A "web-only" version is a non-exclusive statement considering that there can also be "install-only" versions. One can sign up for many "web-only" products yet still have an "install-only" version of the same software right now.

(I knew I shouldn't have mentioned SimCity, because it is obviously not a ChromeOS app, but it does fall into the category of apps that are heavily controlled by the hosting developers. Take or leave the "point" as you will. I won't touch it again.)

Agree very much that it is not Google that controls your apps, but whomever hosts them. The GGP (GGGP now?) parenthetically alluded to it not being just Google, but I agree with you that they didn't give enough credence to the fact that the vast *vast* majority of apps are well outside of Google's control.

Fair enough that both traditional and "hosted app" OS's can maintain the "feature" of the author controlling the current version of the app. But the model promoted by the ChromeOS does inherently *promote* the control of the app being in the author's hands. If the author chooses to maintain multiple versions of their apps on their servers, that is still the author controlling the app. Yes, I realize that *not* requiring an installed app to check with the mother ship is also in the author's hands, but it is less work for the author to *not* check in via installed app and *more* work for the author to maintain prior release in a hosted app. In this sense, it is inherent in the hosted model, even though it is not a requirement of the OS.

There is a monstrous difference between "stops shipping native apps" and "delivers a hosted app." What MORON doesn't see THAT difference?

I spent $90 on a 500GB ruggedized, water resistant, USB 3.0 drive to plug into my Chromebook ARM. Hard drive update completed...

While I do like my Chromebook, I must inform you that you are mistaken. All of my ChromeOS apps are hosted, which means that they are very much controlled and maintained by the developer. All of my traditional OS apps (even in Android) are held on my device and I decide when I want to update them to what the developer has decided is "good". For example, I haven't updated my iTunes app on any of my devices for a couple of years now because I have heard bad things about the newer versions. "Not updating" is impossible in the Chrome OS model. I have a SimCity install that I can play with anytime I want whereas the new SimCity model is completely dependent on what the host decides is appropriate. It is very much a different model and the user loses a tremendous amount of control. But I would not always consider that a bad thing...

Hold on. Did you seriously just compare modelling at tech conferences to mining in underground caverns? Did you just compare death by noxious gas, cave-in, or suffocation to *models*not liking that they are *getting looked* at?

The job of a model is to make whatever is being modeled attractive to those that might be a consumer. If you feel that making items appear attractive is sexist, why the hell would you get into the modelling industry. Let's look at the very first quote from one of the models for some insight into exactly why:

"But the work is pretty relaxed and you don't have to do a lot in order to get paid."

Complaining about being stared at for these women is like a call center employee complaining about having to speak to so many damn callers. Any physical contact or lewd suggestions from the consumers is completely inappropriate and should be prosecuted if it falls in the realm of illegal. And doubly so for their employers. But for a model to complain about getting stared at it is ridiculous.

But is it possible that the desire to pirate an early version is driving up the monthly costs for those of us that are playing by the rules and paying for HBO?

If their heads were in a bucket a water, why did they complain so much about being thirsty?

Evidence that is not admissible in a court of law may very well be admissible in the court of common sense.

I do agree with the general position of listening to the courts to determine if someone is guilty or innocent, but that is not always the best place to look. The best example, IMHO, is the MLB steroids debacle. Nobody was convicted in a court of law of steroid use, but I know damn well that a large number of MLB players are guilty of that crime. And there are multiple reports to point out which ones.

Bucking the trend, apparently.

My home page is 202 bytes.

The most used link points to a page that is 45 kilobytes. All data, no images, no css. There are 12 people that use it.

I believe my site design style could be considered Minimalist.

Please mod this one up! Cuts through the revenge impulse and gets to the practical aspects of what you are causing.

Or you could take off your tin foil hat and realize it could be used as a safety feature in cars. If you are sitting at an intersection, and the system detects a probable red light runner approaching, it could warn you to not enter the intersection too quickly.

CSI does a pretty good job of it (if you don't limit your query to engineers), but it is still all about getting an arrest. Eureka on SyFy comes close, but you are correct. The lead character is still a cop.

This really should be modded up. Hysterical and original...

I am all for instant replay and using as much tech as possible to determine EXACTLY what happened at the plate and in the field of play.

But I don't believe that the foreseeable future holds any means of calling a balk.

It isn't the usual calls that are the problem. It is the infrequent ones. Balk. Infield-fly rule. Base runner interference. Batter interfering with the catcher's throw. Pitcher doctoring the ball. Batter using too much pine tar.

These little elements are rules just outside of what could be programmed, IMHO.