I personally would rather not have any more "boxes" attached to my TV.

I have a Sony Google TV and I love it.
I haven't noticed any latency issues.

BTW, You really can't compare an integrated Sony/Google TV (or similar) solution with Roku unless you ONLY care about streaming. One of the best things about Google TV is the integrated Chrome browser. I love watching some program and being able to pull up a browser in the background and learn about what other movies that actor is in? or what's the name of that song playing in the soundtrack? or how many stars does this movie get on Rotten Tomatoes? or what's that pitcher's stats? etc.... Or, if I want to show my family some pictures on some web site, but I would like to leave the playoff game on in the background.

According to German law, you are required to prove that an artist is not with GEMA.

Nice! Since it's practically impolssible to prove the negative, GEMA always wins...

Bulletproof clipboards have been around since the 70s.
Most law enforcement agencies gave up on them as being of limited value.

I seriously considered iPhone for my last purchase, but I've started to think of my phone as a computer and the iPhone is simply too restrictive. I'm very happy with my Motorola Atrix. Actually, every Motorola phone I've had has been stellar.

Based on my experience with Samsung phones, I would be very surprised if they can hold that market share. In my family of 4 we had 4 Samsungs (various models - 3 smartphones). 3 of the 4 crapped out within the first 6 months of use (only the dumbphone continued to work). One of them had to be replaced 3 times. Samsung obviously does not care about quality control, so I'll never buy another Samsung product again... ever.

I know several friends that have had similar experiences and have come to similar conclusions. Samsung won't be able to hold on to their marketshare lead when they continuously deliver a poor user experience.

Ummm... couldn't resist pointing out that your reading comprehension is not quite right either...

You wrote:

but what the OP actually wrote was:

...just sayin'

Otherwise, I agree with you and add the point about how ironic/moronic it is that when people don't have a clue what you're talking about they jump to the conclusion that you don't know what you're talking about. The OP asked a legitimate question about proxy support and then more than half of the responders started talking about tethering support...

The feds claim against Gibson is not that they are using wood from non sustainable sources, as stated above. Gibson has clear documentation showing that it is.The feds maintain that the issue is that the wood was not "finished" by Indian workers, as (possibly) required by Indian law.

Incidentally, the Indian government is not involved.

So what?

What can be learned from the exploration of the moon or Mars? Maybe some natural history, but that will have very little impact on the quality of life here on Earth.

I know: knowledge is power, but the cost / benefit analysis just doesn't hold up. Once we get all the problems sorted out on terra firma, then we can think about spending money on off-world exploration... and even then, does it really need to be manned exploration? By the time we're ready to resume spaceward boondoggles, maybe we'll have autonomous robots that are more than capable enough to get the job done at a fraction of the cost, for longer periods of time, and no unnecessary risks to humans.

About ports, jacks, and connectors.

The article is somewhat unclear, but the patent application is pretty clear.

The reason Apple is proposing this solution is that it offers the maximum backwards compatibility.

A connector is what most people call the plug.

A jack is the entire female assembly (including housing) that can receive a connector/plug.

A port is the electrical portions of the jack (i.e. the electrical connectors in a specific configuration).

Apple's solution WILL allow the use of standard 3.5mm plugs / connectors.

Here's the exact relevant bit from the patent application:

For full size plugs / connectors Apple proposes a cap of similar looking material to the device case, which will increase the profile of the device with a sort of bubble around the connector.

I use IE, FireFox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera... which, by my calculations would have put me at the top of the IQ heap (they are additive, right?). Now I guess I'll have to look for some other metric to prove how intellectually superior I am.

It's entirely possible to reduce CO2 emmissions without reducing dependence on fossil fuels. Likewise, it is possible to eliminate the use of fossil fuels while maintaining the current level of CO2 emissions. One does not necessarily follow the other.

Well, the SEO poisoning attack I understand, but that is not what was being described. The way SEO poisoning works is that the search engine is tricked into generating a link to a malicious site rather than a legitimate site. This would be one of the normal channels that would bring up the bogus MacDefender web page that looks like a virus scan is being performed. You still have to click one of the bogus buttons (OK or Cancel) to start the download of the installer.

What was described was something different where clicking on the Google link didn't take you to the MacDefender ruse, but initiated the installer download instantly (or perhaps took you to the page and the download started automatically). I think the second option is not possible in Safari... but I could be wrong. I have seen no threads anywhere to suggest that I am wrong, however. I have my doubts about the first option, but am less sure. One of the posts indicated that it was tied to the Safari bug/feature where image files are automatically downloaded. Now I have never seen this behavior, but there are threads where people complain about it, so there must be some truth to it. Also, while I have never seen an image file get automatically downloaded to any of my Macs, I have seen something similar happen with PDF files, so that lends a little credibility.

I have one site that routinely downloads PDFs instead of displaying them in my browser, so I was able to try some things. When the PDFs were automatically downloaded, they did not open automatically open. I have to manually launch them. This behavior is independent of my setting of the "Open safe files" setting.

So, bottom line, I have my doubts that merely clicking on a Google search result can cause the MacDefender installer to launch. For that to happen, the Google search results link would have to be modified to trigger a download instead of following a link. I'm going to give Google the benefit of the doubt that their security has not been compromised to facilitate this.

I did say "doubts", which means I am still open to a convincing argument or proof...

Hmmm... Well I have never observed this, but it sounds to me like the issue would be with the way Google builds it's links to search results, not with Safari, per se. Safari won't download anything unless you request it and to request it you have to perform some sort of click. Unfortunately, a cleverly crafted page can trick you into requesting it... and so... apparently can a poorly crafted Google results page.

Can you help me observe this behavior? I don't know what to search for to make it happen.

I don't completely understand what you mean by this:

However, you said "just by visiting", I said "you have to click" and you said "click"...

Also, you are confusing automatically running an installer with automatically running the malware code.

Anyone who authorizes the operating system to install a program that did not come from a trusted source, deserves what they get. It's an important life lesson that some people can only learn by doing...

You are confused. Safari does not automatically download the trojan just by visiting the page, you have to click on one of the download buttons. Of course, they are disguised, but the user still has to be tricked into initiating the download. Safari does not automatically execute the trojan either. If you have not unchecked the "Open safe files" box in the general preferences, Safari will open the installer, but nothing is executed until the user approves the install. Even then, unless you are foolishly running as an admin, the OS will require your admin password before the install can proceed.

Any operating system that would prevent user stupidity would be crippling to a savvy user.