I've gone through this at a few places now. Besides resistance from the users ("we only know how to use Outlook!"), is migrating from Outlook to another solution ranges somewhere between unlikely to impossible. For someone like me, I only have 3 or 4 appointments scheduled, and the other few hundred are meetings I was invited to. :)

You can have the best plan, with the best business reasons, but when a senior executive tells the CEO that he can't switch, you'll frequently find that it will veto the migration.

Here's a real-world example. I was Director of IT for the company. The CEO told me specifically to get rid of Exchange, because the upgrade costs were too high. We were literally a couple weeks from switching. The Director of Sales went to the CEO and demanded that we keep Exchange, or he would walk.

Funny thing about the sales department. He didn't manage to sell anything, and he couldn't retain the customers. The accounting staff ended up doing all the customer retention. That guy cost us more money than he made. IT, on the other hand, brought costs down, and improved the customer experience.

The only thing that sales brought to us were headaches, and very pretty forward looking reports, that pretty much consisted of a graph showing our sales history, and a line going up at a 45 degree angle showing our future revenue. Every few months, he had to update the graph, so it showed our revenue losses, and had a new starting point for his upward line. I don't think he had a grasp of the concept of forecasting.

Nah. By downloading their web page to my computer they are accepting my EULA agreement.

Yes but for my laptop I don't need a 1TB SSD. 0.5 TB os available for about $250, and that's low enough a price for me to be able to afford it.

Desktops are another story. That's where I want multi TB of capacity.

Funny, I've tried MS Office a few times over the years. I usually go back to OpenOffice. If for nothing else, I install OpenOffice when I set up a new computer, since it's too much trouble to find an unused MS license outside of normal business hours. :)

Microsoft is probably counting every OEM that ships with the trial version of Office, and all the bundled licenses, even if they aren't used.

Most companies buy too many licenses, so they can be sure they have enough. So if we buy 50, and use 30, but only 10 use it on any sort of regular basis, MS will still count it as 50.

For most users that I've known who were willing to try OpenOffice, Calc worked fine for them.

The problem is Outlook and Exchange. The users see the mail client, calendering, and the like, as essential. The word processor and spreadsheet are secondary to that. Once some exec starts talking to sales about getting just Outlook, they are sold on the wonders of getting the whole MSOffice suite.

There are enough users who refuse to even try OpenOffice for the word processor. "I can't because...". I've tricked some users into switching, by just giving them shortcuts on their desktop with the MS names instead of the OO names, and changing the default save types to the MS counterpart. When they ask about why it looks different, I just tell them "oh, this is the newer version.", and they're fine.

Unlikely. The video is exactly 10 seconds long, which is the default recording length for Glass. Now, is it possible she recorded for minutes and cut it to exactly 10 seconds? And those were the particular 10 seconds where she told them she was filming, rather than saying it during any other time during the recording? Sure... But Occam's Razor would tend to disagree.

The video starts with the patrons already attacking the Glasshole, so no, she started filming them after she was attacked. And frankly, filming people committing a crime is quite a reasonable response.

Unless you own the bar, you don't know that for sure.

That's also true for most people's blogs - no one looks at them unless something happens like, say, some idiot attacks the person with the camera and blog.

Here is literally the first result for a Google Image Search for "people texting". The three on the left are indistinguishable from people taking pictures. Flip through that search and I'd say about half of the photos have people holding their phone up in front of their faces. Point being that while some people text while holding their phone down at their waist, apparently just as many do it while holding the phone up to their eyes.

Fiction novels are relevant prior art that can be used to reject a patent application, but can only be used for the material they teach. H.G. Wells' story describes traveling to the moon by cannon: accordingly, it would invalidate a patent claim that recited "A method for traveling to the moon, comprising: being fired at the moon by a giant cannon." But it wouldn't invalidate a patent claim to, say, the space shuttle's main engines; or a method of calculating Lagrange points; or the timing sequence for your multi-engine startup system, etc.

Similarly, a fiction novel that says that contact lenses can include cameras would invalidate a patent claim that recited "A contact lens, comprising: a lens; and a camera attached to the lens, configured to take a picture when the user blinks twice" or something similar. It wouldn't invalidate a patent that claims how you make optically transparent CCDs, or determining proper focus based on relative distance to a second lens, or determining that a blink or sneeze is not actually a picture-taking command. The patent claim would have to include additional limitations that were not described in the fiction story.

It's a little more than that, though... remember the story with the Glasshole in the bar from last month who got attacked? That bar - along with most bars - have security cameras. Cameras that are casually pointed at people the whole time.

Taking a photo (with the flash off) can look exactly like the person is texting.

This is the real issue... Glass costs $1500, and many of the people wearing them are in places with huge economic inequality, like SF or NYC, where gentrification and high rents are pushing out people who have lived there for decades. It's not "there's a camera pointed at me", because there's that security camera pointed at you already. Instead, it's "that rich hipster 'entrepreneur' douchebag is pointing a camera at me, and he's supported by a multi-billion dollar company, and where does he get off coming into my neighbor and replacing my cheap pizza joint with his gastropub, and demanding free parking in charger spots for his Tesla? He wants to be Glassed? Well, I'll show him a glass to his face."

It's the same sentiment behind people attacking the Google busses, or the the SF cops that arrested and held a guy in solitary confinement with no charges after finding out that he was a startup founder.

He didn't. This is a patent application that was just published. Subby can't even blame the article - the headline notes that it's pending, and the article continuously refers to it as a patent filing.

Exactly, now you've got it. Once you've got a combination of prior art references that teach or suggest each and every element in the claims, you've got a solid argument that the patent is obvious and therefore invalid.

Thing is...if you fly often for work, you will reach status within a year and be getting upgraded on every flight. The monday-thursday consultants and other heavy business travelers are getting their upgrades for free...the fees are usually being billed to the client, and clients don't like to pay for first-class.

... and since you said teleportation, your future prediction would be completely ruined by the sudden realization that you can safely establish stable wormholes with stuff that's already in most homes.

I don't trust any forward looking statement. Business people throw those around all the time, which always equates to "I hope we stay in business". They never make the forward looking statement of "In the next 6 to 9 months, I hope we go bankrupt, and the shareholders murder us."