Get him a smartphone?

I'm not sure why your comment and link to an ancient article on gas prices (2004?!) got modded insightful, but when you factor in inflation, gas prices aren't particularly high. They're at a pretty normal level compared to historical prices (again, inflation adjusted).

That being said, the inflation adjusted income of the middle class has been going down for decades. That's more likely to be your culprit.

The submitter got the resolution wrong. It's 1280x800, which is actually a quite nice DPI for a 7" device that's only $200.

The submitter got the resolution wrong. It's 1280x800, which is actually a quite nice DPI for a 7" device that's only $200.

Microsoft killed netbooks by only licensing Windows 7 Starter on netbooks that were underpowered to run Windows 7 well. Thus, people ended up having a lousy user experience.

Google revived netbooks in the form of Chromebooks by ensuring that Microsoft could not sabotage them.

People never really stopped liking netbooks -- what people didn't like was underpowered netbooks (which was Microsoft's fault) running Windows 7.

Microsoft knowingly, willingly, and successfully killed netbooks, by only allowing Windows 7 Starter on netbooks that didn't have enough resources (primarily memory and CPU speed) to perform well.

So the people that got them had a bad user experience, bad mouthed them to everyone they knew, and never bought one again. Those people should have blamed the true guilty party -- Microsoft -- but they blamed netbooks in general instead. Thus, Microsoft successfully killed off netbooks.

The original idea of netbooks was something closer to what Chromebooks are... and they are very successful. Google was smart enough to rename them (netbooks -> Chromebooks) and smart enough to include an OS and browser that Microsoft can't sabotage.

And now we see that netbooks are actually a success, because Google went back to the original successful formula (no fat and slow Windows, no asinine limitations on hardware). Oh, and renamed them from netbooks to Chromebooks since Microsoft's anti-netbook campaign was so successful that everyone hates "netbooks" now... even if they actually do love them in the form of Chromebooks.

Are you actually suggesting it's safer to do online banking with your typical malware ridden Windows system than with a Chromebook?? Seriously??

Maintenance is the primary problem with Windows. It's just too much work to keep a Windows system running well and safe.

In the last few years, my father has spent more money on Windows maintenance -- paid a company to wipe and reinstall his PC due to viruses, and then paid a pretty penny for antivirus software -- than he would have spent on an entire Chromebook.

And in the end, what does he do on his PC? Web browsing.

Not to mention the fact that his data is way safer on Google than local. Okay, so can Google and the NSA see pictures of his grandchildren if it's stored on Google? Probably.

But that's not important to him. What's important to him is not losing those pictures in the first place. And those pictures are way safer on Google's servers than on his local computer.

I've been in the computer field for more decades than I care to remember, and I couldn't count the number of times I've seen people lose priceless data (because it happens so often).

They get viruses that eat their data; they don't backup their data; they backup their data incorrectly; their data and backup gets destroyed (e.g., house fires); etc.

For average people, having a company like Google hold onto your data is a good idea. Google will do a much better job keeping it safe than your average person.

Also, Google does a great job making it easy to make a local copy of all your stuff stored on Google (email, docs, spreadsheets, etc.) so I don't think your lock in comment is entirely fair.

Not to mention the care and feeding Windows requires, it's insane. It's ridiculously easy to get viruses and malware, it's ridiculously easy for your system to start running unbearably slow. It's because Windows is far too hard for average people to understand and administer properly. And it's not the average person's fault, they shouldn't have to be computer geniuses to use a computer.

Chromebooks are an absolutely fantastic solution for lots of people.

Nope, I just grew up enough to stop looking down my nose at the way everyone else lives their life, how they spend their money, how they spend their free time, how they raise their kids, etc.

I'm not sure why I'm even bothering to reply. You don't even have kids. You're clueless.

I bet you don't even own a TV.

You're awesome.

So a lot of people heat their homes in the winter with natural gas. In the summer, natural gas bills are low. In the winter, they can be very high.

You can sign up for a payment plan that evens out the costs. You pay more than you normally would in the summer, and less than you normally would in the winter. The monthly charge doesn't change much all year long.

This plan makes it much easier to budget for expenses.

It turns out this approach works well for health care, too. Pay about the same in the summer (when you're young) and in the winter (when you're old).

You see, many young people just aren't very good at planning for the future. For example, many old people would be homeless, and starve on the streets (and die) when they got old, without something like Social Security. The system actually works very well, despite right-wing lies that it doesn't (the only problems are congress borrowing money from Social Security for non Social Security related things).

So the same proven approach is being applied to health care. This is a good idea.

I'm not sure how I could explain the "so what" part to you any more clearly: in a democracy, if there is too much wealth pooling (or the perception thereof), the people will take your money from you, by force, if necessary.

Thus, it's in the enlightened self interest of the wealthy not to get too wealthy (or perceived to be too wealthy).

You can argue until the cows come home how fair or not fair it is for so much wealth to pool to the top. But at the end of the day, if you live in a democracy, and it is the people's perception that the wealthy have gone too far, the people will say Enough Is Enough, and take the wealth from the wealthy, by force, if necessary.

It's in the enlightened self interest of the super wealthy (this includes CEOs) to not allow their massive wealth accumulation to become so severe that The People rise up and take their wealth from them. CEO compensation has pretty obviously crossed the line to the point where the vast majority of people think they are dirty rotten overly greedy bastards.

Wealthy people should consider this sooner rather than later.

The fastest way to get me to uninstall an app is in-game purchases (other than a one-time payment to purchase the full version straight up, with no further fees).

Give me a lite version to evaluate it, then let me buy it straight up. I loathe and detest in-game purchases for gold, gems, or anything else necessary to continue a game, or to speed it up.