Complaining about tone is ad hominem. Address the argument:

Are you willing to pay more money than the cost of an iPad for a device that is bigger, has worse battery life, runs windows and lets you manage your own synchronization?

You can't just whinge that the market isn't serving you.

The truth is, those devices have existed since the ThinkPad and still exist -- and yet you aren't saying you use or still use yours (never mind that the Newton was better by every metric that doesn't include running PhotoShop 3.5).

E.g., I've had one of these for almost 20 years: http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:710T

You design or license a box of your own. You put video out on those boxes, and you pray your customers have a TV and your game demonstrates a great enough value to drive sales. Oh wait, you thought competing would be easy? You thought you could free-ride on your competitors hardware? They call the shots and you can agree to play by their rules or go it alone. Capitalism!

Sibling post is mine, but I may as well log in so maybe someone will see it:

This is why I propose an artificial government enforced monopoly on intended meaning rather than just expression.

Expression monopolies are so 19th century. We need to get on with monetizing the roots of expression: intent.

Just imagine how great that world will be!

(No really, the implications are awesome.)

Maybe they need "Lebensraum", because there are not many planets that sustain life?

You're a spacefaring civilisation capable of building an interstellar invasion fleet, and you're living on planets? Planets - those huge objects with totally predictable orbital paths, at the bottom of a deep gravity well? The ones that you might as well paint a big red target on and shout 'POINT THE RELATIVISTIC KILL VEHICLES HERE, GUYS!' And where 99.99999% of the usable mineral resources are miles down and under fantastically high pressure? Those things?

Wow. You know, I'd have thought that the art of creating artificial habitats in space would be one that a civilisation would master long before they get to the point of interstellar colonisation and conquest. I guess I was wrong.

Actually, the movie (and book) got the name from the NATO terminology for the Soviets' new super-fighter. The project that resulted in this aircraft began in the late eighties. Of course, back in the Cold War intelligence reports from the USSR were patchy, and nobody was quite certain whether the documentation they were seeing referred to conceptual designs for a future fighter, or to an actual flying prototype. It was just on the edge of plausibility that there was a real Firefox out there, not just a prototype.

It was the same in America: design and planning work on what became the F-22 began in 1981.

In fact, it's exactly the reason that we (civilized people) form them. That way, I can spend my life doing something more useful than making sure that I'm the best at bashing heads and grabbing loot.

I had a similar sentiment the last time MS was spinning its wheels looking for traction in Internet search.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=439888&cid=22278050

But let's look at what we get if we use Bing instead of Live... Re-writing that post a little bit we get:

It sounds like they are going to make some progress this time, but I'm still mostly on the outs with this name. For my demographic Bing doesn't associate with anything other than funny sounds and Chandler complaining about the WENUS or Annual Net Usage Statistics.

Actually, I'm surprised you don't argue it stole their vocation. Otherwise it seems you understand the argument, you just willfully ignore it. The labor pool for hand-copied books was destroyed by the printing press. Scriveners had to do what programmers will have to do, train for a new vocation or find a new way to contract our their services in exchange for compensation. I'm sure there is still some patron desperately seeking a calligraphed book.

Other forms of automation have similarly destroyed the labor pool for the cobbler and the blacksmith. However, one can still buy or commission hand-made boots and swords. Perhaps we'll see artisan software in the same way we see artisan chairs.

(Oh wait, maybe the buzzword for that is saas. Problem solved?!)

You might be interested in a similar reply I made to Commodore64_love at http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1160895&cid=27196657.

The end of scarcity is exactly what we need to be dealing with now, wrt virtual "property". 'Replication' of physical artifacts is coming whether it's Star Trek-style or The Diamond Age-style and/or some other variations in between, only time will tell. It's pretty far out there, but we're going to see more mundane forms of artifact printing very soon and this whole can of worms that we're fretting about with songs is about to happen with chairs or wallpaper and who-knows what else. For a comparison, look at the "underground" trading of sewing machine software for embroidery and cross-stitch piracy; that's already happening. I mean we have "IP infringement" entering the zeitgeist from all angles, from grannies and woodworkers to song-traders and warezers. The current system has to change, because you can't have a functioning society where everyone is a criminal under the law. That leads directly to the sort of draconian police-states that the so-called American Spirit directly opposes. And further, as I mention in the other comment, you can't enforce rights management when replication of all expression is ubiquitous without insanely invasive methods.

First, so there isn't any straw-man thrashing, of course a worker deserves to get paid for his labor. A programmer is like any other laborer. You agree to a contract, that contract is enforced by the state, you do the work you agree to do and you get paid as agreed to. If you are working without an agreement to get paid, that's a poor decision if payment is what you're seeking!

That said, we're on the cusp of a new era. We are very close to a world of ubiquitous robotic labor and a world without scarcity (robotic resource gathering, digital replication, robotic manufacturing/artifact printing). Advances in technology will reach both of these at some point (though probably not at the same time). As fantastic as it sounds, 'computer programming' is another form of labor that will eventually be automated with technology. Software that writes software only has to be written once, if you will. The process has already begun. The research is already happening. We already have replaced millions of jobs with robots and will surely replace many more. Artificial intelligence in general and genetic programming research specifically has marched on for years. Robots will manufacture other robots; Computers will program themselves or each other. I don't think this prediction is controversial.

Sure we'll get to keep wage slaving for a couple more decades until India and China completely corner the market on programming, but you really need to start coming to terms with the reality of technological advancement.

The current IP-regime simply cannot cope rationally with the changes that are just beginning. I mean, imagine it, how is copyright going to handle an age where kids have media devices in their heads and are vlogging straight from their eyes? Will there be some giant royalties agent monitoring all IP witnessed and licensing it or censoring it out? How far away is this future? (Surely we'll be there before the end of scarcity.) Will any relevant cultural artifacts have reached the public domain? Creation of protected works has skyrocketed and is accelerating, but expiration into the public domain has all but ceased -- if IP laws aren't restructured will we need tamper-proof Rights Management implants to protect the vast expanse of expression monopolies? (That's the reality of the current "copyright by default" 1976 Act. Every cocktail napkin scribble, every email, voicemail, lecture note, every action caught on every recorded cctv and security cam, etc. It's all 'rights managed' for the next 100 years or 1000, because no one really knows when Congress will stop extending terms. Those are your rights that are getting managed by the way -- your 1st Amendment right to expression ends where expression monopolies begin.)

I guess my point is, if technological advancement continues to accelerate 'the future' is going to be here a lot sooner than we realize. We need to start thinking about how our laws, businesses --really, relationships of all kinds-- have to change to accommodate the new reality. Essentially infinite copyright protection on essentially every expression since 1976 is not "promot[ing] the Progress of Science and useful Arts."

Sibling posts make good points too.