I think you missed something or made an assumption that has given you the wrong idea of the concept behind Continuum. I don't think that MS is expecting one to carry around a docking station and all the paraphernalia. I believe they think people will be a dock for their home and/or work. Outside of those environs, the phone is just "a phone". But when they get to the workplace or at home where they consume media, surf the web, etc., they can hook up to the dock and have the full laptop experience. Who wouldn't want that ability?

And today Caryn McBride understands the maxim "just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

Maybe because it was a convertible...there are many such beasts running the currently-available Microsoft OSes. Surface looks to be a svelte little thing.

I'm sure you are fine with Apple suing other device manufacturers for basically producing a rectangular product, right?

The phone is locked up? You obviously haven't read any of the articles about MS providing support for the indie developer that created the Windows Phone unlocking app. And I assume that iOS is a wide-open environment, right? Try actually using the Windows Phone OS, first, before passing judgement (if you can be objective).

Kno is a company that started this type of initiative about 2 years ago. Check them out at kno.com.

When has the Republican party attempted to give back any of the Federal powers "stolen" from the states? While I agree the Republicans pay lip service to limiting the Fed, when have they ever really put that ideal in action.

Each of the two major parties is in it for themselves, not for the rest of us (again, gross generalization, blah, blah blah).

As to some states failing while others prospering if the Fed were to stop their redistibution of wealth, that would be a shame. But history is littered with the downfall of governments and civilizations. Sounds harsh, I know; but it's true. Also, no one is making us stay in any given state (or country, if it gets that bad). If a state is not bearing up under pressure, move. We are free to move about this land of ours. Surely one can find a place that suits one's ideals and needs. If they cannot change the place they are (I'm talking to myself here, too), go elsewhere.

My reference to our founders involves the fact that only the powers specifically granted the Federal government by the Constitution were to be within the federal purview. All else was to be that of the States. The Federal government has stepped way beyond that limitation. This was a response to a the colonies being ruled by a government separated geographically from their citizenry and thus, out of touch with the immediate needs of said colonists. I don't believe for one second that a group of in-fighting, power-hungry, money-grubbing (gross generalizations, I know, but you sound intelligent and I believe you will get my meaning) politicians can honestly make decisions that best serve the citizens of states outside of the politicians' day-to-day exposure.

No, I intended to imply that the flames targeted at me would accuse me of being anti-American. I apologize for the ambiguity.

I am encouraged, though, that the majority of replies have been in agreement.

I love my country, I hate my government (because it is no longer "my" government). We need a change. We need to break the stranglehold the Republican and Democratic parties have on the machinery of government. We need the populous to wake up and act...vote. Vote for repealing rights that the federal government has usurped from the state governments. We need to limit federal legislation of states and depend upon each state to make the decisions that affect the people that they know better than the federal government (you know, they way our founders intended it to be). I'm going to stop here and get ready for the onslaught of all of the knee-jerk, anti-American flames aimed squarely at me.

<soapbox>

I am in the minority on what I am about to state, but I believe it nonetheless. The United States of America are exactly that: a union of separate States. These States are entitled certain rights, among those are the authority to cast their vote via the Electoral College as to whom should represent that Union as President. States may choose to cast their vote along the lines of their constituents' popular vote...or maybe not. That decision is up to each individual State. The response of the State's citizens is a different issue, should the State's EC rep vote against the popular decision. Our Federal government has been assuming what should be States' rights for far too long. Forming a "compact" among States to cast EC votes based on the popular national vote only serves to lessen the power of the States even more.

We should be taking States' rights back from the Federal government, not surrendering more. The Feds, both Republicans (the party as which I registerd to vote) and Democrats, have proven they are out of touch with the citizenry and are not concerned with our best interests. Most of the law making responsibility and care of citizens was intended by our founding fathers to be at the State level. Career politicians have usurped these roles over time in order to provide "guaranteed employment" for Federal politicos.

Let's start a groundswell of support for reverting to States' rights and for our government, both State and Federal, serving the people instead of vice versa.

</soapbox>