Previously I've used the free version Catch on mobile and desktop with zero problems, but then Apple bought them out and shut down the service. I migrated everything to Evernote just because they're the de-facto note taking service; I didn't want to have to switch again.
After using it for a while I discovered its flaws, like having your notes be inaccessible during their weekly maintenance Wednesday evenings. What is this, the 90s?
Anyway I couldn't complain too much because it was free. Now that they're hitting us up for money I'm inclined to just pay them the $35 yearly fee so I can access it everywhere and start complaining. I tried Google Keep but it was extremely bare bones; the notes couldn't be shared and were limited to less than 1K of text.
In any case, it's better than pen and paper--these notes never get lost and are easily searchable. If those features aren't useful, you haven't taken that many notes!
Remember that there would have been no charges filed in the Walter Scott case had there not been any video that conflicted with the official police story. I'm all for more surveillance _of_ police, so long as it's not kept secret.
This is less of an attempt by Intellectual Ventures to shed the "patent troll" label and more of an attempt to get some money after the big boys refuse to pay them for their shenanigans. As noted by BusinessWeek and others, they had their second round of layoffs in less than a year:
So they're flailing a bit to try and generate a second revenue stream. I guess VCs are handing out more money than the courts.
To quote my friend Auric Goldfinger: "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times, it's enemy action."
I second the Roku/WDTV props. When I was shopping around for such a box I was leaning toward WDTV but its lack of DVD menu support was a show stopper.
I ended up going with an Asus O!Play and never looked back. $79 for a beautiful HDMI picture and it plays absolutely everything with zero hassles. The menus could be prettier, but it's more important for me that it just works.
The whole thing reminds me of Blockbuster Video and their somewhat arbitrary "family friendly" policies impacting how movies get made. Now Blockbuster is getting their asses handed to them by competitors with more choice and/or convenience(Netflix, Redbox), and I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple found themselves in the same boat in a few years.
OK Ebert, it's time for you to stop trolling on the subject of video games being art or not; you've already made up your mind.
Everyone has different ideas on what art is. Here's mine: art is how an artist expresses something. As long as the artist is genuine in their attempt at expression, that's art. Video games met that criteria long ago.
Of course the medium of video games will change considerably over the next 80-90 years just like it has for medium of film. I doubt anyone could look at the video games of today and accurately predict that future.
Just stop pouring those beers in your ear and you'll be all right.
...it would certainly explain why there are so many rude cell phone users
It's less about greed on Google's part and more about the usual cost-benefit analysis of doing business with China's repressive government. Google just stayed until the disadvantages outweighed the benefits.
Google didn't come to this decision because they found their moral compass all of a sudden--otherwise they wouldn't have agreed to play censor for the government in the first place. Like any corporation they were attracted to China by the money and the audience, but after finding out the government was all too willing to help Baidu and hinder Google they re-evaluated their decision. The cyber attack may have been the breaking point, but it may just as well have been a convenient event for Google to justify their standoff with the government.
He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.