I'm getting sick of the general attitude here. A majority of people seem to think that it's OK to copy user posting data from CL, because they are a monopoly. IE is cited as an example of a monopoly, thus anything is OK to take it down.
That attitude is horribly wrong. Agreed, CL is a monopoly. Agreed, they are holding back innovation. But, you don't disrupt a business (and build yours) by copying their data, especially illegally. Although, the legality of issue at hand is up in the air right now, the general attitude is a bit appalling.
What's required is a way for users to post their listings simultaneously at other properties. The content of the postings belongs to the user and they should be free to re-post it anywhere.
The look and feel of the ad is publisher's responsibility. Can't blame Google for that. Rest, Google gets the blame. Before I get down to that, however, I would be suspicious of the veracity of a publisher who tries to blend the ad and the content so closely.
If it weren't for vim, I would have definitely considered switching. I know you can map keys and all, but, it just doesn't make sense going through all the hassle.
Now that I'm getting a better feel of what BankSimple is about, I don't think it's that revolutionary an idea. I'm not even sure I will use it. Most of what they showed, and more can be accomplished using Mint. And, Mint offers more choice by being an aggregator.
Actually, verification of hosts is not THAT tough and Airbnb already has a solution - "Airbnb verified" photos of the listing. Airbnb offers (in big cities at least) to send a photographer to your address and have him take pictures and upload to your listing page. This verifies to a reasonably decent degree that the person listing the property is the owner too.
Apple did announce the APIs for iPhone accessories a year or so back with iOS 3.0. Scope and traction of Google's and Apple's specifications/APIs might vary.
If HP really wants developers behind it, they should consider giving away these devices to the developers. Even a $500 phone is a cheap investment with high returns, when made on a developer who's going to invest time (and money), is going to learn mostly by herself, and release an app in the market, even if in the hopes of making money for herself.
With Android already doing well, I don't see a developer risking her time as well as money on Palm, when it's uncertain how much success she'll achieve.
I see a lot of criticisms here but it was apparent in the presentation today that Google is targeting this mainly towards business, organizations and schools. Their selling point is elimination (or significant reduction) of the maintenance and support that the IT infrastructure requires.