"equivalent" Surface 3. Surface 3 has a touch screen, active digitizer, and is lighter and thinner with a larger display and more resolution. Hard to really enjoy that 1366 × 768 display compared to 2160 x 1440 on the Surface 3. I'll take all of the above $100 more, thanks.
So your argument is that applications not built for touch are hard to use on touch. Makes enough sense. But with a reasonable DPI setting and the pen I find working with the desktop and Win32 apps is easy enough. I still want to do heavy keyboard input with an actual keyboard, but running my Surface Pro as a UAV ground station using a non-touch optimized app is easy and better than using a laptop.
Your use cases are yours and yours alone, and therefore are lacking diversity. The size is killer for artists. The aspect ratio and the ability to tilt down is perfect for students. For me, the size and weight make it even better than my Surface Pro for a UAV ground station. No other tablets adequately address users with needs like these.
That said, i think the biggest bugbear is going to be Windows 8. It doesn't work very well with touch either. Yes, as I said above I've run a surface 2 for a week and did not like.
How does it not work well with touch? You've used for a week, but I've got 2 years of experience using it on touch and it works fine. Care to cite any examples you encountered?
What's not "proper" about it. They spent a good 20 minutes talking about how the new hinge and keyboard improvements make it easy to type on your lap. What else are you looking for?
Seriously you're grasping at straws. You can use voice commands to do what you can do with a controller?
Voice commands are awesome. Have you never used them? They work flawlessly (for me at least, I know how to annunciate. In my experience, people who claim voice recognition sucks are people who typically mumble and slur words) and are more convenient than a controller. What if the controller is out of reach? What if you are in another room? What if someone other than the remote holder wants to pause the show? What if the cat is sitting in front of the IR receiver? What if you can't find your controller? What if you are sick and laid up on the couch? What if you have a cat sitting on your lap and the controller is just out of reach? Voice also lets you enter text faster than spelling one letter at a time, like I have to do with my Roku. Also with the XB1 voice controls the volume as well, so it's sort of like a universal remote.
You also ignored some of my other points, like how the app can be snapped side by side with others, such as skype. This let me watch a movie with my wife while she was away. My Roku doesn't do that. As I was thinking about it, I came up with another reason as well: the Xbox netflix app stays up to date with current Netflix features. My roku still doesn't support different user profiles, which has been a feature forever. My Roku also has terrible browsing capabilities. It has a maximum of 10 - 15 rows of movies, which are categories like "because you watched...." There is no ability to browse "Sci-Fi" or "Drama" categories.
All these things together cause me to use my Xbox instead of every other device I own that supports Netflix, and I didn't mind for single second that it was behind a paywall.
I think this is perspective you don't understand. Some people don't care about the gaming network at all. Some people do not want to play networked games.
No I understand. I just don't think it was as big of a deal as you make it out to be. I don't play many networked games either. But Gold gives me at least 2 (and now it seems like 4) free games per month, most of which are not networked. I've gotten a total of 23 free games this year via Gold, which together are worth well more than the $35 I spent for my sub. Gold is a service in which even single player gamers should find value.
You had to pay XBL AND a Netflix fee AND the cost of an Xbox to access Netflix on the Xbox.
So I paid $500 + $35/year + $7.99/month. But how much of that is really *for* netflix. I spent $500 for the Xbox to play *games*, and spend most of my time with it doing just that. So is it fair to say the entire cost of the Xbox goes into watching netflix? I spent $100 on a Roku and all I do is watch netflix with it, so in that case I spent $100 to watch netflix on my TV. With my Xbox, not so much. And that $35/year for a Gold sub, most of that goes toward accessing the Gold network and downloading Games for Gold. So how much of that do we slice out for watching Netflix? I dunno.
You buy TV and get a Netflix subscription. That's it. You don't have to pay Sony, Samsung, whoever, to use Netflix.
But that smart TV with netflix access costs more than a TV without netflix access. You bought a TV and then you paid extra for Netflix access included. Of course they "don't charge you again" because they already charged you when you bought the thing. The only difference with Netflix on the Xbox is the cost wasn't built into the device, it was built into the network subscription. Now all they're doing is associating the cost of Netflix with the Xbox itself.
Second, you buy an electronic device which had newer models that were more advanced. You chose to replace it. That's your problem.
It wasn't my problem, it was my choice. That's not the point. The point was I had no problem spending $100 to watch netflix on my TV, and I had no problem spending $100 again to watch higher res Netflix on my TV. That's kind of the point... people don't mind spending money to gain access to netflix on their TV.
No, it doesn't. Even if it wasn't $60/year. XBL was more than $0. There fore it was not free.
I didn't say "was", I mean now. As in the point is moot. They're both free *now*.
What? $100 onetime fee vs $60/yr ($35/yr as you claim) + cost of Xbox ($199 min for Xbox 360 slim). I don't see how this math works.
Reading comprehension. I said back when Netflix players were scarce, if you already had an Xbox, then a Gold sub was a better deal than a Roku. In 2009 there were already millions of people with an Xbox.sitting under their TVs. For these people, it was a choice of a $100 Roku or a $60/$35 Gold sub. Which is the better deal? For many of them, then already had a Gold sub, so it was no choice at all.
Look, after this back and forth I think it's clear what are difference of opinion is. I have an Xbox for games, I have a Gold subscription for games, and the fact that Netflix was behind a paywal didn't bother me because I was already paying for the Gold sub anyway. I think Gold is cheap, and adds value to my console. So I don't attribute the $35 I pay for Gold to the Netflix app. You, on the other hand, don't seem to value a Gold sub (do you even own an Xbox?) and seem to attribute every penny of the Gold sub to the Netflix app ("Please explain what "value" to a Netflix or Hulu customer that would justify $60/year on top of their fees."). For me, those fees are justified before I even consider the Netflix app. For you, they are not.
The bottom line though, as I've already stated, is that this whole discussion doesn't matter! The point is moot. The app is out from behin
It will not starting in June. It used to charge to access Netflix and Hulu.
So then the complaint is moot. There's no point in crying about the fact they used to be behind a paywall.
You said that MS added "value". I asked for what "value" was provided that would justify the fee
Microsoft added voice control capabilities and the ability to control the TV from the Xbox via voice commands. Before the Amazon box that was recently released no other device had this capability (and still no other devise can also act as an IR blaster). This is the main reason I use my Xbox to watch Netflix over my Roku, blu ray player, or integrated TV app. That, and it's much faster, achieves HD quality streams faster than the others, and can be snapped side by side with other apps.
Now do these features justify "the fee"? I don't know, it depends on what the fee is. You want to pretend it is $60 per year. But we both know that $60 per year buys access to other features as well free games. From my perspective, I was paying $60 per year for access to a multiplayer network, got 2 free games every month, and some top notch apps as well. From your perspective, you're being blocked from using apps that are standard on other platforms. I understand that too, to some degree, although I don't really understand the point of an Xbox without a Gold sub.
So no one in the whole world looking to buy a PS4 or an Xbox One would look at features and costs in determining whether to buy one console or the other? Are you smoking something?
That is not at all what I said. If ALL you want to do is watch Netflix, you don't buy a $400 PS4 *OR* a $400 Xbox. You buy a $60 Roku. The situation you posed was "please explain what "value" to a Netflix or Hulu customer that would justify $60/year on top of their fees." This is a red herring. MS was not charging $60 a year for a Netflix app. MS was charging $60 a year for access to a network without which you couldn't use a Netflix app.
Not everyone is interested in getting on either gaming network, but not everyone will actually use Netflix or Hulu but there exist people today that want Netflix without having to pay for it again.
Without paying for it again? So how exactly did they get their Roku player? Did they steal it or did they pay for it? Oh, but Netflix came free* with their $1000 Smart TV. Or did it come free* with their blu ray player that they paid for? Sorry, anyone watching Netflix on a device connected to their TV has "paid twice". Before I had an Xbox I paid $100 for my first Roku, and I paid $100 again when they added 1090 HD support. That's more than 5 years worth of Gold for the price I pay, and that's attributing 100% of the Gold sub to the Netflix app.
In this case, one provides a feature for free while one charges.
Again, in this case one provides a feature for free while the other... also provides a feature for free.
So what? First of all, the Roku was the first device to stream Netflix in 2008 and didn't charge for the service.
But they did charge ~$100 for the device itself, didn't they? 99% of the utility of the original Roku was the Netflix streaming app. The rest of their channels were, and still are garbage. Most people who bought a Roku, bought it specifically *for* Netflix. Back when Netflix players were scarce, if you already had an Xbox, joining Gold and getting a Netflix app was a better deal than buying a Roku outright.
Again, Blu-ray players with these apps doesn't charge. Sony doesn't charge on their consoles. Roku doesn't charge. Apple doesn't charge. Amazon doesn't charge.
And neither does MS. What's your point?
Please explain what "value" to a Netflix or Hulu customer that would justify $60/year on top of their fees.
This question is a red herring. No one buys a $400 console and a $60 (or in my case $35) Gold subscription just to play Netflix/Hulu. The whole point of putting Netflix behind the Gold pay wall was to add more value to a gold subscription. Back in the day, there weren't too many devices which played Netflix. Now, as you point out, even the kitchen toaster has a Netflix app, so as Microsoft clearly realizes it's not worth having it behind a pay wall anymore. These days the Gold network is well established, there are more benefits to joining Gold, and it's no longer competing with a free Playstation Network.
No other devices like Blu-ray players, Roku, AppleTV, etc charges a monthly fee to use apps
No other devise offer actual value beyond access to app contents.
Live Gold subscriptions which is $60/year
Yearly subscriptions go on sale regularly for around $35 on Amazon and other sites. Even with Netflix and Hulu going free, I'm still going to keep mine due to the monthly free games (which you get to keep playing if your subscription expires, unlike with PSN). Just do the math:
Monthly Xbox Gold Cost: $2.92
June Free Game 1: Halo Spartan Assault: $9.99
June Free Game 2: Max - The Curse of Brotherhood: $14.99
June Free Game 3: Dark Souls: $19.99
June Free Game 4: Charlie Murder: $9.99
June Free Game 5: Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition: $29.99
June Xbox Gold Value = $84.95 - $2.92 = $82.03
Even if you want just *one* of the free games, the value for gold is still more than you're paying.
Tom, I'm currently ten miles outside of Beaverton, unable to get inside the town proper. We do not have any reports of fatalities yet, but we believe that the death toll may be in the hundreds of millions. Beaverton has only a population of about eight thousand, Tom, so this would be quite devastating.
They HAD to program that test, excluding same-sex marriages, because such marriages are illegal in Japan (and in many countries).
What? These are not real marriages we are talking about. These are pretend marriages between pretend characters. Murder is also illegal in Japan but there are plenty of Japanese video games, television shows, movies, books etc. depicting murder. Ever seen Battle Royale? You want to tell me the that shit is legal in Japan?
still lots and lots of "gypsy cabs" or how do you call it.
You're looking for the word "jitney". I used to use them in Pittsburgh when I lived there. Very reliable and low rates. You started to get to know tem after a while, so I would only use the ones I used previously, but looking back I was probably naïve. Maybe I got lucky and never got robbed.
As far as I can tell from reading the report, Linux is not installed on the drones themselves, but is running under the operations control suite. They would be absolutely insane not to be running an RTOS on the avionics of the drones. I do research on drones (no, not the $100 quadcopters you can buy from Toys R' Us) and autopilots, and wouldn't let Linux anywhere near the avionics.
Ever see the "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" episode "Charlie Goes America All Over Everybody's Ass" ? The problem is when you give people absolute freedom to do whatever they want, society devolves and you blow right past "weird" and end up at "lunacy" very quickly.
To add to Andy Dodd, the FAA has jurisdiction over anything that can potentially fly outdoors. Fly a drone in your garage with the door closed: fine. Fly a drone in your garage with the door open: FAA technically has jurisdiction. According to some FAA guys I know, they tell me they technically have jurisdiction over paper airplanes, but you'll never see them enforcing any kind of regulations on them.
Maybe you should ask the EU about their solution for Microsoft. In 2009, IE was easily removed from Windows, and for years prior it had been easy to set the default search engine to anything else. Yet the EU still wanted a browser ballot on first boot.
The key word in an antitrust lawsuit is "dominance". When trying to determine if a firm is dominant, one usually first looks at market share. I believe there was just recently a story on Slashdot where commenters were quick to point out the Android/iOS split is about 80/15.
Looks like that's exactly what they did. Except they did it for two days and found the common car in both days. Then they waited for the third day and pulled the guy over that time.
Slashdot Mirror
"equivalent" Surface 3. Surface 3 has a touch screen, active digitizer, and is lighter and thinner with a larger display and more resolution. Hard to really enjoy that 1366 × 768 display compared to 2160 x 1440 on the Surface 3. I'll take all of the above $100 more, thanks.
Surface Pro 2 lasts 6-8 hours, and they claim this one will be about 10% - 15% better.
So your argument is that applications not built for touch are hard to use on touch. Makes enough sense. But with a reasonable DPI setting and the pen I find working with the desktop and Win32 apps is easy enough. I still want to do heavy keyboard input with an actual keyboard, but running my Surface Pro as a UAV ground station using a non-touch optimized app is easy and better than using a laptop.
Your use cases are yours and yours alone, and therefore are lacking diversity. The size is killer for artists. The aspect ratio and the ability to tilt down is perfect for students. For me, the size and weight make it even better than my Surface Pro for a UAV ground station. No other tablets adequately address users with needs like these.
That said, i think the biggest bugbear is going to be Windows 8. It doesn't work very well with touch either. Yes, as I said above I've run a surface 2 for a week and did not like.
How does it not work well with touch? You've used for a week, but I've got 2 years of experience using it on touch and it works fine. Care to cite any examples you encountered?
He said he does all that with the Surface not Pro, starting at $299.
What's not "proper" about it. They spent a good 20 minutes talking about how the new hinge and keyboard improvements make it easy to type on your lap. What else are you looking for?
Seriously you're grasping at straws. You can use voice commands to do what you can do with a controller?
Voice commands are awesome. Have you never used them? They work flawlessly (for me at least, I know how to annunciate. In my experience, people who claim voice recognition sucks are people who typically mumble and slur words) and are more convenient than a controller. What if the controller is out of reach? What if you are in another room? What if someone other than the remote holder wants to pause the show? What if the cat is sitting in front of the IR receiver? What if you can't find your controller? What if you are sick and laid up on the couch? What if you have a cat sitting on your lap and the controller is just out of reach? Voice also lets you enter text faster than spelling one letter at a time, like I have to do with my Roku. Also with the XB1 voice controls the volume as well, so it's sort of like a universal remote.
You also ignored some of my other points, like how the app can be snapped side by side with others, such as skype. This let me watch a movie with my wife while she was away. My Roku doesn't do that. As I was thinking about it, I came up with another reason as well: the Xbox netflix app stays up to date with current Netflix features. My roku still doesn't support different user profiles, which has been a feature forever. My Roku also has terrible browsing capabilities. It has a maximum of 10 - 15 rows of movies, which are categories like "because you watched...." There is no ability to browse "Sci-Fi" or "Drama" categories.
All these things together cause me to use my Xbox instead of every other device I own that supports Netflix, and I didn't mind for single second that it was behind a paywall.
I think this is perspective you don't understand. Some people don't care about the gaming network at all. Some people do not want to play networked games.
No I understand. I just don't think it was as big of a deal as you make it out to be. I don't play many networked games either. But Gold gives me at least 2 (and now it seems like 4) free games per month, most of which are not networked. I've gotten a total of 23 free games this year via Gold, which together are worth well more than the $35 I spent for my sub. Gold is a service in which even single player gamers should find value.
You had to pay XBL AND a Netflix fee AND the cost of an Xbox to access Netflix on the Xbox.
So I paid $500 + $35/year + $7.99/month. But how much of that is really *for* netflix. I spent $500 for the Xbox to play *games*, and spend most of my time with it doing just that. So is it fair to say the entire cost of the Xbox goes into watching netflix? I spent $100 on a Roku and all I do is watch netflix with it, so in that case I spent $100 to watch netflix on my TV. With my Xbox, not so much. And that $35/year for a Gold sub, most of that goes toward accessing the Gold network and downloading Games for Gold. So how much of that do we slice out for watching Netflix? I dunno.
You buy TV and get a Netflix subscription. That's it. You don't have to pay Sony, Samsung, whoever, to use Netflix.
But that smart TV with netflix access costs more than a TV without netflix access. You bought a TV and then you paid extra for Netflix access included. Of course they "don't charge you again" because they already charged you when you bought the thing. The only difference with Netflix on the Xbox is the cost wasn't built into the device, it was built into the network subscription. Now all they're doing is associating the cost of Netflix with the Xbox itself.
Second, you buy an electronic device which had newer models that were more advanced. You chose to replace it. That's your problem.
It wasn't my problem, it was my choice. That's not the point. The point was I had no problem spending $100 to watch netflix on my TV, and I had no problem spending $100 again to watch higher res Netflix on my TV. That's kind of the point... people don't mind spending money to gain access to netflix on their TV.
No, it doesn't. Even if it wasn't $60/year. XBL was more than $0. There fore it was not free.
I didn't say "was", I mean now. As in the point is moot. They're both free *now*.
What? $100 onetime fee vs $60/yr ($35/yr as you claim) + cost of Xbox ($199 min for Xbox 360 slim). I don't see how this math works.
Reading comprehension. I said back when Netflix players were scarce, if you already had an Xbox, then a Gold sub was a better deal than a Roku. In 2009 there were already millions of people with an Xbox.sitting under their TVs. For these people, it was a choice of a $100 Roku or a $60/$35 Gold sub. Which is the better deal? For many of them, then already had a Gold sub, so it was no choice at all.
Look, after this back and forth I think it's clear what are difference of opinion is. I have an Xbox for games, I have a Gold subscription for games, and the fact that Netflix was behind a paywal didn't bother me because I was already paying for the Gold sub anyway. I think Gold is cheap, and adds value to my console. So I don't attribute the $35 I pay for Gold to the Netflix app. You, on the other hand, don't seem to value a Gold sub (do you even own an Xbox?) and seem to attribute every penny of the Gold sub to the Netflix app ("Please explain what "value" to a Netflix or Hulu customer that would justify $60/year on top of their fees."). For me, those fees are justified before I even consider the Netflix app. For you, they are not.
The bottom line though, as I've already stated, is that this whole discussion doesn't matter! The point is moot. The app is out from behin
Came here to post your comment. Thanks for saving me the time, although now I wasted it posting this comment. Easy come, easy go.
It will not starting in June. It used to charge to access Netflix and Hulu.
So then the complaint is moot. There's no point in crying about the fact they used to be behind a paywall.
You said that MS added "value". I asked for what "value" was provided that would justify the fee
Microsoft added voice control capabilities and the ability to control the TV from the Xbox via voice commands. Before the Amazon box that was recently released no other device had this capability (and still no other devise can also act as an IR blaster). This is the main reason I use my Xbox to watch Netflix over my Roku, blu ray player, or integrated TV app. That, and it's much faster, achieves HD quality streams faster than the others, and can be snapped side by side with other apps.
Now do these features justify "the fee"? I don't know, it depends on what the fee is. You want to pretend it is $60 per year. But we both know that $60 per year buys access to other features as well free games. From my perspective, I was paying $60 per year for access to a multiplayer network, got 2 free games every month, and some top notch apps as well. From your perspective, you're being blocked from using apps that are standard on other platforms. I understand that too, to some degree, although I don't really understand the point of an Xbox without a Gold sub.
So no one in the whole world looking to buy a PS4 or an Xbox One would look at features and costs in determining whether to buy one console or the other? Are you smoking something?
That is not at all what I said. If ALL you want to do is watch Netflix, you don't buy a $400 PS4 *OR* a $400 Xbox. You buy a $60 Roku. The situation you posed was "please explain what "value" to a Netflix or Hulu customer that would justify $60/year on top of their fees." This is a red herring. MS was not charging $60 a year for a Netflix app. MS was charging $60 a year for access to a network without which you couldn't use a Netflix app.
Not everyone is interested in getting on either gaming network, but not everyone will actually use Netflix or Hulu but there exist people today that want Netflix without having to pay for it again.
Without paying for it again? So how exactly did they get their Roku player? Did they steal it or did they pay for it? Oh, but Netflix came free* with their $1000 Smart TV. Or did it come free* with their blu ray player that they paid for? Sorry, anyone watching Netflix on a device connected to their TV has "paid twice". Before I had an Xbox I paid $100 for my first Roku, and I paid $100 again when they added 1090 HD support. That's more than 5 years worth of Gold for the price I pay, and that's attributing 100% of the Gold sub to the Netflix app.
In this case, one provides a feature for free while one charges.
Again, in this case one provides a feature for free while the other... also provides a feature for free.
So what? First of all, the Roku was the first device to stream Netflix in 2008 and didn't charge for the service.
But they did charge ~$100 for the device itself, didn't they? 99% of the utility of the original Roku was the Netflix streaming app. The rest of their channels were, and still are garbage. Most people who bought a Roku, bought it specifically *for* Netflix. Back when Netflix players were scarce, if you already had an Xbox, joining Gold and getting a Netflix app was a better deal than buying a Roku outright.
Again, Blu-ray players with these apps doesn't charge. Sony doesn't charge on their consoles. Roku doesn't charge. Apple doesn't charge. Amazon doesn't charge.
And neither does MS. What's your point?
Please explain what "value" to a Netflix or Hulu customer that would justify $60/year on top of their fees.
This question is a red herring. No one buys a $400 console and a $60 (or in my case $35) Gold subscription just to play Netflix/Hulu. The whole point of putting Netflix behind the Gold pay wall was to add more value to a gold subscription. Back in the day, there weren't too many devices which played Netflix. Now, as you point out, even the kitchen toaster has a Netflix app, so as Microsoft clearly realizes it's not worth having it behind a pay wall anymore. These days the Gold network is well established, there are more benefits to joining Gold, and it's no longer competing with a free Playstation Network.
No other devices like Blu-ray players, Roku, AppleTV, etc charges a monthly fee to use apps
No other devise offer actual value beyond access to app contents.
Live Gold subscriptions which is $60/year
Yearly subscriptions go on sale regularly for around $35 on Amazon and other sites. Even with Netflix and Hulu going free, I'm still going to keep mine due to the monthly free games (which you get to keep playing if your subscription expires, unlike with PSN). Just do the math:
Monthly Xbox Gold Cost: $2.92
June Free Game 1: Halo Spartan Assault: $9.99
June Free Game 2: Max - The Curse of Brotherhood: $14.99
June Free Game 3: Dark Souls: $19.99
June Free Game 4: Charlie Murder: $9.99
June Free Game 5: Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition: $29.99
June Xbox Gold Value = $84.95 - $2.92 = $82.03
Even if you want just *one* of the free games, the value for gold is still more than you're paying.
Tom, I'm currently ten miles outside of Beaverton, unable to get inside the town proper. We do not have any reports of fatalities yet, but we believe that the death toll may be in the hundreds of millions. Beaverton has only a population of about eight thousand, Tom, so this would be quite devastating.
This was a settlement. There are not punitive damages in a settlement.
They HAD to program that test, excluding same-sex marriages, because such marriages are illegal in Japan (and in many countries).
What? These are not real marriages we are talking about. These are pretend marriages between pretend characters. Murder is also illegal in Japan but there are plenty of Japanese video games, television shows, movies, books etc. depicting murder. Ever seen Battle Royale? You want to tell me the that shit is legal in Japan?
still lots and lots of "gypsy cabs" or how do you call it.
You're looking for the word "jitney". I used to use them in Pittsburgh when I lived there. Very reliable and low rates. You started to get to know tem after a while, so I would only use the ones I used previously, but looking back I was probably naïve. Maybe I got lucky and never got robbed.
Stanford tuition, room, and board is actually free for students with families making less than $100k a year. http://paloalto.patch.com/grou...
As far as I can tell from reading the report, Linux is not installed on the drones themselves, but is running under the operations control suite. They would be absolutely insane not to be running an RTOS on the avionics of the drones. I do research on drones (no, not the $100 quadcopters you can buy from Toys R' Us) and autopilots, and wouldn't let Linux anywhere near the avionics.
Ever see the "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" episode "Charlie Goes America All Over Everybody's Ass" ? The problem is when you give people absolute freedom to do whatever they want, society devolves and you blow right past "weird" and end up at "lunacy" very quickly.
To add to Andy Dodd, the FAA has jurisdiction over anything that can potentially fly outdoors. Fly a drone in your garage with the door closed: fine. Fly a drone in your garage with the door open: FAA technically has jurisdiction. According to some FAA guys I know, they tell me they technically have jurisdiction over paper airplanes, but you'll never see them enforcing any kind of regulations on them.
Maybe you should ask the EU about their solution for Microsoft. In 2009, IE was easily removed from Windows, and for years prior it had been easy to set the default search engine to anything else. Yet the EU still wanted a browser ballot on first boot.
The key word in an antitrust lawsuit is "dominance". When trying to determine if a firm is dominant, one usually first looks at market share. I believe there was just recently a story on Slashdot where commenters were quick to point out the Android/iOS split is about 80/15.
Looks like that's exactly what they did. Except they did it for two days and found the common car in both days. Then they waited for the third day and pulled the guy over that time.
Fines aren't supposed to cover costs -- that's what taxes are for. A fine is a penalty to discourage certain behavior.