Yup, just as long as you are willing to give up any sense of decent UI, performance, etc. Mobile devices are shockingly bad at rendering HTML at a good rate, and I'm yet to see a HTML5 page that properly scales to different screen sizes, has good information density, or works properlly offline.

That's not to say these things aren't possible, but I have to assume that they are very hard because nobody seems to be doing them.

*Fuck*. Why, after apparently 20 years, are we still having to explain this! So-called professional, intelligent people can't seem to grasp the fact that *bundling* is not problem. Bundling AND being in a monopoly position to enforce that bundle *is*. It's a logical AND. We're not talking mental gymnastics here, and you've had 20 years to understand, I would have thought a MS employee would especially be wanting to understand this. Jesus.

And don't think Google are somehow immune from this, Chrome on ChromeOS is fine since it's not in any way in a dominant position on operating systems, but using search monopoly to push their own products does have them currently in trouble with the EU.

Well indeed, which is presumably why Google chose not to go with one. They were more interested in generating developer and manufacturer support (where "oo, free stuff!" is attractive) than maintaining absolute openness all the way down the chain.

Personally, I like copyleft, but sometimes getting people to piggyback is more important to your goals.

*Searching for sarcasm... appears clean*.
So... In what way is that "working"? Ending up in prison or on a plane back home?

Well, for a start if you're not a British Citizen then you might not have a right to enter.

Congratulations! You have just made an entirely pointless post that says nothing, and proves nothing!

You can disable them, they don't get removed from the phone but they also don't run.

People complain when there's fragmentation, people complain when there's an effort to prevent it.

The platform is still open, but Google's services and ownership of the Play store is not. You can make an Android phone, fork it and do whatever you want, but if you want to run it on the Play store and Google Maps, whatever, you have to agree to the rules. Those rules, by the way, do a hell of alot to standardise and make the platform stable for developers.

Some people won't be happy until everything is completely gratis and uncontrolled, and we'll end up with the same mess we had with Symbian.

I have to admit, this sort of ignorant racist/nationalist bullshit is usually posted AC, but you put your name on it. Kudos.

Yeah. The real problem with signature verification is you are relying on minimum wage checkout assistants to compare and *challenge* the customer. I used to do that job, how can it be worth me calling someone a liar for the hassle and abuse I'd get?

Not to mention that schemes like Verified By Visa mean you often now have to enter a password into a bank-served iframe that verifies you.

Fingerprint is a terrible security mechanism. Not only does it give someone a reason to steal you *finger*, you also leave your fingerprint on everything you touch. Credentials shouldn't be revealed unless you are actually in the process of using them.

You should also avoid cards with magnetic strips on them. Damn dirty electromagnetic field technology!

Nothing. Of course, any improvement in security that doesn't improve security in every possible case should be discounted completely!

I'm relatively sure that parents with lots of children don't think of them as a bunch of spares...

You shouldn't have to bribe the employee to get a contractually-obliged fix done.