@ nighttime - Patrick wasn't saying science was about aesthetics

'It's ugly [the consumer product, to which aesthetics are relevant], therefore the science behind it is pointless.'

However his comment doesn't really make a lot of sense since the point of science is to study the physical world so the 'science behind' things can never be pointless, that's the point.

My guess as to what he meant would be that; the product is ugly, therefore it won't sell. Since the product isn't going to sell it really isn't worth informing us, potential buyers, on how it works. But that's just a guess.

Very good?

'two-dimensional world where triangles and squares are ruled by pentagons, hexagons, and priestly polygons'

I lol'd xD

So glad I'm not the only one!

Apple may not have created the all-in-one but they have championed it in the mainstream. I don't think it is unreasonable that when an all-in-one is mentioned it is compared to the most well known competitor in the market.

I dont want this. But it is an awesome game!

Future evil genius, maybe deranged puppy...

No, shoving a 360 in a PS3 case, now that's worth it!

Supplement incapable portable tech with our unportable tech for unportable incapable gaming fun!

I genuinely want the TV in the picture