Can it run in a virtual machine? Some folks might not want to give up their current super fast and reliable OS for one that runs only one complex, often insecure and sometimes error-prone application. In a VM I think this could be very useful.
So how would things have turned out if we dropped all the software patent claims and Apple could only sue on trade dress?
Apple is a hardware company. A hardware enclosures design company, really; they outsource most everything to do with producingthe hardware. For a company like Apple, trade dress claims make sense. Software patents seem a little fishy.
(Even for software companies software patents are a bit fishy. That's why they've traditionally relied on copyright. And if I'm not mistaken that's why the USPTO is soon going to be issuing new rules and a new system to deal with software/business method patents since they cause so much concern.)
Anonymity (pseudo-anonymity) certainly has downsides but over the years I have found the better thoughts come from posters who are _not_ attaching themselves to a Real Name(TM) that is connected to a web site^W business that would love to attract more followers^W customers.
Anonymous comments have to stand on their own. They can't rely on name association. The reader has to evaluate them for their content, not their author. This is a good thing.
Another thing I have learned over many years of using the web is that intelligent people do not always make intelligent comments. We are all inconsistent; we're human. It's foolish to assume everything Joe the Self-Proclaimed Expert says is going to be worth reading. Sometimes he will say stupid things. By the same token people who in the real world might not be deemed intelligent can sometimes have some brilliant insights. It would be foolish to assume that every comment they make is worthless simply because of the name it's attached to. Anonymous commenting allows each comment to be evaluated individually. It addresses the inherent inconsistency of human comments and protects readers from making unwarranted assumptions. Unless of course they assume every anonymous post automatically falls into some category with respect to its content. IMO, that sort of thinking is the mark of web inexperience.
The notion of "experts" is vastly overrated. This is an idea used to sell advice and services. Socrates figured this out hundreds of years ago. Read what Socrates learned and you too will learn something abut "experts" and earned reputations as "authorities" on given subjects. Learn how to form questions. In learning, it is my opinion that questions, knowing how to formulate them, are far more important than answers.
The web is blissfully free from the hard sell of the "expert" while still being a great place to discover many types of "expertise". No one is demanding to see how many degrees or certifications anyone else has. No one cares about your "reputation". People are just interested in knowledge, no matter who it might come from. They can then evaluate it on their own. Without anyone telling them what to do or think.
This is not stopping some from trying to force their own system, with "experts" and "reputation" and so forth. In my opinion, none of them will scale. The main attraction of the web is that it is free from those sort of restraints. There are plenty of experts on the web, but they do not have to self-promote. They might not be trying to sell anything; maybe they just share their thoughts for the joy of sharing.
Anonymous posting is as close to pure thought, free from real world biases like identities, credentials and reputations, as we're going to get. Every thought can be evaluated on its own merits, irrespective of the submitter.