I'm not sure where you're getting your math from, but you're really quite wrong.

You clearly have very little understanding of evolutionary theory.

Uh.... Not really.

Heh. There's nothing remotely as funny as the fact that her tweets are now being reposted all over the place.

well, for lightweight tablets, sure. But not for heavy duty stuff like the surface pro or ultrabooks. x86 will get more powerful at a greater rate than ARM gains battery life at decent performance levels.

I really like this guy. I don't think I learned any valuable working type ideas, but who cares because I really like him and that whole article.

Truthfully, i don't think that tablets really justify themselves, externally, but they really can be far more pleasant and accessible for most use cases, particularly compared to that old of a laptop. I haven't had a traditional laptop for two and a half years.

I might be the only one who bought one, but I really loved both of sony S tablets. I have the xperia tablet now.Truthfully, I think most people don't need a full conventional laptop anymore, it's just too hard for some people to transition over. For an average consumer, spending $200-500 on a tablet will give a much…

Explain this to me like I'm 5

I love them too, but switched to other brands for better paper quality for the sake of using fountain pens.

They aren't mismatched. There are two monitors that are the same, and then an imac. contained in it's self.

No, it shouldn't. They shouldn't have been so stupid about criticizing it so far ahead of time.

This isn't necessarily revolutionary, but IFTTT is the best way to pass articles between different services. So when I star an article in google reader, it sends it to pocket, or instapaper, or whatever service I happened to be using this week. Similarly, you could send it to your kindle or whatever too.

You're kidding, right? I was one of the recipients of a free cr48 laptop. They are not even slightly trying to profit from hardware.

They don't need to sell off the hardware division. That wasn't the primary purpose, but it is a definite bonus.

There's no reason why they can't include the hardware in their plans, but google themselves have made it pretty clear it was about patents.

are you kidding? You're kidding, right?

no, it wasn't. They turned straight around and did this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/dec/20/google-sells-motorola-home-arris

Google did not buy motorola to have a successful hardware arm. They bought it for patents. I really doubt that they are going to exert as much influence as everyone seems to think they will even within the next year and a half.

Actually, it's because the artist worked in a factory building ipads, and purchased this with the wages he saved. Also on display are the clothes he wore and such.