Exactly. It's actually a well known fact that Google sucks at marketing their own stuff. A perfect example is their Nexus One phone.

The leader of marketing (and brainwashing) is (IMHO) Apple, because no matter what it is, they can spin it to get people to buy it. Apple could probably find a way to successfully market dog shit if they wanted to.

I hope this does pass, just so that when one of the people pushing it call the IT guy for a computer problem that could be critical to their job they can respond with: "Sorry, I've already worked all my hours, and you made overtime illegal. I'll be back in next week."

So if there's ever a security breach or data loss or privacy concerns or whatever else could go wrong, they can blame it on Microsoft.

So does this mean games could get easier when I'm about to throw the controller at the wall? because that seems counter productive to Sony, who makes money when I have to go buy a new controller.

I can confirm this. I just went to WoW's site and signed up for a free trial and it did not ask for a credit card or anything. Although, I think it used to at one point in time.

Anyway, there is a major difference in how Blizzard, Netflix, and other sites that offer "free trials" work compared to Video Professor. When you sign up for a free trial at Netflix, it makes sure you are aware that it is a 2 week trial and that afterwards you will be billed. I went to Video Professor's website, and the only time it even mentions the word trial is in the fine print on the left side. If you are aware that it will bill you then it should not be considered a scam, but Video Professor doesn't even make it sound like a subscription, let alone a trial. Then again, who needs Video Professor anyway? eHow and Youtube have tons of videos on how to do pretty much whatever. Its just getting the word out to the non-tech-savvy crowd that free alternatives do exist.

Do you have any idea why they released Chrome Frame in the first place? Its because Google got tired of Microsoft not meeting web standards. Google will be releasing Wave soon and the majority of the population would not be able to use it because IE does not support HTML5. Chrome Frame is just as secure as IE if not more, not to mention, if a bug or exploit is found with Chrome or Chrome Frame, it takes Google hours to days to push out a fix.

"There's just no reason to get this installed in corporate networks where IE6 is being used"

Do you have any clue what Chrome Frame even does? It does not force EVERY website to use itself. Only websites that request it or websites that you told to use it. And believe it or not, there are a lot of newer applications in the business environment that do not work with IE6 or even IE7/8.

"anyplace where IE8 is being used (surface of attack expanded in exchange for little benefit)"

I guess you are unaware of exactly how much IE8 does not include compared to Firefox/Safari/Chrome, and your obviously not a web developer. Most of the time websites have to have code dedicated for IE otherwise the website will not work right. Google is sick of Microsoft not following standards and them as well as everyone else having to waste their time to make patches so it will work in IE.

This is part of the point that everyone seems to be missing. Not only does the OS get upgraded, but the hardware does too. I bet when win2k was released it was moderately fast on moderate hardware. Windows XP did the same when it came out. When you try to install Vista on your XP machine with 512mb to 1gb of memory and a 1.5-2ghz processor then yeah, its going to be slower. I have Windows 7 installed on both my laptop and my desktop, and I noticed a performance increase on both. XP -> Vista had a larger performance gap, but once hardware caught up (and SP1 fixed a few things) the OS ran fairly smoothly. I work for an IT department and if I remember correctly, when XP came out, we didn't upgrade for a long time and mostly had windows 98 or 2000 because XP ran slower. Stop trying to use an up to date OS with way out of date hardware and you may notice that it isn't so slow after all. (No, I'm not a Microsoft fanboy, but I'm sick of people complaining and expecting the latest software to run on their old school hardware)

Its simple. They want market-share for their browser so they will allow extensions such as AdBlock. If people are going to go through the trouble of blocking ads then they are going to do it whether its through a proxy or an extension. So yes, you will most likely see out of the box compatibility with AdBlock for Chrome.

Originally Google Chrome used the WinHTTP library, which is native to Windows. In the currently dev build (2.0.156.*) it now has its own implementation of the HTTP network protocol so it will compile on mac and linux.

If they are going to be capping the monthly usage what about services like NetFlix that offer (now unlimited for some plans) video streaming? These videos are obviously going to be a good size (probably 300mb-1gb, haven't tried it personally). I also heard that iTunes is letting you rent movies via download. All these new services are coming out that require heavy bandwidth, and the ISPs response is to cap it? If they do cap it, what kind of cap are we talking about. I currently have a 10mbps connection and pay $70/mo for it.. if its capped at 10-20gb/mo (although I probably would never use that). That pretty much limits you to what you can do... I didn't pay extra for a faster line so I could download less...