Personally, I don't think it's all that smart to try to out-Apple Apple. Apple's strength is ridiculously tight integration of hardware and software, perfected over a decade now. Microsoft's strength is that they are the default desktop/laptop O/S for pretty much everyone else.

If they try to copy Apple, they become the second best at tightly integrated hardware/software, instead of the best (in a commercial sense) at selling ubiquitous, flexible operating systems.

Put all that differently - why would I buy a Microsoft walled-garden laptop when I could just buy a macbook?

I buy Microsoft stuff because it comes on my flavour of hardware, I don't buy the hardware because I love Windows 7 so very much.

American exceptionalism is the problem I am referring to. More traditionally known as 'hubris'. There are some good plays about it, you should check them out. The Greeks had the concept nailed down about 2500 years ago.

Your government and many of your citizens operate on the basis that there are "Americans" and "others". You regard yourselves as special, privileged, the chosen people. You have failed to register that this is obviously not true, nor have you registered that your supposedly permanent hegemony of only a few years ago is already gone.

Once you decide that some are "more equal than others", you lose the ability to impartially assess any situation. The concepts essential to a just, democratic world become unworkable, because they rely on the opposite view, that no-one person or group should be more privileged than any other.

The GP's comment exemplifies the (majority) American mindset - murdering people is only problematic if it offends your constitution. Well, guess what? Fuck your constitution. It's problematic because it's fundamentally wrong, not because it offends some American document which you guys tend to ignore most of the time anyway.

Hence you cannot understand (a) your immense economic problems (b) your immense geopolitical problems or (c) your immense problems with groups of angry foreign men wanting to hurt you. None of it makes sense to you because you cannot see that you are not special, and therefore that there will be no automatic Hollywood ending to these dramas.

Bill Clinton made a speech towards the end of his presidency where he argued strongly that the US should strengthen international institutions and human rights standards as much as possible. His reasoning was that America's time in the sun wouldn't last forever, and that when some other power - China, for instance - was dominant, America would be grateful for strong and liberal democratic international governance. Sadly Bush II and Obama haven't heeded that warning, and have contributed to a world of unilateral murder and mayhem as a result. The precedent of the powerful being entitled to murder the weak instead of pursuing them according to law will have terrible consequences for all of us, I fear.

You don't think this might have happened already (the targeting, not the hell breaking loose)?

I hope this is a joke. In case it's not, I assume you agree that by parity of reasoning, other countries have the right to launch missiles into US territory to kill US citizens if they decide they are beyond the reach of those countries' domestic legal systems?

The fact that you are more concerned that your President is killing US citizens without charge or trial outside of a warzone than that your President is killing human beings without charge or trial outside of a warzone is at the heart of what is wrong with your country.

You have started down the path where arbitrary murder by the state is sometimes acceptable. You can still turn back, but you need to turn back right now, in relation to all human beings.

It will be interesting to see how the US reacts when, with its power in decline, China or India or Russia start killing civilians in other countries because they are on some "kill list" or other.

So you place no value whatsoever on the pure visual spectacle. You refer to theatre, which suggests that you are happy to have your stories conveyed to you by people standing around in an unchanging, brownish room talking to one another.

I'd say you're atypical, even amongst people into the arts. While I don't mind a decent play, the experience of watching a genuinely good movie cannot be replicated by a book or theatre production.

Do you avoid art galleries because you can stay at home and read descriptions of what's in the paintings?

Furthermore, you must be going to the wrong movies, because there are many, many movies which are "more than just spectacle, explosion and skin". Try avoiding "The Avengers" and go to something with some substance instead.

I must disagree about 3D, too. Used properly, it does add to the quality of the visual spectacle.

Interesting that you would say that - I found the 3D instantly effective from the moment the film started, so perhaps your speculation about eye separation is right. I watch a lot of movies and would say that Prometheus is the best looking film I've seen in a cinema.

3D is a challenging thing for the ./ crowd. On the one hand it's quite a nifty technology and falls into that category of "things people in the 1950s would happen in the future which are finally, belatedly happening". On the other hand, people here are such cynical, tightwad shut-ins that they scream and yell about how it's a gimmicky rip-off propagated by the Hollywood mafia designed to lure them out of their basement lairs and steal their thoughts.

IMHO Prometheus (and also recently, Hugo) shows that 3D has matured to a point where it can be used to great effect to actually enhance movies, instead of being used as a gimmick where things 'poke out' of the screen at you. The only thing I dislike is that it does not capture real 3D - you can't move your head to see behind something, for example.

I need to file a patent on frivolous lawsuits. I know exactly how I'd word the letter announcing my intent to protect my IP.

"Yo dawg, I heard you like to sue, so I'm suing you for suing, so you can go to court for going to court..."

I would caution against trying in-home support unless you live in a well off neighbourhood or can afford to live on a low wage. Problem is there is some young buck, usually the son of a friend of a friend, who gets off on messing with computers and will do it for pocket money. It's hard to make a living wage against competition like that.

If this sounds bitter, yes I've tried it. I'm a bit similar to you started my IT career doing assembler programing on IBM 360's , became a systems programer, then started doing network support, then pc support, then ended up doing PHP programing. I hate managing and at an early stage became a freelance contractor to get decent money but avoid all the management politics.

I had to give all up when I had to take 3 years out to look after my terminally ill mother. Tried to get back in after but I was too far behind and frankly not in all that good a state myself by then.

Tried the home PC support but it's very hard to find a price level that you can afford to live on and people can afford you, though I very much enjoyed the work and meet real live people again after 2 many years in 2nd line support. Did a few other non-computer ventures for a while ( Ran a bar, worked as a photographer) but was never really as happy as when I was messing with bits . Neither did I make as much money , and that with the loss of most of my capital through two divorces forced a rethink.

In the end I stumbled in into a job I really enjoy. I'm a model railroader by hobby and started using 3-d cad to make models by 3-d printing. A year and a bit later I have a business that almost supports me and my family.

If you have been in the biz for 39 years, like me you're not getting any younger - go find something you enjoy and do it.

Because anyone that's ever used the iPhone or Android Facebook apps know that, you know, apps are just what Facebook excels at.

Call me when they can produce one of their own that isn't a steaming pile of terribad.