You're making *huge* assumptions here, which, to be fair may be true for your own situation.

On the other hand, I regularly have to install legitimate and mandatory software that fails unless I turn off AV during the installation process or "exempt" it as an exception. Big projects requiring extreme focus are often done on a weekend because that's the only time a team can work without constant bureaucratic distraction. Many of the Service Desks or people authorized to alter group policy to allow disabling of AV are often only available during limited hours...typically leave early on Friday, etc. ...meaning the install will fail...until the three-day weekend is over. It's narrow thinking like yours that demoralizes those that actually work at making a difference. ...and people wonder why bureaucracies can never think outside of the box and constantly lose their top performers.

My use-case is getting around the annoying iTunes ecosystem. I want to use simple file-system level organization and commands. For a bunch of reasons, I like full tower desktop computers and the command line as the very first icon on the desktop. I travel a lot and keep a full tower desktops in several cities. iTunes seems to think I only need to be tethered to one computer AND THREATENS to ERASE ALL my data because it's synching with a computer other than my "home" computer, which is typically in a completely different city when I want to transfer my media files. I don't like devices that try to restrict me to certain paths and channels and assert control over devices and data that I built and own. I also walk around a lot without a backpack so, I want use my phone as a makeshift tablet.

Want to sell your new model for $1,000? For me it's simple. Put back the audio jack, make it a bit thicker and stronger. Add the capability to routinely swap micro-SD cards and I'll gladly pay $1,200. I feel like the new smart phones are still trying to market sexy styling ahead of swiss army knife capability...much like cars.

This one is easy to field only, if you're ignorant about economics and how the real world works.

You seem to start with a number of false, but emotionally-validating assumptions: 1.) No human has ever done enough work to justify $600,000,000." This means you equate work with effort. While loosely related, they are not the same. For example, lots of people put huge effort into producing minimal changes in outcome. There are some rare individuals that can produce big changes in outcome with minimal effort. For concrete examples of decoupled relationships between effort and outcome, watch a football game. You'll find plenty of examples where effort did not equal outcome. 2.) "They didn't do it on their own." You seem to want to believe that "going it alone" is the only legitimate way to create large changes in value. While it might be emotionally satisfying, history shows this generally isn't true so you need to get that notion out of your head and grow up. There are many ways to create large changes in value and most involved large numbers of relatively unskilled people organized and focused by one pivotal individual with rare skills, whom without, the project would have failed. Most meaningful changes in outcome require a team organized in a hierarchical pyramid of skills. 3.) They did it off the back off hundreds of other people who will never see a penny of that money, despite earning it for them. I'm going to assume your emotional statement of jealousy and hatred is referencing rank-and-file employees at the bottom of the pyramid. Obviously, they already received more than a penny of money for their efforts. It's highly likely they earned "dollars" instead of a single penny for their efforts. In fact, it's statistically likely they earned several hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of a major project...whether that project was successful or not! Some of it in direct pay, some of it in indirect benefits. The ownership or management classes of whom you're jealous and hateful likely took deferred compensation, by agreement from those that risked capital.

You seem to have little actual real-world experience in the economy that you're too willing to criticize with nothing more than statements of jealousy. To change your sorry situation, I suggest you stop putting emotional effort into criticizing others and re-direct your energy into producing something of value and go make it successful. Do not surround yourself with those that think the way you write...or you'll fail.

I used to spend most of my days passing through airports and on the road, needing to print to whatever printer was at that day's location. After installing a few hundred printer "drivers" you get a feel for just how much everyone else owns your computer, and that, yes, "security updates" may indeed be misnamed. I developed a strong appreciation for the detailed view of Task Manager, SNORT and WinPcap. I hated that so much of my attention was diverted from business and sunk into studying all the "legitimate" crap on my computer. Inkjets were the worst offenders and HP was the worst of the brands for crapware. I also remember developing a strong bias for a certain Asian "sewing machine brand" of cheap printers because their drivers and software was measured in kbytes TOTAL size and didn't try to sell me anything or collect info.

So, free speech, if it's political, needs to be regulated and those exercising it to call for change need to be identifiable? Really?

Let's see...Swift takes more memory, users react by upgrading to iPhones w/more memory and more profit margins for Apple.

Older versions of Windows get slow and bloated with extensive patching, users react by getting new computers, boosting OEM license sales.

Conclusion: It cuts expense while simultaneously increasing sales. That's win-win!

Those of us interested in tracking every detail of your single-purchase behaviors...then selling that info to another entity...strongly disagree that there isn't a need to force you to voluntarily register and create an account. Despite your tone indicating that you disagree with this practice, our records clearly show you clicked "I agree."

Hopefully their fashionable office is more flexible and able to accommodate their changing needs than their phones. I miss phones with protective bezels, distinctive-feeling controls at the edges, changeable memory cards, upgradable batteries and standardized audio jacks. Fair or not, I generally assign blame to Apple for for the loss of these features and laughably-thin form factors requiring after-market protection shock-protection on even the majority most non-Apple phones. If their office is absolutely locked into a certain "visionary and innovative plan" well...Apple will just have to deal with it, just like they've made us deal with their silly fashion dictates.

I respect that facebook needs to make money. I would like to see a user-paid option, thus allowing me to participate by spending my money to pay my own way, so that facebook can monetize me directly filter out all ads and protect my private info.

Participation was not optional, in my case, if I wanted to keep my high-paying IT job. Our clients used facebook as the sole method for registration and tracking in mandatory activities.

I objected strenuously on principle and offered several workable alternatives, including asking the organizers to make up a fictitious account for me to use (I didn't want to be the one committing fraud) and was told I was being a "P.I.T.A." about privacy, as the whole point was to use a single, consolidated, low-cost method for tracking/reporting registration, participation, etc.

There's only one reason individuals & institutions reference the Oxford English Dictionary and it isn't to keep up with slang. Funny how Oxford English Dictionary lexicographers want to keep in sync with popular use of English, but, don't seem want to keep in sync with the dictionary's current role as a de facto authoritative reference. There more it strays from that de facto role, the more likely it is to lose its relevance...and enviable position as the world's authority in a rapidly growing language.

There's a parallel lesson to be learned from watching Radio Shack give up its dominance in a market about to show rapid growth. In the late 1970's and early 1980's Radio Shack was the de facto nerdy electronics store. They had nearly 100% of the market. One indicator of its dominance was that everyone included Radio-Shack part-numbers in their circuit designs. Another was that, to learn electronics, people bought reference books from Radio Shack and not a book store. In switching their floor-space to selling ordinary consumer goods, they failed to recognize their dominant position in a market about to show major growth. They left a vacuum in their wake obvious to everyone but Radio Shack and allowed firms like Fry's Electronics to fill the space they didn't recognize was valuable. Similarly, the Oxford English Dictionary has a core-competency as the world's authority on a language that's rapidly becoming the world's standard.