The US is actively terrorizing their homelands.

I've told people who scoff at $32 million "for a website" that $32 million might actually be low, depending on requirements.

This article is good for enlightening people that this is far from the case.

Yes, he managed to creatively squeeze revenue out of existing markets. This is what he was known for.

But as far as finding new markets or growing existing markets, he failed and that's all Wall Street cares about.

> Surely MS could have done better, but I view it more as lost opportunity than failure.

Non other than Bill Gates himself refers to MS Mobile strategy as a failure: http://fortune.com/2013/02/19/today-in-tech-why-bill-gates-c...

> Remember that 80% of acquisitions fail. Google spent $3B on Nest. Apple spent $3 Billion on Beats, it remains to be seen if they'll make that up in profit

Ballmer's failure rate on major acquisitions may have been 100%. (I'm not even kidding)

Ballmer made several missteps:

1. Fruitless foray into mobile with acquisition of Nokia and Windows Mobile and Windows Phone strategies.

2. Billion+ dollar acquisition of Skype that basically went no where.

3. Remember a company called aQuantive? Don't worry, neither does anyone else. Ballmer's MS purchased them for $6 billion.

That's off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are more examples.

1. Realize the world is moving beyond Windows

2. Cede mobile OS to Android/iOS, that battle is lost.

3. Realize, next great revenue stream is the Cloud (Azure).

Definitely not the case. Lots of people live in the city of San Francisco, though it's also true a lot of people commute in from the South and East Bays.

There are good things about the city, but the homeless problem (and really, that's what I think this is about) is a very serious issue that makes the place much, much less desirable.

So the view may be designed by the client, but it's not hosted by the client. It's hosted on DocuSign.

Then View 2, is the "dashboard" view which of course isn't designed by the client.

In an ideally designed embedded View 1, it should not be possible to get to DocuSign's "dashboard" (View 2). Sessions should be tracked in DocuSign's API and View 1 refreshes should return the user to hosted View 1 or should return an error.

A sophisticated enough client user would still have access to the all data associated to the API user.

All of this. Also, I'd bet more than a few of her friends in relationships with homes are jealous of her! They probably have a false impression of how exciting her life is.

Also, I am happy you were able to get out of your DV situation and can see your kids. Can't imagine what that must have been like.

I think of "non-literal" code copying as R&D. I think the Zenimax lawyers were claiming that the R&D that Carmack did for the Occulus, while still an employee of Zenimax, was key to making Occulus valuable. And it seems like Carmack even used Zenimax IP (Doom) to develop a demo that was shown to investors, without Zenimax permission. Essentially Zenimax was used as an R&D arm of Occulus.

Pretty messy case and pretty different from Google vs Oracle IMO.