moves on.

A good company run by strong management knows how to adapt. A steam engine company that went out of business is evidence of management that thought they were in the "steam engine" business and not the business of powering things.

Netflix knew their business wasn't "delivering DVD's to people" and that it was "delivering movies to people" and they switched from DVD delivery to focusing on streaming.

Apple has been selling personal computers for almost 40 years. So why is Apple the most valuable company in the US and the rest of the PC titans has-beens?

The users are winning, because they're not being roped into a monoculture.

With inferior hardware, horrible support, and crapware infested computers?

Monocultures can be very successful. They do have associated risks though. Diversity usually wins in the end.

So who "won" in the PC industry?

Dell -- revenues and profits declined so badly they went private?
HP - PC division is doing so bad they almost got rid of it.
IBM -- completely left the business
Compaq - Dead
Gateway - Dead

And at the same time, who is "winning" selling Android? Samsung is about the only one and their profits are declining because of Apple on the high end and Chinese manufacturers on the low-end.

Even Google isn't "winning" with Android since the vast majority of Android phones sold worldwide are not using Google services/

So how does that help "discoverability"? Amazon is able to recommend books based on the buying habits of others with similar taste as those with my buying history. They are able to list the top sellers, etc - none of which would be available on 8 different websites.

Then that also means that you have to sign up for 8 different websites and give your payment information to 8 different websites. Do you really think this would be more convenient than going to one website, buy an ebook and then it automatically shows up on all of your devices?

I can start reading a book on my iPhone, go home and pick up my Nexus tablet and everything is automatically synced -- bookmarks, notes, the page I was on etc.

If I buy a new device, I can install the Kindle app and my entire library is automatically there with all of the meta data no matter which device.

How would you propose you do that with random ePub readers?

You really think major publishers are going to give up their DRM? Even if you assume they will, are customers suppose to go to 8 different websites and know which publisher publishes which book?

That depends on what you think keeps other companies from going into business.

Right. All another company has to do is make distribution deals with all the major publishers, get people to give up their e-ink readers and make apps for every major platform....

And then Amazon starts back selling below cost just long enough to run them out of business...

That should be real easy....

Until the single marketplace uses its market power to exclude sellers entirely from a market. This has allegedly happened in the markets for iOS apps and console games. What editorial power does Amazon exercise over its Kindle store, other than to remove obvious copyright infringements and erotica [slashdot.org]? Is the "preference to publishers with larger ebook catalogs" a way of dealing with the likes of VDM [slashdot.org] and 30 Percent Fewer Shades of Grey [yahoo.com]?

What do you think is going to happen when Amazon runs everyone else out of business?

I would aggressively punish apps that demand overly broad access to your data.

That's an Android problem not an Apple problem. An iOS app has very few permissions by default and the app ask for permission it needs in the course of running. If you say "no" , the app still should work. You can turn off previously granted permissions on a per app basis - something you can't do with Android without hacks.

They may eventually unify all of those with a single, future design, I suppose, but that hasn't happened yet.

They already did.

The iPhone 4s was GSM/CDMA. There was only one 4s.

As far as the 5s (from Apple's site). All of their phones support GSM. The difference is support for CDMA and the LTE bands they support.

Model A1533 (GSM)*: UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 17, 19, 20, 25)

Model A1533 (CDMA)*: CDMA EV-DO Rev. A and Rev. B (800, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz); UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 17, 19, 20, 25)

Model A1453*: CDMA EV-DO Rev. A and Rev. B (800, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz); UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26)

Model A1457*: UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20)

Model A1530*: UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); FDD-LTE (Bands 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 20); TD-LTE (Bands 38, 39, 40)

It's a nice idea, but it requires the calling party to have a Mac or iOS device to call in from. I would have thought they need a solution that would support PC users as well.

If only there were a way that you could install cross platform third party apps like Skype or Yahoo Messenger on the iPad.....

If there were only a simple low cost low maintenance device that could do FaceTime, Skype etc. that costs less than $299 was portable, automatically updated itself, and was foolproof. I wander when someone will invent such a device. It wouldn't even need a keyboard and it could be wireless! It could have a front facing camera and be a simple touch screen device.

Nahh we will never see something that simple in our lifetime....

It doesn't matter whether some MS patents have expired. According to the summary "Samsung voluntarily entered into a legally binding contract with Microsoft in a cross-licensing agreement".

Do you really think that Samsung's lawyers were incompetent enough to sign a contract that extended beyond the patent terms?

But that argument becomes a double edged sword, since M$ patent licenses cover the standardized memory card file format(oopsey - standard essential ) . So what's good for the goose is good for gander so to speak..

"Standard essential" is not Just some arbitrary term that judges slap on a patent. The patent holder decides to agree to license their patent under FRAND in exchange for being a part of the standard. MS never tried to become part of a standard or did they agree to license the particular patent under FRAND.

Of course such a vulnerability would probably never be FOUND in iOS or WinPhone, since they are closed source, and almost certainly never disclosed if it was

The last major security flaw in iOS was found in open source parts of iOS.

http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co...

And all phones released since 2009 received the patch. (iPhone 3Gs and up)

No not all of Android is open source and Google is close sourcing more and more of what is considered "Android" by most people.