so you can go back to sleep.

At the low-budget end of the film market, Kickstarter is already replacing Hollywood angel investors and YCombinatot is bringing in more conventional VC startup money. What I'm proposing here would simply accelerate the process.

As for legacy content, even MICROSOFT can figure out that masters of films or records in archival storage that just sit there make the owner no money. There's a lot of long-tail potential in the vaults of Universal. Why should a movie or record EVER go out of print?

But those concerns are for grownups. You can go back to dreaming of being sparkly. And hope the next VAMPYRE you see isn't carrying a Zune.

by pooling their petty cash and simply buying up the big mass market content providers. And probably manage the Hollywood IP portfolio more efficiently and profitably than Hollywood can.

We can hope that everyone actively involved has figured this out and the real Net war in progress is over how much Hollywood is going to get paid to go away. Perhaps Hollywood should get what it wants to ensure that these people get an early start on partying themselves to death.

The Net Coalition can make Hollywood effectively disappear from the Web.

And that is exactly what they should do.

No advertising or product sales or even a visible presence until the stock prices of these companies drops far enough that the members of the Net Coalition can buy the biggest MPAA studios and RIAA labels out of petty cash. Then fire the management of these companies and replace them with people who know something about music in thel digital age. I believe that the tech industry can probably manage the IP portfolios more rationally and profitably than the jackass incumbents in any case.

The *AA wants censorship? I think they should get it. Enough of it to destroy them.

to get each other's mobile OSs banned from public sale. In the meantime, it would be a bright idea for some patent attorneys to look at the 'abandoned' mobile OSs to see if they conflict with the Apple / Google / M$ IP portfolios.

One of these days, a lawsuit-proof mobile OS might prove extremely valuable. Imagine the next generation of mobile OS products based on WebOS and Maemo rather than banned-from-sale iOS and Android.

And an object lesson as to why tech companies should compete on technology and marketing ability rather than on the ability to suppress competitor's products via legal means would also be a good thing, and better it be that companies I am not involved with provide it.

to the person who needs to unload an OS if one's mother knew the current President of IBM socially from mutual involvement in high-level charity fundraising.

"Not exactly poor" indeed.

The people who have actually used it, myself included find the UI very good indeed.

Nobody is suing about it.

For a tablet/smartphone manufacturer, having a superior UI backed with lawsuit-proof code is the way out of the legal clusterfuck involving Apple, Google, and even Micro$oft . . . which appear to have collectively concluded that since they can't compete on superior technology, that their road to future growth is to sue its competing OSs out of existence.

Personally, I hope Apple and Google and Microsoft succeed in blowing each other out of the mobile market.

Several vendors sell multipurpose Lathe-Mill-Drill 3-in-1 machines.

is user pushback followed by voting with one's feet if the vendor still doesn't get the message. I plck a UI to maximize my efficiency, and I saw nothing in Unity that would help me do that on a desktop. I wouldn't mind trying Unity on a tablet or smartphone. If Shuttleworth wants happy Unity users, he needs to convince OEMs to put it on tablets and smartphones.

So I run Kubuntu on all 4 of my machines, including the netbook. If some way is found to make it impossible to run KDE on Ubuntu, I'll go back to Debian.

But because all the OSes are going to be extended to the mobile, all the vendors are making changes to the DE at the expense of some discomfort of the users.

Desktops are not smartphones,. The main differences are far more screen real estate (true even on a netbook with the screen the size of a tablet ...netbooks don't need virtual keyboards or touchscreen cursor control), a physical pointing device, and a physical keyboard. Optimising a desktop with a smartphone UI is a great reason to change distros or operating systems.

Certainly, a single unified UI is convenient for developers. But if the price of developer convenience is mass migration to the competition, it's not worth paying.

you and Shuttleworth and others who think You Know What Is Best For Us.

You and others who think like you do should feel free to run your ideas up the flagpole, but if they do not fit our perceived needs, don't be surprised if the salute you get is a raised middle finger if you are annoying enough about pushing it.

and smartphones and tablets are sufficiently different environments that the best they can do is to annoy desktop and smartphone and tablet users sufficienty to switch to more specialized OSs more suitable for the devices they are used on.

You're posting from a Mac, right?