You misplaced your phone. It must be wiped ASAP per corporate policy . Two days later, you found your phone.

Thank you, come again.

Why is it so hard to imagine a technology that "only" stays relevant for 8 years or so? The iPod became relevant in 2004 and stopped being so shortly after the iPhone's introduction. That's less than 8 years of relevance. The iPad is in its Year 3. By the way, there are so much dissing around here that it seems Slashdot has become just another site where haters and fanboys gather.

Slashdot story submitter should use better judgement. The picture taken on the BB10 phone wasn't even framed like the others were: http://forums.crackberry.com/attachments/blackberry-z10-f254/133209d1359583067-gizmodos-camera-review-low-light-performance-fail-wwzsmmo.jpg

Thanks. I'll take that as a career advice. :)

Thank you! I'm one of those dumb people who now wished he had gotten a BA degree instead. Wear a suit, go to meetings, eat lunch with well-dressed men and women, being highly regarded (because of the suit) and moving up the hierarchy without actually doing half of the real work I'm doing now. Engineering has been in a race to the bottom for a while now. The "engineer" title has long lost its prestige and real meaning because countries like India and China are producing cheap "engineers". Companies can hire plenty of cheap engineers to do *any* technical work. So yeah, why invest time and money to become a technician? So I don't blame our kids for not aspiring to become an engineer -- they are smart.

Using Apple as an example is stupid. For one thing, does Motorola have a cult following?

I wonder if your post was just an excuse to boast about how great Apple is.

Apple's success is not about new technology (tablets and smartphones already existed before the iPad and the iPhone, respectively); it is about creating a new market -- they transform a niche market into a maintream market. They have been incredibly successful in doing that because: 1) they make technology accessible and, more importantly, 2) they create awareness. They manage to create awareness not only with excellent marketing but, and this is their very unique advantage over any other company, because all eyes are on Apple. Whether it's tech media or maintream mass media, whether it's the Web, TV, newspaper or radio, every media is following and reporting Apple's every move. Any company can make technology accessible, very few, if any, can create awareness like Apple can.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! This is just "business as usual" in American -- the business of fear and hate of the foreign. When we start seeing Chinese prominently portayed as the bad guys in Hollywood movies, we'll know America has changed target (ref.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel_Bad_Arabs).

So are you saying that if the developer clearly states that it was a BitTorrent app, Apple would have accepted it? I don't think the developer was entirely surprised that the app ended up being rejected. They knew that if they advertised it as a BitTorrent app, it would have had no chance of being accepted by Apple. So they tried to trick Apple knowing that they might be caught anyway.

Which 30$ app would that be? Don't blame RIM for buying the wrong software or for not looking hard enough for the right one.

"a lot of people prefer even an iPhone that drops calls to a Blackberry that doesn't" What did you say about anecdotes again? What an irony. (FYI: RIM has a greater smartphone marketshare than Apple.)

It's just amazing how Westerners in general and Americans in particular view this latest event as a win for Google and see China just wanted to "save face". Reality is the redirect to google.com.hk did NOTHING at all in terms of bypassing censorship -- users in China couldn't even go there! It's just a smokescreen for us Westerners aiming to give the image of a righteous Google rebelling against China censorship (and judging by the comments here, that smokescreen worked marvelously). Bottom line is Google wimped out by once again offering filtered Google search results to Chinese users -- they follow the money as any company would do. Equally amazing is some people believing that China had more to lose than Google in this "standoff". In the grand scheme of things, Google is practically insignificant to China's economy whereas, to Google, China is the biggest yet-to-be-conquered market on the planet. This goes to show that, often times, media manipulation and propaganda are much more effective than censorship.

If Nokia had NO brain at all, it would switch to Android, abandoning their still dominant platform (~40% worldwide marketshare), giving up control on the OS and becoming just another me-too phone manufacturer, just another Sony Ericsson.

MORE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER BUT IT OFTEN IS. And it's exactly why Apple added features to its iPod over the years. DUH!

Sounds like Communism.