citation please.

Hardly. Do you think Apple just magically shat out an OS and hardware a few weeks before the iPhone was released? All of that took quite a bit of time to write and develop before being released to the masses and since Apple didn't buy an already existing product to do it, I would say they started on it before Google purchased Android.

Yes, they should suck it up as your alternative traps everyone in a shitty system instead only the poor. Like it or not, life isn't fair and no amount of federal bureaucracy will fix that. Getting rid of the DOE and other federal departments that truly offer little or no value add for our way of life is a good first step.

Yes, being poor sucks... tell us something we don't know.

I guess that would depend on whether my private fork would somehow give me a competitive advantage or not. Would the iPad sell as well if anyone could have iOS running on any old tablet. I guess it just depends on what you are trying to do. Apple gives back to open source in many ways, but they certainly don't give back everything as that would negate their efforts in setting themselves apart.

I think you are mostly right. Amazon is really the only company currently capable of taking on Apple. If they were to do as you suggest and pretty much sell the Kindroids at cost, they could probably make a bit of coin on the content, but I think they would have to resort to a walled garden similar to Apple's for it to work. Yeah, you could probably the geek community side load apps and music (they would find a way around it anyway) but I wouldn't make it easy for the less savvy users. They will simply open up their app store app or music app and buy from amazon just like the Apple users do en mass. One thing they definitely would have to do though is make the process as seamless as possible because that is why the app store and iTMS took off.

Google owns dick. iPhone is the single most sold smartphone brand presently and Apple makes more than 50% of all smartphone profit and probably 80% to 90% of tablet profit. Google is giving Android away for free. Now if you were to say Samsung or HTC, then your comparison might be valid but Google only makes the OS, not the phones themselves. If you are going to throw in the whole of Android then it would more honest of you to at least count all iOS based devices too when talking about which mobile OS is reigning supreme at the moment.

What do you think these patent lawsuits are if not competing on innovation? I know it's not popular slashdot groupthink but patents are a way of staking claim to your innovations and preventing others from taking advantage of it in hopes that the resulting product will be better than the competition's. Apple is not your run of the mill patent troll. They actually make products incorporating these patentable inventions and I can't fault them for wanting to prevent other competing products from using those inventions.

Now I agree that software patents are a "bad idea," but not every patent lawsuit is about software patents. We all remember that Nokia managed to get a licensing out of Apple, so why shouldn't Apple be able to do the same for things they invented?

Therein lies the rub. Self-enrichment is a powerful motivator which often times spurs creativity which can not only reduce costs, but can also produce a superior product. It's a rare thing when the government actually does something well or efficiently, so I say lets give private enterprise a try and see what happens. Granted, it's not a sure thing... especially when the government starts messing with requirements and regulations and various inefficient procurement rules (ie, parts must be made in Alabama, assembled in North Dakota, and 47% of the parts must be from minority women owned businesses), but if they can mostly keep their hands off, it might just work.

Rights are not granted, they are inherent. Privileges are granted.

Wrong, Jobs said that the free bumpers were available to anyone anywhere who bought and iPhone4, it is NOT limited to the USA.