The problem is that they can't allow programs to execute parts of the memory as instructions. This is needed for efficient JITs like the one in Nitro.

Apple is actively (Frequent commits) working on fixing this problem. The project is called Webkit2, and features a Javascript interpreter that runs in a separate process, and thus is able to safely execute Javascript on iOS. This model, btw., is inspired by the multi-process architecture found in other major browsers.

But on the other hand, any carrier and manufacture can inject the needed tracking code without asking anyone.

Actually you can. At least in iOS 4

Looks like it is for hardware keyboard only, no? For on-screen you can choose between qwerty, azerty and qwertz

This reminds me of The Myth of the Genius Programmer. I.e. the developers who don't want others to see them make mistakes and instead want to look like geniuses. I don't see how they "dig" Open-Source when they really are just releasing their source publicly. No one can see the progress of their projects or participate in their work.

It also amazes me that they consider branches to be cluttering.

I wish developers could participate in the work, but unfortunately this is difficult because feature development on the client libraries is tied to feature development on the gateway. Until we release the corresponding features in the gateway, the client libraries wouldn't work.

I was thinking about your comment about seeing the progress of the project. While that is conventional for open source projects, it is unconventional for products. And since our client libraries are tied so closely to our product, progress of libraries is progress of our product. Anybody have thoughts/experiences/etc on sharing day-to-day development of their products? I know some companies do it, but it doesn't seem very common.

One of the issues you'll run into is that if you do make the day-to-day progress available, someone will expect you to support it. You'll either need to explicitly say that it's "use at your own risk" or have to make sure that the exposed "daily" branch works. The former probably isn't useful for the majority of your end users while the latter introduces extra overhead to your development process that you may not want or have time for.

Ensuring that branches are useful and not "cluttering" requires a bit of discipline. It's easy to get a bit branch-happy in which case you end up with changes scattered across a number of branches that may or may not have a consistent starting point. This will cause issues when you have to merge all the updates for a release.

A general rule of thumb is only to create a branch when you need to work in parallel: code needs to be separated to allow for simultaneous updates or if a feature needs to be isolated until it's release timetable is set. This will vary depending on team size, work patterns and the nature of code changes.

Wait a second, if it's going to have apps, what is the controller going to be like?

My guess: iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad is going to learn a new trick. Imagine a driving game where the controller is your iPhone (accelerometer and gyroscope for control) the screen can be used to control gear, and watch stats. If this is going to be true, the new Apple TV will seriously be something unique!

What about raw text rendering and SVG rendering? I would like to see that as well

Chrome's acceleration is not of the entire page. It is only acceleration of things like 3D transforms and a few other things.

Chrome OS?

Exactly. Just asking a question from the perspective of a !hacker. :)

I was aiming at the concept of the "cloud desktop", as kierank commented in the meantime.

If you're looking for an experience similar to the concept of a "cloud desktop," you should try out Favetop. It has icon shortcuts, which you described above, along with media management and social sharing capabilities. We currently do not have a customizable wallpaper option as of right now, but we are planning on offering this feature in the near future.

You could perhaps try and internationalise it a bit. e.g. Hulu replaced with BBC iPlayer etc.

Thank for the suggestion. We're going to continue to try our best to ensure international users have as many of their favorite web apps and sites available to them as U.S. users. We currently have over 1,000 web apps and sites in our database for you to choose from and we are looking to offer users the option to upload their own site icons very soon. Btw, the BBC iPlayer app is now available with the added ability to directly search it from your Favetop if you'd like. If you have any other suggestions please let us know through the "Suggestions/Feedback" link on our homepage. :)

The Facebook app is able to do things the web interface can't.