Big Clock is going to shut this bill down with their extensive lobbying.

It isn't a misunderstanding of your words, I was trying to explain how science works at a level you might understand. I am wondering if you noticed the user ID numbers of the people trying to explain why you are wrong.... I wonder what that might indicate?

Ok here is the situation.

You are a caveman who finds two rocks that seem to stick together when they touch each other. This seems strange so you decide to see what might make this happen. Your first idea is there is tree sap on the rocks making them sticky so you wash the rocks off in the stream, but the rocks still stick together. Then you decide that the sun or the wind must be making the rocks stick together so you go into the darkest cave you can find. The rocks still stick together, and you go tell your best friend Ooge about the rocks. Ooge says did you try washing the rocks? And you say yes Ooge I am not an idiot. So now you have eliminated all the ways you know that would make the rocks stick together, but you don't know why they stick together. Since you are a scientist caveman you won't say it is magic you just write what you measured on the cave wall next to your pictures of the animals and go work on Ooge's banging rocks together to make fire theory. Later on we figure out it was magnetism and Ooge wins the noble prize for fire.

Things become much more complicated then first impression when you try to really explain something. For example I went to a football game with a group of Chinese grad students and they asked me how a team can score points. I thought to myself this is easy, and began to explain the rules.

1. Touchdowns are worth 7 points... err they are worth 6 points technically
2. After a touchdown the scoring team can decide to kick the ball through the uprights for 1 point
Or
3. The scoring team can decide to run another regular play and if they enter the end-zone again on that 1 play they get 2 points.
4. Fields goals are 3 points and are scored when the team on offense can kick the ball through the uprights.
5. The defense can score points if they can tackle an offensive player in the end-zone while they are holding the football. The defensive team then gets 2 points and gets the ball kicked to them on the following play instead of the normal system where the scoring team kicks the ball to the other team.
6. If the defense can steal the ball and run into the end-zone they are facing then it is a touchdown and rule 2 and 3 apply.

By the end of this discussion they were more confused then when we started. So when you say how hard can it be to explain how to store a file questions like.

1. How to delete?
2. How to rename?
3. How to create folders or other organizational structures?
4. How to move items between organizational structures?
5. How to copy an item already in storage?
6. How to download multiple files?
7. Can security be set or changed?
8. Oh yeah and how to I upload a file in the first place?

The more precision you apply to a discussion the more complicated they tend to get. Just like a touchdown is 7 points is easier to understand, upload a file is easy too.

Apple wants it's products to be unique and have different capabilities compared to other companies products. In fact Apple is famous for having unique features and exploiting that fact till the competition catches up. If Apple spends tons of money making a new feature for the iPhone or iPad like a new hardware 3D accelerator and release it to their developer community, they would want to see this special ability used in the software created for their product. If a significant portion of the developer community uses Flash or a Flash translation layer to make their programs , then Apple is at the whims of Adobe if they decide to support the new feature. Adobe might say hmmm only the new iPhone ultra 2000 has the 3D accelerator system, and it would cost us money to develop for it, but the majority of phones do not have this feature we should probably just skip it. Then when consumers compare the new Android phone and the new iPhone they will say "hey these things work exactly the same for the programs I want to run" This might be good for Adobe, and the cheaper non-3D accelerated phones, but it would be devastating for Apple. You do not want your developers coding to the lowest common denominator in terms of functionality and features. You want the developer to exploit your strengths in the products they make.

Spacecase

I read an article discussing the future of on-demand cable programming and the future of commercials. The article stated that on a regular TV show (IE NOT the super bowl, or big event etc..) the average was 1 penny per viewer per commercial based on the Neilson ratings. If the average TV show has 24-30 commercials per hour show and my wife and I watch the show together then we are looking at about 60 cents per show the producing channel makes in profits. I am very keen on the idea of paying 60 cents per show to never see another commercial, if the TV companies get the money they want, and I get the show sans commercials I want, it is a win-win unless you are a advertiser. $2.00 for a show at iTunes resolution is not a great deal, but if cable companies or iTunes step-up and tell ABC that they will charge a rate closer to the advertising rate then people would swarm to it. I am not suggesting they force payments on every viewer, but if they had a on-demand system or web system that let me purchase shows without commercials I could decide if I wanted to watch Free-ABC or Commercial-Free-ABC.

Just my 2 commercials worth of ideas.
Spacecase