Launching Tasks
Sharing Wifi

Just a couple I use off the top of my head

I'll be looking forward to the updates soon. I switched to Linux Mint once Cinnamon came out, it seemed less buggy than Mate while still giving me the use of Gnome utilities that I preferred over XFCE. Cinnamon was feature-limited at first, but Linux Mint + Cinnamon still had most of the Ubuntu goodness combined with a UI direction that made sense. Now that more features are getting added to Cinnamon with every new version, I'm glad I made the switch. My only real question is how to best move my Nautilus scripts over to Nemo.

In addition to all of the other instances mentioned above, I've been using Alarm Clock Xtreme with shake to turn off on my Android phone (actually two phones, using on both a Droid Incredible and Galaxy Nexux) for a couple years now. This patent is only original if you consider whacking the phone significantly innovative over shaking, flipping, or any other motion based ways to silence phones that have been around for years.

We gained a bunch of customers by advertising a data-hogging feature of our phones, but then the customers had the audacity to want to use that feature! How dare they!

You too can create your own search engine to compete against Google. Google doesn't have a patent on that, only their particular algorithm for doing search. Create your own search engine algorithm and you're good to go. What you can't do, however, is create your own algorithm to search multiple sources on a phone, or create your own slide-to-unlock algorithm for a phone, because Apple has patented the very idea of doing that. And somehow you think those are the "technologies" that need protection from the government wrenching them away.

Because customers are unlikely to come back if their last phone never got updated? This attitude sounds like a good way to get customers to switch do a phone that gets timely updates.

And how is this *not* creationism? If you're trying to prove that not everyone that doubts evolution is a harboiled creationist, you probably shouldn't base your argument on a slightly reworded form of creationism.

Office.

The formats are a de facto standard, Open/LibreOffice aren't completely interoperable 100% of the time, and no one ever got fired for using the solution that works best with the documents/spreadsheets everyone else is creating.

Linux Mint. Based on Ubuntu, but with a reasonable desktop manager plan. I use Cinnamon, which is trying to make Gnome3 look similar to the Gnome2 desktop but it still a bit of a work in progress. It also comes with Mate, which is a full fork of Gnome2. Either way Mint is more oriented for desktop-friendly interfaces in the long term, as opposed to thinking a tablet interface is a good idea.

Except, as far as science is concerned, the open discussion and debate has already occured, and the correct idea won. The problem is that the losing side still won't give up because they are more concerned with the Bible being the literal truth than the actual science involved.

I suppose a good example to reinforce what you are saying would be this post. Just go to the comments and look what happens when an article about the Facebook login page gets promoted to the #1 Google result for "facebook login". So many helpless people. Just imagine what changing the method to open a browser would do to them.

It makes sense to compare Foxconn to practically-no-longer-existing factories in the Western world because of the recession and high unemployment in the Western world. The US could really use those manufacturing jobs, but Apple would rather exploit cheap Chinese labor because it helps increase their record profits. There is a reason the Western world implemented regulations preventing the type of labor conditions that exist in these factories, but Apple (and everyone else using Foxconn) would like to ignore those reasons if it helps their bottom line.

$250,000 is nothing compared to future revenue once they are locked in to Microsoft products

It's simpler than that. 9/11 succeeded more due to the mindset at the time than anything that wasn't allowed on planes. Ten years ago, the standard operating procedure for a hijacking was to give in and deal with it on the ground. The 9/11 attackers went after the flaw in this plan, which assumed the hijackers weren't suicidal. Today, even if we didn't have reinforced doors and still banned knives on planes, any would be hijackers with box cutters wouldn't make it two steps up the aisle before half the passengers would take them down.