wasn't Bush running around the world in 2001 enraging peoples everywhere by backing out of treaties and basically saying 'we're the US of A and we will do things the way we want.'? I recall massive demonstrations everywhere he went and this was all before the 9/11 attacks. After which, even those he pissed off were behind him for going after Osama in Afghanistan but then his obsession with Iraq turned them all against the US again. Bush was an idiot and the Americans were too for not seeing the mess Iraq was.

LoB

ditto on G W Bush in 2000 showed how stupid Americans are and in 2004 showed how ignorant Americans are. But Santorum is as scary as Palin was.

LoB

I forgot, google.com is just another web site. my mistake.

LoB

you sir are completely missing the point HP was making and trying to use facts and logic. HP is trying to get some value from WebOS and facts and logic do not help them. It really sounds like Meg and clowns were in a meeting trying to figure out how to get people to run to their open source phone/tablet platform and they figured getting them to run from Google/Android was a good option. The slide showed up asking why would developers and OEMs run from Google/Android and someone said, 'if it were proprietary like when Honeycomb was released'. Along comes this drivel about how Google could take Android inhouse because of Motorola Mobility.

You nailed it though but the truth won't help HP. I see them running to Microsoft again and this time, Meg and Steve will drive them into the dirt like DEC was. IMO

LoB

Let me see, netbooks originally shipped with Linux and SSD's. Along came the Windows XP deals and the SSD's were gone and replaced with HD's. Microsoft ports Windows 7 to ARM to go after the tablet market and puts it's phone UI on it. Almost all current tablets use SSD's.... So Windows 8 tablets will be using HD's.

got it. lol

LoB

most anyone who bases their profession on only Microsoft software will tote this kind of line. Microsoft targets companies and lets their fans know who are the enemy so you see tutorials like this where the enemy is trashed while Microsoft's software is advanced. Self preservation by those following Microsoft and basing their livelihood on them. Microsoft loves this and designs their partner and developer programs to promote these things.

It is also why these kinds of "bugs" tend to be looked at as intentional by those who've been in the field a while. There's usually nothing to prove it's illegal and only years and years later does illegal activity show up in court docs but usually too late for a case to be filed. IMO

LoB

even with the declining market share, there are enough IE users to give BING a nice bump. It's probably time for some nice "independent" research to come out showing how MS BING is gaining market share and this bump will help that study perfectly.

LoB

but wasn't this a signature update which included a flag targeting the number one search engine used? Even if it were some automated system which somehow generated a diagnostic which flagged google.com, wouldn't you think Microsoft would run tests on this stuff before shipping it out? I think they have the resources and the money to do this.

they have done this type of thing before and landed in court a few times over it but it cost them little compared to what they gained. As they well know, claiming it's a bug and fixing it at a later date keeps them out of court but does the damage intended or damage benefiting them and harming the competitor.

yes, it could be a mistake or a bug but here's the problem: The company putting the software which controls most of the worlds desktop computers is the same company behind this "bug". Are they really not testing this stuff enough so to let these through? And if not, should they really be your desktop OS vendor?

Because of their history of doing this to their top competitors with lengthy periods due for fixing and releasing patches, I would always lean on the side of this being intentional. Incompetence runs up there in second place.

LoB

they took out AOL's TCP/IP stack years ago too and low and behold it happened right around the time Microsoft was getting MSN going. The default action for users clicking their AOL links and finding the dialer stopped working was to use the MSN dialer and bring MSN in. It took a court case to get them fix it and that fix was claimed to take months. It was a bug. Right, because they didn't bother to test against the most used TCP/IP stack out there. Google's a target now so stuff like this is just fun for Microsoft.

LoB

given 2 choices in a seach, the standard Rick Santorum site and the "other" site lots of people will find the anti-Santorum site more interesting. Supporters are going to know they want the candidates site but those just surfing for something to read are going to gravitate to the more _colorful_ spreadingsantorum.com. I think it's human nature.l

As it stands, Santorum just has to continue to purchase Google ad space so his candidacy site is top on the results page. Or continue to show why people should not vote for you.

LoB