You should also note that to utilize more than the basic features (like, to view on mobile devices, or get video clip alerts, cloud storage, etc), you'll need to shell out $49.99/year or $4.99/month.

Likely, though at its price point, it isn't too terrible. But I would agree that a timed subsidy (for example, like they're doing with Window 8 desktop upgrades for $40 until the end of the month) would greatly increase the userbase.

I'd say it would be because the "Metro Market" is woefully underpopulated at the moment, and RT is a hard sell, especially to folks that would be turning away from Apple or Android's huge-by-comparison offerings. With the full Windows 8, you get the metro store, but you could also install whatever desktop app you…

Absolutely. Fitted sheets are the bane of my existence, next to tequila and possibly the seasonal Steam sales.

Crazy business. I think that before this ever gets solved, some company will release an individual washer/dryer unit.

As a non-engineer, I don't see it being completely possible without altering the structure and configuration of existing washer/dryer units. Since most washers are top-loaded, there'd be no easy way of retrieving the clothes from inside, and being sure you got every last sock.

Its pretty interesting. There's some things it does that are just plain intuitive and super useful, like tapping a photo to a reply box to attach it, and the location awareness of the entire system. Then, there's the typing...I hope that's something that they can crank up the speed on

Could we get a feature/usability comparison sometime soon between the Flex, the One, and the Jawbone Up? I'm curious to see how they'd stack up against each other.

Uhm...ok?

That's fair. But by any definition, Microsoft's situation was surely more a monopoly than Google's is now.

If you use the same username across multiple sites, which a large majority of people do, then all they need to do is figure out your password (since a lot of people keep them the same across multiple sites as well) and they have potential access to a lot of information.

No. Microsoft's monopoly was easier to define because there was no simple solution to it. Macs/Linux boxes simply weren't as available as Windows boxes were, in the same way you can only get Comcast in some locations, or Comcast and FiOS, etc. There's very few places that you can get Comcast, FiOS, Time Warner,…

Collusion and such, I don't know. The pharmaceutical industry is the one area I think is more backwards and complex than the patent world.

Its...uhm..hmmm.....

Obligatory "That's what she said"

True. I know I'm in the wrong for this thought, but I've always considered the "essentials patents" the real reason for getting a patent in the first place. If you've patented something that later turns out to be essential to an entire industry, you damn well better be making boatloads of money through licensing it.

The worst thing Microsoft did was make their OS run their products better then the competitions.

I'm not up on the numbers (I think I was 5 at that time, so most of my information comes from my dad, who was/is at IBM), but it always seemed to me that Microsoft had something like 90% market share when it came to personal PC's during that time, and not solely because that's what consumers chose. Lack of…

True, but this is the FTC, which should only be concerning itself with Google's US-based operations, right?

Microsoft got slammed for antitrust and monopolization because at the time, there just was not a lot of choice in the matter. It was Windows, or the much less popular Linux and Macintosh (way less widespread than today, as I'm sure you'd know). Added to that was the fact that a web browser (Internet Explorer) was…