We used to use these so called "hard" balls explicitly to throw at people with the intent to hit them. I believe they called it a "game"... Ball tag?

Schools will attempt to ban any and everything that could possibly be fun even if there is no chance of someone getting hurt (trading hockey cards was banned from my elementary school), its ridiculous.

I purchased a Motorola Xoom (my first Android device) about a month after it came out... Wow was I ever disappointed. It would crash several times an hour just browsing the web (especially on Motorola's own Xoom website), but I chalked that up to "being an early adopter". Then I started downloading apps from the Android market and things got even worse, if the app even loaded without crashing, I felt like I was teleported back to the late 90's from a design / look & feel standpoint. Other than the rare exceptions ( Angry Birds ) every app I downloaded didn't even compare to a similar app on Apple's App Store, it felt like companies/developers were publishing an app for Android just to say they did it, without the intention of it actually being used. Many apps that did have an iOS counterpart (*cough* thinkorswim *cough*) hadn't been updated in almost a year and were pathetic at best.

Needless to say after two weeks of torture I took it back and purchased an iPad2, I've been quite happy with it.

Hopefully in a few years it will be a different story, I would much prefer if Apple had some decent competition.

If I was an IPV6 only user, I would want IPV6 pages to rank higher than IPV4 pages which I wouldn't be able to access anyway.

Though, Google may already be doing that...

Have Google modify their page rank algorithm to give any website accessible through IPV6 a slight boost. The power they hold over website revenues is so huge the SEO industry would go nuts over this and you'll see adoption rates explode.

Release early, release often... In my opinion its worked great for the Kernel folks since v2.6 was released. Does anyone remember the hell that was upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4, and again to 2.6?

The more things that change at once, the greater the pain will be, its as simple as that. Holding back all changes and releasing them all at once with a major version upgrade causes the most pain as possible, and people are reluctant to actually upgrade, so testing is limited.

Instead if they release small changes more often, they will get more testing as more people are willing to risk an upgrade if only a small number of changes occurred, and if something does break, its limited in scope. The key here is that you try not to upgrade too many important parts of the system at once. For instance Xorg should probably never be upgraded at the same time as KDE/Gnome if possible.

For example, if Apache releases a new major version, you can send that out and if something breaks, its pretty easy to roll-back or fix the issue, since only Apache was changed and maybe a couple other minor things.

Instead if you upgrade to a new version of the entire distro, if Apache breaks you don't know if its directly related to Apache, or one of the other 1000 packages on the system. It makes troubleshooting, bug tracking and quality control much more difficult.

Its just a matter of time before TV as we know it will go away in favor of something that is completely On-Demand, which the internet is currently king at providing. Some cable companies have their own On-Demand service, but its horrible at best, and they often charge outrageous amounts for it.

I've had a MythTV box running since about 2001, and prior to that I never owned a TV at all. As cable TV switches from analog to digital with restrictions on what you can/cannot record and the requirement of pricey incompatible set top boxes, it won't be long before MythTV fails to work as well. At that point I will likely drop my cable TV entirely and hopefully Google TV or some other alternative will suffice by then, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

The bottom line is that broadcasting programs at specific times of the day is just horrible practice to begin with. People are too busy nowadays and their schedules fluctuate too much. Who wants to schedule their life around the next episode of "Lost" (gag), only to accidentally miss one and be completely "lost" for the rest of the season.

Luckily for them, most cable TV companies offer the internet as well, because eventually TV subscriptions will disappear along with a vast portion of their revenue.

Yup, same experience for me too.

Their flash viewer is nice and smooth with scrolling, supports search and works quite well.

The HTML5 viewer is horrible slow (using Chrome on a quad-core Linux box) and doesn't even support search.

Apparently "just got better" means something entirely different to them then to their users.

Everyone of those sites would be much better if they were done in Flash, likely many times faster too. Two of the three virtually froze my browser entirely, and the "presentation" one took over one second to respond to my keypress to turn to the next slide. (Firefox 3.6.5 on Linux)

Again, its not about HTML5 not being able to do what Flash can currently, its about which is better at it *right now*. Flash is hands down the winner there, and the snails pace that is browser innovation means that this will likely stay that way for many years to come.

If you read my post you would notice that I didn't say these things *couldn't* be done in HTML5, I just said that HTML5 and its tools have a *long* way to go to catch up to Flash.

I mean, if you really wanted to, you could write a game engine in ASM, and it would be the "fastest game in the world". That doesn't mean it makes sense to do it, and virtually no one does it these days *for a reason*.

Eventually I see entire web-sites turning into just HTML5 canvas applications to get the necessary features they need, which the end result is basically identical to what Flash offers right now, only with a plugin. At this point it will be all about the developments tools.