I think 16:10 would work better on a tablet than 16:9. 16:9 doesn't work very well in portrait mode especially for browsers.

I'm one of the developers enticed over and I have released apps on their store and have another in the pipeline but they're android apps ported to .bar files. It's a pain in the arse to do and compounded by the fact that the android environment has been deliberately crippled to prevent users from installing other app stores, or even from sideloading. Apparently RIM intend to disable sideloading altogether but how it affects devs will be interesting to see. Either way it's really annoying.

The OS is pretty good but it has it's share of annoyances. I hate the way the lock / pin screen sometimes rotates and sometimes doesn't depending on the app underneath (i.e. if you have mail open under the lock screen it won't rotate). Some icons like Music / Video mysteriously disappear from time to time. Some of the default apps are a mixed experience mess or point to proprietary commercial services (e.g. Zinio). Sometimes wifi goes awol and a total reboot is required. The browser is fast but lacks options like password manager, edit bookmarks, or to put touch activated placeholders for flash. Lots of little things that add up to be annoying. A .5 release could really nail the experience but I fear it may never happen. If anyone ever figures out how to root these things, I'll be installing ICS like a shot.

I really think they should just dump their OS altogether IMO. RIM's value is in security, certification and business infrastructure. They can provide this as value added software / hardware over Android. I think a security hardened Android would be extremely popular.

I have a Playbook and it is nice hardware. It's just a shame about the software which suffers primarily from the fact it isn't android. The app store is pitifully empty and what apps there are often cost more than their counterparts in android land. The OS itself is reasonably stable but still suffers by comparison to android 3.x or higher. I think RIM should give up on their own hardware and really think about becoming a VAR over android.

My reading comprehension is just fine. You throw around insults because a GUI dares not do things the way you expect. Rather than stepping back and perhaps considering the rationale for this decision, or maybe, just maybe offering constructive criticism you start ranting and insulting people. Immature doesn't begin to cover it. Grow up.

Er sorry, but evolution is studied as rigourously as any other scientific discipline. Papers are published, papers are peer reviewed, rebuttals are issued, hypotheses are discarded and the science gets stronger. You pretend this is not the case but even a cursory examination of the field shows it to be the case.

If you have Netflix and consider yourself a scientist that is not afraid of new evidence, watch "Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed". I found the documentary to be disturbing and scary as well as informative and entertaining.

Now I see where you're coming from and it's certainly not from a scientific viewpoint. That movie has been soundly debunked for the creationist propaganda that it is and it isn't hard to find virtually point by point rebuttals of everything it says.

No I get the point all too well. If developers don't exactly deliver what you Mr Anonymous Coward demand (for free) regardless of it's merits vs some other mechanism then you're going to call them assholes. I'm sure they'll be very sorry to see you go.

Yeah those arrogant GNOME people put in a sensible default behaviour and the means for you to override it if you wish via an extension. Such arrogance!

People debating evolution are not rational people. If over 100 years of overwhelming evidence from multiple strands is not enough to convince these people then what difference will a few more make? The first rule of the denialist is to ignore or handwave away the evidence no matter how comprehensive it may be. Ignore it, cherry pick it, nit pick it, place undue weight on dubious evidence, emphasise the gaps in knowledge or minor discrepancies, employ copious amounts of wishful thinking and pseudoscience to pretend it doesn't matter, quote mine your opponents, and generally do everything to avoid confronting it at all. And above all else, never advance another explanation which is in any way reasonable or testable.

Creationists are old hands at doing all of the above but the technique is common to denialists of all shades - moon hoaxers, 9/11 truthers, anti-vaxxers, global warming deniers. The same tactics every time.

It's not too hard to conform with the rules. It mainly involves getting user consent before issuing tracking cookies. i.e. a web filter might test for a user-has-consented-to-tracking cookie and redirect them to an informational page explaining what cookies or data is stored on the user's machine and what it does. If they click OK then the user-has-consented-to-tracking cookie is set and it's business as usual.

Cookies to do with security, checkout baskets etc. are largely exempt. The law is to control analytics cookies from advertisers, sites that remember users and so forth.

A bigger issue is this law is going to be hideously hard to enforce, there are plenty of edge cases to consider (such that the guidelines are 30 pages long) and at the end of the day it's not really doing much for the user. I think it would have been better to oblige EU sites under law to honour a "do not track" cookie sent by the browser with various levels of privacy control.

Want to bet that if this material made its way into products that the bottle would be redesigned and coincidentally the total volume was reduced by a substantial amount. That or they'll hike the price up way beyond the 0.1c or whatever it costs to actually apply it.