Actually it's forced secure boot _by default_. On x86 hardware MS requires the ability to add keys or switch off secure boot, true, but they also require any PC that is Win8 certified to refuse to boot anything else _unless_ the user disables secure boot in the BIOS. It's all about barrier to entry,

I can't help but think that the difference here is between academic knowledge and vocational experience. Working in an industry gives you the latter but only _maybe_ the former.

For example, WRT fracking I'd like to see more judges with a background in academic geoscience _not_ ex oil-industry workers

Digging in the _kernel_ I.E. in existing open-source code to figure out the interface, and using a shim to intercept system calls This is using the binary blob as a black box, in no way has the driver been decompiled nor abused in any way.

This is the correct way to implement an open-source driver. I think you have a broken understanding of what's going on here.

Actually it is not just a right it's a natural law. Anything that is broadcast with the potential to be heard and/or seen is automatically in the public domain. That is the default! Some governments specifically added the grant of a limited monopoly on distribution of a work (copyright) "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" because the default was thought to not encourage progress sufficiently, this would not be needed without the recognition that the default is the public domain.

Now your legal or moral obligation to obey that grant is a highly relative issue, and as should be discussed, but the right to transfer knowledge and experience you have received is almost as basic as it comes, even if that happens to be a reproduction a performance.

Actually it's "TO all intents and purposes", or, as originally used in an Act of Parliament under Henry VIII, "to all intents, constructions and purposes". The OP who used "for intensive purposes" is without doubt an idiot but he does at least need to be corrected accurately :) Every day's a school day.

A push button dialler has _more_ functionality than the older rotary dialler (at least additional items "#" and "*")
The transition from rotary->push button is simply one of mechanical reimplementation, not of simplification.
Now we have address books, how would people feel if you _only_ had address books, you couldn't add any new numbers you could only choose from the numbers that were somehow "blessed" by your tellco or phone manufacturer. That is a more accurate comparison to the iPodification of tech.

I'm all for UI's that hide complexity as long at they always allow you to express the full power of the system in question, even if they hide much of it by default. However that is rarely what these UIs do, generally they simply remove needed features.

I'm not going to be using my phone data and tablet data at the same time (to any great degree) so I see no reason why I should pay an additional £15 a month for a tablet data plan. Android tethering all the way, and I don't need to pay for another radio in my tablet, win-win.

Odd, I use Google reader on my Vega, it's first release was pretty poor but it really nice now.
Additionally you don't check "pixel counts" on android you allocate assets depending on device categories

http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/screens_support.html

No it doesn't. iOS literally doubles the phone app pixels, it's a terrible way of doing things due to the fact that iOS was not built for resolution independence. Android have been allowing for variable screen sizes and dpi since 1.6. Android apps don't "re-scale" they simply conform to the available space (assuming they are written well)

Nonsense, iOS is almost identical between the iPad and the iPhone, your artificial separation of "mini-app" and "full-size app" makes no sense. The only difference is the layout of the UI nothing about the core of the app needs to change (assuming the API is flexible enough)

Sure there may be apps that are fundamentally impossible to build using a small screen. But mostly the formula is "two panes, one for navigation the other for content" rather than "one screen leading to another" That is easy to do on Android even without honeycomb.