Am I the only one looking forward to seeing the first proper Meego Phone? I've been putting off buying my next phone until I can have a play with one.

We have people thinking Microsoft will release desktop windows for ARM.

Lastly we've got colour e-ink finally making it's way on to the scene.

What's on their list? A White iPhone, Tablets and Chrome OS tablets.

I agree the Move is a rip off of the Wii controller, but it is a big improvement on it.

I picked up a move controller to play party games. After completing Resident Evil 5 (control schemes for that game suck horribly btw) a friend invited me to come over and play Goldeneye. I find the controls were sluggish, inaccurate and because of how they worked it made 4 player goldeneye very difficult (people sitting at angles had major problems).

I thought the Wii controllers were fine but the Move has really raised the bar. I want to hate the connect but the few goes I've had on it had been pretty awesome.

We have credit unions as well, you have building societies, credit unions and banks. Each has their own limitations and roles.

The IRA robbed banks and blew up streets and buses. They are responsible for several hundred deaths. Why think of them as freedom fighters? Is it somehow ok, because the people who died were English?

By your own logic people who lay IED's in Afganistan are freedom fighters and to commended.

Some examples of their work:
Omagh Bombing
Hammersmith Bridge
RPG Attack on MI6
BBC Car Bomb

I could go one but I'm getting bored.

Most school people I've met who've done the Computing A Level learnt visual basic from teachers hardly qualified in the subject. So your probably right.

My point was rather than lump everything under computer science and discover the persons only done MS Word 101. It at least gives an indication of what the students interested in.

Do what we do in the UK, we have "Information Technology" and "Computing". Information Technology covers typing, word*, powerpoint, excel, etc... While Computing delves more into computer science with things like programming, design, etc...

People can then get grades to show they have an aptitude in using a computer and universities can properly weight the qualification.

*generic concepts are taught but the tools are always the MS ones.

This is a very good point. In Java there are numerous safe guards you can add things like concurrent maps, synchronised statements, etc.. which when combined with good multi-threaded design make multi-threaded applications very easy to control and maintain.

Personally I also find it much easier to write modular code in Java. The Plug-in architecture coupled with the removal of header files prevents you from having stealth dependencies.

These things can be done in C and C++ but it is far harder to achieve and more importantly maintain.

I'd like to point out that I did something similar to this recently. I noticed I'd reached 14.3 stone so I went on the Speacial K diet and changed my evening meals so they involved pasta/chicken/etc.. I arranged things so I got all my vitamins and minerals but was significantly short in fat and calories.

During the first week I was starving every day, for the first two weeks I noticed becoming extremely tired when doing my gym workout. But my body has adjusted over the last four months. My stomachs shrunk and I would struggle to stay on my previous diet oh and I've reached 12.5 stone.

I agree the change was radical and not every diet will work for everyone but the body does adjust over time, its the the reason I gained so much in the first place.

My huge unsubstantiated opinion comes from listening to my friends who like me feel the same way. We've begun to refer to the show as Stargate: Eastenders. Admittedly those only the 20-30 people I know but as you said most people were as for less drama and more shooting. Sure that is just anecdotal evidence but reading this thread shows it is a common opinion.

People were not asking for no drama and any good action story will require a plot. It doesn't need a great plot but one needs to exist. Stargate SG1 and Atlantis both had multiple plots and story arcs, they were not great or even complex but they were compelling. SGU had none until a quarter the way through the second season.

I have watched some of the earth stories but after the first few I decided it was best to skip through them. That doesn't mean I missed all of the story I simply fast forwarded and checked nothing interesting was happening. The only ones I've seen that were meaningful were the Greer story and when Rush was in the chair. The rest have generally screamed filler.

I went to a school in the top 30 in the UK, most of my friends went to Cambridge and Oxford Universities because of their ability. Most of my life has been spent with people with IQ's above 140. I say this not to insult or intimidate but to clarify where I am coming from. While the social awkwardness of character's like Sheldon, House and Bones is funny, it is not a requirement of intelligence and in my experiences isn't even that common. The dysfunctional are often perceived to be intelligent even when they aren't, for example most people assume geeks are smart.

Even assuming anyone with an above average IQ would be heavy dysfunctional that would only explain Rush, Eli and the scientists. The colonel, Scott, Greer, Cloe, etc.. should be reasonably capable, however even the normal civilians and military personnel are deeply flawed to the point where it would have be hard to see how they achieved their positions in a normal environment let alone how they would qualify to be sent into space.

No people's complaint about there being too much drama is because good science fiction has a plot and you watch as the characters react to that plot. Character interaction is important but without anything to drive it you have little more than a Soap Opera. Until the end of season 1 the only 'plot' was having the characters attack each other. In season 2 Rush discovers something and it takes 5 episodes for the truth to come out. That story arc would have worked well in a single episode but dragging it out over 5 was boring.

I've tended to skip the earth stories because apart from seeming like something like from Lost they don't really add any depth to the characters.Most of the characters were unlike-able, you have a Colonel who is incapable of making any good strategic decisions, a second in command who won't take command even when he knows he must, a series of incompetent scientists, Eli who's naive to the point of idiocy, most of the soliders are cliche and Rush who I actually like.

Even when action occurs its filled with plot devices and the whole story seems more about god than science. They would often jump and skip big events only to drag out minor issues. For me the worst part was when Rush made it back to the ship, rather than show Rush dealing with being kicked off, or show how the ship starts failing without him, he comes back within the next episode.

The idea of the wrong people in the wrong place was a bad one, the Stargate program was supposed to involve the best and the brightest but most of the characters were so flawed I'd doubt any of them would have achieved their positions let alone be good enough to send off world.

Thats worse in many ways, news organisations with a clear bias are useful because you can often spot where the facts end and opinion starts. When the bias is less obvious it can be difficult to see the line.

Take the BBC news website, it aims to be unbiased and the website will often take contradictory views on issues in an effort to stay that way. It can lead you into a false sense of security. I'd suggest looking at the recent news around wikileaks. Julian Assange's story is played out as "Wikileaks on trial", constant inferences are made that wikileaks are doing something illegal and the actual history around the case is forgotten. Anonymous is a shady hacker group, bent on stealing credit card information.

Rather than argue about bias you should be encouraging people to read sources with different bias in order for them to get a better picture of the news.

I agree about copy protection on game saves. I own assassins creed 2 the save games are copy protected and I have to ask why?

With call of duty if you move a save from one account to another you lose the ability to earn trophies. Since game companies can invoke measures like this to stop people skipping things why do we need copy protection on save games?

Last year myself and my Dad both got Uncharted 2 for Christmas, we took it in turns playing the game on one machine. When we finished I took my save home and replayed the game. This year both of us want Assassins Creed 2 : Brotherhood. I won't play it until I get home because there is no point playing for all that time and then having to go back to the beginning.

I don't want pirated games, I care nothing for the "Other OS" feature. Giving me the ability to move all my saves onto a USB stick should be top priority. That an firing the Sony Executive who thought copy protecting game saves was a good idea.

Readers generally dislike book adaptations because Hollywood tends to trample over the book's storyline and do whatever they want.

Harry Potter, LOTR, and Twilight appear to be good adaptations. Just as Spiderman and Watchmen were good adaptations.

Sure there can be cuts and changes, but in those films the directors made changes so they story would work on the screen and they either have the writer enforcing the plot or a director that really cares about the subject.

Hollywood's failure with game conversions is like Star Trek 13, or Thunderbirds. Rather than learn the universe, the rules, care about the characters, etc.. (basically take the time to know what it is that is so loved about the book/game) they will do their own thing. Heck in Thunderbirds they changed the order of age of the brothers. In Star Trek they basically tell us the last 20 year of TV shows didn't happen.

Chill man, I got your point there's no need to shout.

I see mobile applications differently.

I have a Nokia 5800 and it browses the web pretty well however I've noticed a lot of websites simply aren't designed for mobile access (Domino's and the redesigned BBC News site come to mind). There is nothing stopping Domino's from scrubbing their web content and proving me a simplified view for my phone. The UK News Application in the Ovi store does this pretty well.

The idea isn't to move the web into mobile applications but to stop phone users from loading unnecessary images/javascript. When I browse on my phone I've noticed images/flash can be 99% of the page size, when I'm ordering Pizza I don't want to have to download several 0.5-2Mb images.

I agree companies like Apple are probably hoping for websites accessible through specific applications. But I think companies are trying to use applications for accessability (see Tesco's, Facebook, Pizza Hut, Windows Live Messenger, Wikipedia applications).