"Let me decide if I want to Skype Out, Google Voice or use what came with the hardware. It works for the rest of the computing industry." And there you have the argument for why Apple won't do it. I like that you want choices, but Apple is selling you a phone, so why would they want to let you use other people's phone apps? Especially if the app is altering the use of their phone to make their application moot?

Isn't this exactly the situation Google indicated they are using for Android? This whole situation/argument reminds me of the requests for Apple to release OSX on different hardware. It may be a great idea, it may increase the widespread usage of the iPhone, but it's just not going to happen because that is not how the Steve Jobs run Apple Inc works.

I saw someone argue that it's their phone and they should be able to install whatever they want. Not so fast. Apple is selling you a product that includes hardware, software, updates, connectivity and access to applications. You do not buy just one specific part of the package when you purchase an iPhone, you buy the whole package and it is Apple's intent (just as it is with a Mac) to tailor the experience of using that package to provide consistency and reliability because that is what gives them their competitive advantage. Why do you think the early Mac vs PC ads were about viruses?

So while Nilay may consider this a disadvantage, if you consider Android (based on Google's responses) work the way Nilay is proposing and Blackberry may as well, adopting the same sideloading option actually would negate any advantage either side has, because they all using the same model. So if Google is already using it, why would Apple change? Because some people are complaining about a few apps and the FCC is investigating AN app? No way. As they've stated, there are 65k apps and some 1.5B have been downloaded. Why give up that cash cow because a few people are angry?

The only way Apple will consider alternate options for controlling how apps are distributed (assuming no government intervention) is if their app store proves fiscally untenable. Which means all the iPhone users need to stop buying apps. That's not going to happen, however, as the small percentage of iPhone users/owners who visit gadget sites voicing their disapproval pale in comparison to the many users/owners who simply do not care.

Toshiba has been showing these colors on their website for a while... Why are they just now announcing it? Or why is this first being reported?

@WickedEast: You can't focus on profit, as he mentions it is about return on investment. Let's say they spend $2 million to make that $10 millon on the PS3. That's a 500% return. But if they take that same $2 million and develop for XBox and make $20 million that's a 1000% return. So if they are deciding how to invest their development dollars, they are going to go after the one that results in a higher return. Based on his comments, that's the XBox. So they are not passing up profit, they are increasing profit.

@Aaron: You make a good point and there are always other factors that go into pricing an object. It very well could be that the margins for the PS3 are so slim that they can't afford to lower the cost. And if you are selling at a loss, it doesn't matter how many sell. Then there is also the demand factor. Consider the Wii and the stories of its scarcity. If production can't meet demand, then you could end up loosing money.

Please note, what I'm really doing is arguing that not only does he have the right to call out Sony, he has a responsibility to. Whether its fiscally responsible for Sony to lower the cost is their call. But if Activision's CEO sees an opportunity to improve their profitability, he needs to say something.

Where does he say he wants Sony to lose money? He wants them to charge less, which would presumably lead to more sales. So Sony may make more money. Lower cost is not synonymous with lower revenue, you just need higher volumes.

This threat may carry more weight than some may like to believe. If there is a serious return on investment advantage for the Wii and Xbox360, then it would make more sense for Activision to focus on developing games for them and leaving Sony out to dry. This isn't about being a dick, it's about making sure his company makes the most money it can. It would be irresponsible of him, as the CEO to ignore how to best serve his company.

Dell now has them with Ubuntu. Go to their site.

I'm glad to see someone else paid attention: "More Storage – Do even more with optional 2GB memory and optional 250GB2 hard drive." From link Justin provided.

Hey! Anyone seen my pho... no.

As a BSU alum, I hate to lose Brady Hoke, but I would like to point out Ball State did not win their bowl game last year. In fact, we've never won a bowl game... but he did take us to consecutive bowl games for the first time in school history.