Well, all and good, but you can actually play back the audio that goes with the bad transcription...

Rocketboy, you sound like an expert on such matters...

Really you're helping me prove my point. If you have performed some action that you expect to generate that UAC response, then you can easily take the extra mouse click to dismiss it and move on with your life. It is when you don't expect to see a UAC prompt and you are running some potentially rogue app that it would greatly behoov you to have it turned on. If "BritneySpearsNaked.jpg.exe" is prompting you to elevate privleges, then you may want to reconsider it.

UAC isn't any more annoying than having to run certain Linux commands with sudo, unless you are the type of individual that simply logs in as root...

UAC doesn't really help those who don't understand it... Does anyone really think that someone uneducated about computers is going to understand a dialog box that asks if they want to elevate their permissions?

UAC prompts don't happen often enough that it is really a problem, and it only benefits the more knowledgeable computer users that might actually realize that some super cool game (trojan) shouldn't be asking for administrative rights.

Unfortunately there is a daft group of users that think they know better, and choose to turn UAC off "because it annoys" them. Do yourself, and anyone else who doesn't want your computer turned into a Zombie, leave UAC on and don't use warez unless you've installed them first in a Virtual Machine to make sure they don't have any malware payload.

To frame this another way, look at the services provided. Something is regarded as anticompetitive when the services provided are both necessary and when business practices are designed to control and/or limit other businesses from entering the market by leveraging and coercing consumers to only use the services provided by the original company.

Sony has a vertical market from making movies, to owning the music studios to write the music, to owning the movie theaters, to owning the BlueRay standard and IP for next generation video formats. Sony exploited their dominate position in the entertainment industry to unfairly squeeze HD-DVD out of the industry. Because entertainment is not a required service, it is difficult to demonstrate that this is a monopoly, because people always have the ability to go elsewhere for their recreation.

Microsoft was not a monopoly is every sense, but they provided the OS that the majority of PCs were using. This gave them leverage over competing products and services such as web browsers and media players. At the same time, Apple was doing a similar thing with Mac OSX, but the market share did not create a monopolistic situation. The fact that computers are very necessary for doing business helps establish this as a monopoly.

A cell phone company that makes every effort to sign you into a 2 year contract, that has exclusive rights for distributing the device in the United States, and has already gained an admittedly impressive market share for how long they have been available compared to other smart phone providers, begins to look like a monopoly when they strictly regulate EVERY aspect of the device and market. The crux of the argument for me hinges on necessity. I don't know if you could argue that owning an iPhone is required just yet, but by limiting application distribution and adding music to the device through iTunes, Apple is beginning to model their phone after the same monopoly that Microsoft created for itself. If you have bought your applications and music through iTunes, and now have no way to bring those services to another device and/or phone company, you are compelled to keep using the same service. This is of course what Apple wants, but it is also what makes their current business model anti-competitive.

I have long held that Apple is doing anticompetitive things, since they started releasing QuickTime and more recently iTunes. The phone companies have also done a similar disservice to customers with their contract agreements. Because services that you get for your phone can no longer be taken from one carrier to another, this is only going to become a bigger issue and something that if it doesn't warrant investigation now, is surely heading that way with the practices of both parties.

Might as well throw T-Mobile into the works. They won't let you use GV on a Flex Pay account and they insist on making you sign a 2 year commitment to have the "Forward Calls" option. I've been told that there is absolutely no way that I can add the service and pay for it.

After and hour and a half on the phone with them on Tuesday, and after trying to bill me for my time on the phone with customer service as "a voice mail retrieval," all they would give me is a PO Box in NM to write to... I'm pissed right now. I think this easily qualifies for FCC investigation if the iPhone app is being investigated.

I've been using it for a week now. I love it. There was a third party solution for Android that I had been using for a year, and it doesn't hold a lick to what BK have produced. That said, it doesn't use the camera intent, so if you want to use something like Snap Photo for all your camera business, that doesn't work with this release. I got an email saying it was something that they'd look at for the future.

Not sure what this is about... I have an ADP1 and have had paid apps since they went live.

I got a strange message yesterday that I couldn't login with my Google Apps account and that I needed to login with a gmail account. I don't know if this might be related or not. Specifically it said I needed gmail for Maps and I am still getting my google apps account email. Not really sure what the deal is there.

As for the Market having paid apps, I'm running JF 1.4 version of RC33 on my ADP1, and I have paid apps as of today. I haven't really poured over all the new apps yet.

I had a Treo 700w for 3+ years. I picked up a G1 back in Nov, returned it the day before my 15 day "trial" period ended (seriously, what's up with that T-Mobile?), picked up the Omnia during the holidays, returning it a couple days before it's "trial" period ended, and now I've swung back and picked up an Android Developer Phone 1 (ADP1), the G1 Dev phone.

The 700w was really starting to show it's age, but I was finding it difficult to find a suitable replacement. Like SoCoolCurt, I thought I might be holding out for an 800w. I've been a WinMo user since my Samsung i600 running Smartphone 2002, but with Android device(s) coming to market, I felt the need to examine other options. The G1 met most of my expectations, but I didn't think the keyboard held up to the standard set by the 700w. The Omnia was a step back in resolution in some ways, and certainly a step back in some functionality. I think Samsung did a good job trying to release a touch device, but as has been pointed out, it was obsolete the minute it hit the market. The camera was the best thing it had going for it.

Back on the ADP1, it doesn't meet all my needs, but I can't help but love the openness of the phone. I'm running the latest JF varient ROM, giving me the RC33 revision with tweaked bits such as Multitouch and orientation sensing. I could always sit down and write an application for WinMo (I have before), but the ADP1 really embodies that and makes you want to write apps. Because I have the Dev phone, I expect that I will move to a different Android device when it matures a little more. I will continue to keep the ADP1 as a development platform.