That line just bugs me on so many levels. Why can't they prosecute those cases without having the data on someone's laptop?
What can someone have on a laptop that can be so important that without it it becomes impossible to convince a jury?
Honestly, I think if the prosecution is unable to move forward without that data, then they had no hope in the first place.
PulseAudio has been one of those love/hate things. Per application audio is great when you want to mute an application that you can't mute otherwise (like a flash application for school simply won't shut up).
I hate how it keeps touching the volume level for the system/hardware.
There was a fair amount of community involvement and some other companies. Intel and Nokia were the major players here.
Also Nokia is supposed to release a Meego phone; they said that they will be using Windows mobile to replace Symbian in low and middle tier devices, and they haven't really commented on upper tier.
To be honest, I probably won't be buying a Meego phone from Nokia if they ship one. My N900 is fun, but I feel it doesn't get enough attention from them.
Obviously, the biggest factor for Meego's success is if it can get any real attention from the media and consumers.
Microsoft owns the trademark for "Windows", but walk into a hardware store and you'll see dozens of companies that freely use windows in their name. I've never heard of Microsoft going after them.
Honestly, I think if the prosecution is unable to move forward without that data, then they had no hope in the first place.