Put a (USB) keyboard and mouse connector on it - and maybe a stand to hold the screen upright. Maybe instead of "tablet" or "laptop" the could call it a "desktop"...

Did my own custom [Open Source Hardware/Software] controller/system: http://www.bradgoodman.com/dimwatt/

No - but the Market will ultimately decide that.

Damn straight! That's why I did this with my Honeywell! ;-)

http://www.bradgoodman.com/thermostat/

The next is rediculously expensive. I use a Honneywell Wifi which is better. From what I know about the Nest from a lot of my friends that have it - the "smart" and "adaptive" stuff doesn't really work too well at all. The Honewell give you a basic schedule - and lets you access it remotely - which is what and all I really need. I don't need all the fancy display, UI, bells/whistles of the Nest. I hope/assume Google will go the "chromecast" route - in delivering an inexpensive, Wifi connected product that just works.

>> The bill will require patent holders who are filing a suit to identify the specific products and claims which are being infringed

It's a good start - in the "trolls" who hold patents but don't have any actual products wouldn't be able to meet this bar. However, it still would not prevent a troll from selling said patents to someone who HAS such an infringing product - to whom violation of such a patent would be valuable, and valid for suit.

I want to just make this incredibly clear to people: Type-1 and Type-2 diabetes are two completely different diseases. They have different causes and different treatments. IMHO, they shouldn't even share the same name.

So, how do I snap the QR code - if I am logging into the website - on my phone...?

I pushed the "stupid" button as soon as I read that. You can't just compare something to "drugs" - because different drugs work differently - and have differing levels of addictive qualities for very different reasons. For example, diploids (like Heroin) jack with your dopamine levels and are highly addictive, whereas stimulants (like cocaine) or depressants (like alcohol) can have very different affects in different people due to things like genetic factors, and mechanisms for ADD (which affect how stimulants affect you) - but in general are less addictive. Then there are things like tobacco that aren't "drugs" - but are also highly addictive.

So in other words...WTF??

(P.S. I'm not really educated in any of this kind of stuff and don't really know what I'm talking about - so don't bother correcting me)

I read on the Internet that they are....

Worst idea ever. There are "computers" and there are "mobile devices". The do different things and serve different purposes. History keeps repeating this. Tablets are not laptops. Tablets are great for watching porn, but people don't use them for serious, high-end productivity. (I am at work, typing this on a workstation, not an iPad).

Just because the two may have the same CPU ( which let's say for the sake of argument - they will) - it'doesn't mean people want an "iOS experience" on a MacBook pro. Chances are if they did - they would have bought an iPad. If they want a keyboard and a mouse (which they probably do - or they'd by an iPad) - they are probably doing things that are less condicive to the iOS-type "touch" interface. They want mouse control (which is more accurate than "touch", and doesn't require lifing one's hands up or far from the keyboard for extended or repetitive sets of time) - a keyboard - and possibly a multi-windowed environment - which they can do for a lot of stuff. They might be doing a lot of word processing, layout - or running XCode. They need to install their OWN SOFTWARE (without the restrictions and complications of Apple's certificates, licensince, AppStore, etc).

So I could see them packaging it as an "iPad with a keyboard" - but it would be a different product - and not a "replacement" for the Air or any other laptop.

But people still DO use it. It may not have been a "good" solution, but it was *a* solution. Today however, (just like with Flex), it is *not* a solution, because it would yield a web site which doesn't work with a lot of popular devices. That wasn't the case before iOS.

I think much of Java's *lack* of decline is attributable solely to it's "native support" (use) in the Android platform - just as the sudden rise of Objective-C (See Tiobe index) is obviously attributable to the iPhone and iPad devices.

Outside of Android - I believe use and acceptance is waning heavily. As a client-side web tool (where it got most of it's early predominance) it has been cockblocked by iOS, and is becoming overshadowed by native HTML5 (JavaScript) stuff. As a server-side tool it has been getting taken over by Ruby/Rails, Python and the stuff mentioned in the OP.

I can (half) see using "biometric" data in something like a grocery store. You swipe your card, and have to press your finger against the scanner in the store. No fingerprint match - no groceries.

But to insist on using "biometric" data for "online" purchases - how are they expecting to receive the biometric data? Through a scanner on the *users* computer? Even if it was done by some sort of credit-card hardware - you are now relying on not *biometric* data - but just *data* - as the users' computer has to send the data - and therefore who's to say if it's really "biometric" or not. (i.e. Some sort of reply attack - or something like it). My point is - there is no way to assure that it's really the user's fingerprint - just data matching the user's fingerprint. So how is this different than a conventional password?

At least a the grocery store - if you stick a "fake" finger on the scanner - you're going to at least create some suspicion - at minimum.