Read the report yesterday and dismissed it for being completely useless.
Just because Samsung makes the phone, it's still a Google device. When users start up the device for the very first time, it's a Google account request which shows up, not a Samsung request. This doesn't happen until one actually opens a Samsung app.
As for being unable to uninstall, what difference does this make? These apps aren't invasive, nor do they interfere with anything else, and the file sizes aren't even an issue.
I can understand the argument if people didn't have control on what apps they can use, but this isn't the case. Instead, we see 250 people being monitored because they bought a phone to connect their Google accounts, not their Samsung accounts.
I'd be more concerned if people are making an issue out of nothing because they haven't figured out how to customize their device.
The other extreme has figured it out, and that's rooting the device and flashing the OS to remove the bloatware.
The most terrifying aspect of the verdict, should Aereo lose, will be that AT&T U-verse will automatically turn me and my family into infringers of copyright.
AT&T U-verse doesn't give me 3 antennas for anything over its box, and if the issue is re-transmission, this means that single box will re-transmit its contents into every non-receiving box into my house. At a maximum of $250,000 per instance, I can be found liable for $750,000 if those three other boxes even dares "publicly" play NCIS, the show my wife watches (but I do not).
Three times, because we've that many boxes in the house.
This isn't an issue of a public performance, this is an issue of CBS (et al) getting paid thousands of times from its affiliates (who then license the signal to be carried on local cable stations, which is why it's always in the news LOCAL CBS BLACKOUT ON TIME WARNER CABLE and CBS just laughs its ass off).
Just how damn long is it going to be before these fucking broadcasters scream "There are 5 people in this household, so they must pay for the signal 5 times!"
Does anyone here truly believe there's a winner in this case? Regardless how SCOTUS rules, customers lose. It's just that simple.
Costs now will explode if Aereo wins. Analysts believe cable companies will stop paying the broadcast fee because they are no different than Aereo, and they'd be right. Once these fees are taken to court to nullify contracts, who's left paying the bills? We are. The customers.
And we're already paying the bills if Aereo doesn't win, meaning monopoly prices continue to soar with absolutely no way for customers to choose.
Hope people enjoy Game of Thrones. They helped pay for this lawsuit.
Let's hope for Australia Brandis was there only to placate these idiots and is now laughing his ass off on the plane, telling the pilot "Can you believe these idiots want us to force our ISPs to play police and upset our taxes we generate from them? The audacity Dodd and company believe we'll fall for their numbers games. By the way, did you check out last night's episode of Game of Thrones? I paid $50 for that episode!"