ziadbc

This seems wrong from an engineering AND MBA point of view. As designing and manufacturing electronics becomes more automated, the workflow for designing computer hardware will be very similar to software development (it pretty much already is).

From an MBA perspective, Apple just owns more of the value chain in software, i.e. some of the silicon via the mobile processors, and the proprietary cases. Other than that, most of the hardware follows pretty closely with the industry standard tech [intel's roadmap]. They don't seem excessively tied up at all.

You could just as well say that your dollar lost 10% against bitcoin in a day, who would dare buy something with a dollar with it fluctuating so much so often.

Does everyone forget that the U.S. government brought an antitrust case against Microsoft and nearly broke them up? That experience certainly cooled them off a bit.

They've slowly aligned themselves in the background with Facebook, Yahoo, and even Apple against Google. They just inked another licensing deal with Foxconn for use of Android and Chrome OS of all things.

It was really the exact opposite of that. The thesis was exactly that, it's all about the content, so get the best content creators in the world. It turned out to be all about the medium, and there are still only a few people who know what do in the medium of online video.

It would be great if they can be successful at making a company where you can be confident that your data will not die; but flexible enough for the inevitable sampling of future 'bloggish' platforms that come out.

Part of being a good communicator is being relatable. This worked so well with Steve because his results spoke for themselves. The is the important detail for anyone who wants to emulate his style. He was given the privilege of communicating like a visionary because of the results he achieved, not the other way around.

Someone can probably build an app player for android apps, but architecture wise, what you just described sounds kind of like a custom UI for android.

The rationale for not doing something like this philosophically is that the underlying point of webos is that it shouldn't feel like a 'whole new platform' to a web developer, but rather the platform they are already most familiar with, even more than android, i.e the web.

Given the way Google implemented gathering street view data, I wouldn't be surprised if Google has more map data in the USA than all the other map companies combined.

Twitter wants to give you access to the data. Their client is their main product. Thus, every 3rd party client is competing with their main product, that seems to be a fact.

Theres no way to stop you from building one anyway, twitter knows that. If you go against their rules, you're a revolutionary, and if you win that revolution, they'll have to deal with you.

You can't expect however, that the incumbent is going to go around encouraging revolutions against themselves.

The only alternative is to encourage everyone to make clients, at which point, they're just a big cloud xmpp server to the world.

Who is more of a 'liberal' programmer, RMS or Linus. Think about it.

In my estimation, if the answer here is unclear, then this metaphor breaks hard.