when Apple didn't do a single thing to facilitate the creation or sale of the app

Other than providing the platform and millions of possible sales opportunities. The fees aren't a flat 30% either. However, let's not let facts get in the way of a good rant against Apple.

For example, if an iPhone user messages a non-iPhone user in Apple Messages -- the default messaging app on an iPhone -- then the text appears to the iPhone user as a green bubble and incorporates limited functionality: the conversation is not encrypted, videos are pixelated and grainy, and users cannot edit messages or see typing indicators.

Not everyone has an unlimited messaging bundle, especially when it comes to MMS, so showing things in different colours dependent on whether it's using the data plan, or not is a useful feature.

I guess if you've got an iPhone you shouldn't be worried about that though, and instead be considerate of the feelings of people that can only scrape together enough beans to get an old Android Phone.

Or maybe, just maybe, you could both use a cross platform messaging solution that uses the data allowance. Something that you might not know was necessary if there wasn't the distinction between iMessage and SMS/MMS in the Apple Messaging app.

This really does seem to be scraping the barrel.

And if the game doesn't make money, because of piracy, what is going to pay their salaries when writing the next game? Duh!

I hacked my keyboard to enter this.

Disclaimer: I don't use web mail, for anything.

Threaded email pre-dates Gmail, it even predates Google. I've used threaded email clients since the early 1990s. Just because you haven't seen it before doesn't mean that Google 'invented' it. Oh, and applying threads to Webmail doesn't count as invention.

It doesn't matter what tools are used, I still craft web pages in a text editor. A CS degree shouldn't be thought of as providing the graduate with knowledge about how to use the latest toolsets. It should provide them with the answer to "why" rather than necessarily the "how".

I did a CS degree way back in the early 1980s. I was taught general computing principles and how to code in a few languages. The general principles, how to do analysis, etc. have given me a good grounding to learn other languages and techniques and keep my skills relevant. As long as the companies allow the students to continue to learn general principles, the why rather than the how, then this will be of benefit.

If the company has sufficient influence to make the course concentrate on the how that is most relevant to the company then this would be bad. They might as well just take the people on and forget the degree.

Still niche because those superchargers provide far less refuelling density than the existing gas stations. Given the increased time to refuel, even with a supercharger, the density has to be greater than the existing gas stations serving that route.

The build out of superchargers is impressive but it is catering to a relatively small number of vehicles.

Is this posted AC to avoid bringing down the wrath of the copyright god, or just because you're trolling?

I did work for an international LLC law firm 10+ years ago. They had migrated everything to a Documentum system. All of their paperwork was scanned and included in this system which made it available to anyone that needed to see it; lawyers in the firm, or clients.

My partner is currently working for local government scanning their planning records into a similar system.

In both cases the original paper documents are destroyed after the electronic copy is made.

Over here in the UK I can access most government services without needing to use a piece of paper.

Maybe I move in different circles to you, but your dismissal of the paperless office doesn't ring true with my experience. Its going to take time, but as the GP posted tablets have moved it nearer.

If someone has a criminal record for an assault in the past then that would hang over their head for the rest of their life. Its part of their history.

Which is exactly why Robert Peston wrote the new article. It becomes self defeating for the person wanting to be forgotten because the new articles bring the deed he is trying to suppress into the current. If it goes on it also creates a large number of 'this article has been removed' messages in the Google results, which in itself would be a marker.

It's better to leave this to the legal system ruling on the original articles. If the article is removed then, and only then, should a search engine have to remove links to it, cached copies etc.

Double plus good