I'm waiting for a well priced and usable Windows 7 pad. Unfortunately most of the ones out right now really aren't up to scratch. Something like this would fit the bill quite nicely, but it doesn't come out until next year:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/31/asus-eee-pad-official-intel-culv-processors-windows-7-and-a-1/

Proprietary OS besides purely a Windows 7 overlay just isn't going to cut it. Just seems like an unnecessary hassle to have to learn an entirely new OS, and potentially buy software you already have on your desktop for it when familiarity is around the corner.

The iPhone's OS makes sense. It would be impractical to consider either attempting to run desktop applications or a desktop UI on such a small form factor. Hell, I'm considering getting one now that the older models can be found for very cheap. But when you're in 10" territory, inching (apologies) towards the lower end 13" laptops, there's really no excuse. Besides exploiting their Apps Store for revenue, and besides wanting to not encroach on their other product ranges that is.

Right now Apple is doing well because besides being a marketing and cultural behemoth it's tapped into a niche which previously barely existed, certainly not in the mainstream. Sure tablet PCs have existed for years but not relatively lightweight, compact and highly functional, or at least not all at the same time. I have no doubt when the other big manufacturers start rolling out their Windows 7 alternatives, assuming they get their touch interfaces right, the iPad as it is now, will be forgotten.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I'm sorry wait - are you saying that Windows changed a paradigm by inventing a GUI?

I would argue that Apple - yes, has invented a paradigm changing GUI - (again). Flicking to scroll around a capacitive touchscreen all seems very passe in perfect 20/20 hindsight - but so-called smart phones weren't doing it before the iPhone. Have a look at a Nokia or Windows Mobile phone from that era- and it's pretty clear. static icons, optimised for a stylus or control pad, nothing harnessing the power of your finger. The Android phones are very good- I might get one some day - but they owe a debt of innovation to Apple for blazing the trail.

I'm sure that getting a game distributed through EA or Steam would be great, and they may have better terms than Apple - but I'd argue that single hacker working in his basement to make something cool has a very slim chance in brokering a deal with EA or Valve. The App store is making a lot of these single programmers very rich - and I think that's a good, disruptive thing.

>> ^EDD:

>> ^dag:
Apple has once again changed the paradigm of how we use computers.
Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA.

"Changed the paradigm"? What are you smoking, mate? They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the touch screen (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented a new, ultra-popular activity that we use computers for, like twitter or facebook or e-mail (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the mouse or a GUI like Windows (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented MS Office or at least an equal alternative to at least one of its products (they haven't). But a simple rework on an ages-old tablet device which is only becoming popular now because of the brand and the drop in price which they can take very little, if any, credit for? Puhh-lease.
And as for your second argument - try and compare Apple terms for iPhone devs to EA Partners terms or Valve's Steam terms. You'll find that there are few publishers with shittier deals for game and software devs than Apple. And by the way - moving into the social mini-game market isn't exactly "wresting power" from publishers of AAA console and PC publishers like EA.

It's on!
>> ^EDD:

>> ^dag:
Apple has once again changed the paradigm of how we use computers.
Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA.

"Changed the paradigm"? What are you smoking, mate? They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the touch screen (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented a new, ultra-popular activity that we use computers for, like twitter or facebook or e-mail (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the mouse or a GUI like Windows (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented MS Office or at least an equal alternative to at least one of its products (they haven't). But a simple rework on an ages-old tablet device which is only becoming popular now because of the brand and the drop in price which they can take very little, if any, credit for? Puhh-lease.
And as for your second argument - try and compare Apple terms for iPhone devs to EA Partners terms or Valve's Steam terms. You'll find that there are few publishers with shittier deals for game and software devs than Apple. And by the way - moving into the social mini-game market isn't exactly "wresting power" from publishers of AAA console and PC publishers like EA.

>> ^dag:

Apple has once again changed the paradigm of how we use computers.

Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA.


"Changed the paradigm"? What are you smoking, mate? They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the touch screen (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented a new, ultra-popular activity that we use computers for, like twitter or facebook or e-mail (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the mouse or a GUI like Windows (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented MS Office or at least an equal alternative to at least one of its products (they haven't). But a simple rework on an ages-old tablet device which is only becoming popular now because of the brand and the drop in price which they can take very little, if any, credit for? Puhh-lease.

And as for your second argument - try and compare Apple terms for iPhone devs to EA Partners terms or Valve's Steam terms. You'll find that there are few publishers with shittier deals for game and software devs than Apple. And by the way - moving into the social mini-game market isn't exactly "wresting power" from publishers of AAA console and PC publishers like EA.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I'm reading a few stories from prominent bloggers who were initially dismissive of the iPad but have now embraced it.

Say what you will about the closed nature of the OS, lack of ports (people said the same when Apple removed the floppy) or camera - Apple has once again changed the paradigm of how we use computers.

And for all the squealing about Jobs' choke-hold on the platform - it's good to remember that Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA. Good luck making a little game on other platforms - AND actually making dosh from it. The same kind of disruption-- upsetting the applecart of the big publishing companies-- appears to be in the works for self-published authors.

I understood what Mr Paul was saying. It is likely that a good portion of Congress, and a vast majority of the US population has no clue (or care) what he is talking about. Never mind the significance of it all. The farce that which the 'Fed' and the IMF is, is quite blatant. If only people would look, listen and understand. True free market capitalism does not exist. The US economy is supported on pillars of fake money.

When the likes of Iraq (before) and Iran (now) threaten the US dollar system by running Euro based oil markets and refuse to adhere to the US behemoth, they either get invaded, or they get targeted. Iran is no good guy by any means, but it isn't the so-called nukes that the US cares about. They want Iran to kill their Euro based oil markets.

For those who don't get it. The US doesn't like buying Euros for a Euro based oil market.. because they need REAL assets with which to purchase those Euros with. When you have a fake system, you want everything to be in that fake tender. Thus you can print whatever you need on demand. Poof. You have money for oil.

I have not been following the American health care debate as closely as I'm sure many citizens of that country are. My synopsis from afar is that the bill that was passed was not what Obama wanted. The kind of bill desired morphed into something that is only, as @longde pointed out, better than nothing. Coming from a country that has universal health care already, I am somewhat baffled by the strong resistance universal health care has in that country (except by corporates and lobbyists allowed to profit from disease.)

When I learned that the bill became a several thousand page behemoth does make me think that the final version should have been written by Alan Siegel and his team. At least then it might also be intelligible.

@RedSky

You lied. Capitalism is perfect to you. You have yet to dare any alternative, hence your perception of perfection.

Dead wrong? I'm dead wrong?

Offer an alternative to capitalism, your capitalism. You can't. You won't.

If you want to make things better for the labor class, then that will lead to inflation according to your model.

The fact is that according the most perfect example of capitalism, the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer, and any attempt to modify that paradigm is like dropping a monkey wrench into the gears of a mechanized behemoth.

You don't know shit. You've been conditioned from birth to love capitalism as if it were a god, and you do.

Where was I? Ho, yeah, stuff he didn't mention (because he's a barista and doesn't have to deal with it): get fresh coffee. It's the most basic, yet most important change you can make to your intoxicating drinking habit. Whatever the type of machine you have, from plastic-y kitchen espresso machine to semi-pro behemoth, or even if you don't drink espresso and are, say, on drip brew (at least get a French press, for God's sake), this is the change you will notice the most. See that coffee with a use-by date two years from now at the supermarket? It's not fresh. The one twice the others' price in a fancy tin box? Not fresh. And the ones in vacuum packing? not fresh either. Buy fresh coffe. Get it from a local shop. It won't even cost that much.

More info:
http://coffeegeek.com/
http://coffeesnobs.com.au/
http://www.ineedcoffee.com/

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I'm starting to think that a geeky company like Google has a better chance of getting humans permanently off the earth than the bureaucratic behemoth that is NASA.

You cannot use union actors if you're non-union. If you do, and you do not specifically get the actor to sign a contract explicitly agreeing he is non-union, then SAG will sue you... and SAG will win. There's no fighting that evil behemoth.

Unions are silly in the film industry, but that's a long drawn-out conversation for another time. Later my Hitler-lovin' Socialists!

I thought it was cool but no big deal. Planes glide.

> It isn't even a real plane but some tiny kit ultra light.

Oh, it's a real plane, it uses wings, airelons, elevators and a rudder. Is a 747 not a plane but a giant behemoth?

Remember which party took every opportunity to LIE, misrepresent and distort the events of Hurricane Katrina. A sitting President was accused of not caring (enough), blamed for all the corruption and ineptitude that comes naturally to any useless government behemoth like FEMA (they'll perform just as poorly now, with Obama in the Red House) and the worst of it is, the kooks claiming Bush pushed down the plunger and dynamited the levees were not vocally opposed by a single Democrat (to my knowledge).

Democrats invented demagoguery and they'd have to, as facts and logic are rarely on their side. If a theoretical Republican suggested cutting the budget of a school lunch program, the next thing to occur would be nearby Donkeycrats screaming: "LOOK! THE EVIL CONSERVATIVE IS TRYING TO STARVE POOR CHILDREN!" The DEMagogs are all around us, with liberals falling back on race, class envy and victimhood every time their most current schemes fail (because human nature doesn't change).

Max wrote: I am still amazed at how he is actively trying to rebuild the Republican party by insisting that they have a say in legislation that they have no way of stopping.

The answer is because when the programs fail to work, without Rs on board the Ds will get ALL the blame, and rightly so. I WANT the Crats to shut out the Repubes. Take the receipt for the Fail. 2010 is almost here.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Behemoth, Death Metal' to 'Behemoth, Death Metal, poland, polish' - edited by Zonbie

i dont see why people are jumping on winston,
his views are obviously conservative.
that's his right.
i disagree with his view,and much of my argument many here have posted..
i.e:american already has taxpayer socialized systems,the free market health system is an epic fail geared for the have's,even the 250 million that HAVE
health insurance are receiving inadequate care for their dollar.
a civilized country should take of its elderly,vulnerable and its children.
the one point i would make that has not been addressed is the simple,yet blaring fact,america could insure every single american for 200 million LESS than is spent now.
lets think about this...
adequate care for every american,for 200 million LESS than we pay now.
i think even winston would appreciate those numbers.
no need for medicare,medicaid,prescription drug plans,government subsidized childrens health plans....all gone.
one teensy weensy problem though...
the eradication of the FIFTH largest lobbyist.
the health insurance industry.
they spend untold BILLIONS to influence legislature to affect their bottom line.
they have been writing the legislation for medicare and medicaid for the past twenty years.
*note* yes..it has been lobbyist who have been writing 85% of legislation.

so the REAL problem is not a universal health care system.
its the removal of the bloated behemoth we call the "health insurance industry" which devours almost 60% of every dollar paid for health insurance for "administrative costs".
bribery, *cough* i mean "influence", is extremely costly.
this entrenched,archaic,self-perpetuating,and ultimately redundant system,
needs to go.which i do not think is going to be a walk in the park.

i think that when viewed in this light,even our friend winston,the conservative,will agree on some points.
its all about common ground,and re-gurgitating the health insurance's own propaganda to make an argument helps noone.
well..it helps the health insurance industry.