It'll cost a little more than many probably hoped, but it comes with a pack-in game and it's less expensive than the Windows version.
When Microsoft launched its Xbox One games console in November 2013, it cost $500: $100 more than Sony’s PlayStation 4, and $150 to $200 more than Nintendo’s Wii U.
That steep price tag arguably cost Microsoft launch sales as well as momentum heading into 2014. Sony now claims over 10 million PlayStation 4 units sold worldwide, a record for any games console in a similar period, whereas at last check (in April, the last time we saw a formal number), Microsoft said its Xbox One had shipped to stores (distinct from sold to consumers) some 5 million units.
Surely because of that lack of momentum, Microsoft dropped the Xbox One’s price from $500 to $400 in early June, but at the expense of removing its Kinect motion-control sensor from the system.
Since June, you’ve been able to buy the Xbox One without Kinect, but if you wanted to buy the Kinect sensor separately, you couldn’t because here wasn’t a standalone Kinect SKU.
Microsoft never intended to sell Kinect as a standalone SKU, because Kinect was supposed to inextricable from the Xbox One experience. It’s removal was the boldest sea change in a series of philosophical reversals the company’s made since the system debuted.
The standalone Xbox One Kinect SKU finally has a price tag and a launch date: Microsoft announced it’ll cost $149, and you can buy it on October 7. That $149 includes a copy of Dance Central Spotlight, an upcoming music video game in the Dance Central series due out on September 2.
Yes, the math seems wonky at first blush. I suspect most assume that if the Xbox One was $500 with Kinect and $400 without, Kinect by itself ought to be $100. But there’s packaging to consider, plus intangibles like the development value of being able to depend on Kinect’s presence in a given home. And of course there’s Microsoft’s right to jack up the price any way it likes. This is a company that, for years, managed to sell a proprietary Wi-Fi USB dongle for the Xbox 360 at two to three times the asking price for similar PC parts, after all.
Microsoft says, “Kinect remains an important part of the Xbox One experience.” Never mind that claim: how important is going to come down to evidence in the coming years. Either the company’s going to release groundbreaking games and media center features or it won’t. If it doesn’t, Kinect becomes like any other secondary peripheral in the annals of console-dom: somewhat interesting, occasionally amusing, and utterly niche.
Note that Microsoft currently sells a Windows version of Kinect as well, a part that launched in July for $200 without a pack-in game. So at least from a PC gamer’s standpoint, you could argue console gamers are getting a pretty good deal.
Digital analytics firm comScore recently released a list of the top 25 mobile apps in the United States, each based on the number of unique users over a one-month period this June. Did your favorites make the list?
According to the report, the top app in the United States is Facebook by far – 115.4 million people over the age of 18 used the social networking app in June. YouTube comes in second with 83.4 million unique users, followed by Google Play, Google Search and streaming music app Pandora. The full top 25 list is as follows:
1. Facebook (115.4 million)
2. YouTube (83.4 million)
3. Google Play (72.2 million)
This is the Android app store that comes preinstalled on every Android phone.
4. Google Search (70.2 million)
5. Pandora (69 million)
While Pandora is the most popular music stream app, there are many others with different features you should consider.
6. Google Maps (64.5 million)
The indisputable king of online mapping apps, Google Maps is constantly being updated. Just in this year, it added functionality that allows you to save maps for offline use, hail an Uber ride and measure aerial distances..
7. Gmail (60.3 million)
8. Instagram (46.6 million)
9. Apple Maps (42.1 million)
This comes standard on iPhones now, but is still far inferior to Google Maps.
10. Yahoo Stocks (42.1 million)
Again, standard on many phones.
11. iTunes Radio/iCloud (40.5 million)
12. Facebook Messenger (39.2 million)
This one is now required to use Facebook chat, but on the upside, you can make free voice calls with it.
13. Yahoo Weather Widget (36.1 million)
Standard app for many Android phones. Consider these top-rated competitors.
14. Twitter (34.7 million)
15. The Weather Channel (30 million)
16. Google+ (28.8 million)
Google’s attempt at a social media service hasn’t done very well, but it still comes standard on many phones.
17. Netflix (27.6 million)
Great for streaming a full season of Orange Is the New Black, but be careful only to watch when connected to Wi-Fi otherwise you’ll eat through your data plan in no time.
18. Snapchat (26.5 million)
This photo sharing app that destroys the image shortly after sending has become an enormous hit among teens.
19. Amazon Mobile (26.5 million)
Many people don’t know the best feature of this app: You can order a product simply by taking a snapshot of it with your phone.
20. Pinterest (24.6 million)
21. eBay (22.2 million)
22. Skype (18.8 million)
23. Shazam (18.4 million)
A popular music recognition service. Check out #5 for listening and discovery options.
24. Yahoo Mail (17.6 million)
Standard for many phones; #7 has more resources for you.
25. Kik Messenger (17.2 million)
A popular messaging app that younger users have flocked to.
As you can see, there are a large number of Google apps on the list, thanks in part to so many of them being built in to Android phones by default. Social networking is big, too – Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest and Google+ all make the list.
Obviously, because the above list is constructed based on user numbers, there are a ton of great apps worth downloading that aren’t in the top 25. You can take a look at picks for the best mobile apps by checking out Techlicious’ top 10 free Android apps and top 10 free iPhone apps.
This article was written by Fox Van Allen and originally appeared on Techlicious.
More from Techlicious:
It's a redundancy issue
Updated 1:05 p.m.
Thousands of Time Warner Cable customers woke up Wednesday morning, took a shower, poured their morning coffee, opened up their computers, and… nothing.
A massive outage that TWC later said was the result of an infrastructure problem triggered during routine maintenance affected subscribers from the East Coast to Los Angeles, as shown by a map in which wide swaths of the country glowed a bright, troublesome red—a color that probably matched the faces of customers who tried calling customer service hotlines only to be met with a busy signal.
Thankfully for TWC customers, the outage struck in the wee hours of the morning, when big maintenance projects are typically undertaken exactly because there’s a lighter load and fewer folks who stand to be affected if something goes wrong. The issue was also fixed relatively quickly, considering the number of people it touched. But Wednesday’s glitch could cause headaches later on for TWC—and even more so for Comcast, the cable and content behemoth that’s looking to merge with TWC in a landmark deal that, if allowed, would create the single largest Internet provider in the country.
Comcast can’t go right ahead and buy Time Warner Cable like you can buy a magazine at a newsstand. A deal this big—worth about $45 billion—and one raising significant antitrust and public interest concerns needs to get the government’s go-ahead before it can be completed. Two federal agencies have the power to put the kibosh on the whole shebang: the Department of Justice, which will evaluate antitrust issues, and the Federal Communications Commission, which could block the merger on broadly-defined public interest grounds.
In preliminary hearings and statements about their proposed merger, Comcast and Time Warner Cable have argued the deal should go ahead as proposed because it wouldn’t significantly change the cable industry’s competitive makeup: Comcast and TWC, the companies accurately say, don’t currently compete in specific geographic territories, so individual customers won’t really be losing an option for getting cable (or fiber) to their home.
But as the anti-merger crowd says, a merged Comcast-TWC would have unprecedented size and scale both in content delivery and creation, especially when considering its recent purchase of NBCUniversal. That size and vertical integration, anti-merger advocates say, would mean Comcast could really turn the screws on the few cable or fiber companies with which it would compete in various regions, like Verizon, Charter and Cablevision. If a post-merger Comcast chose to engage in anti-competitive practices or if its regional rivals just couldn’t keep up, those advocates say, it will eventually be the consumers who lose out.
However, Wednesday’s outage brings up a point that hasn’t been talked about much in this debate: Physical infrastructure redundancy.
If TWC’s Internet infrastructure—the routers, switches and other physical stuff which help get Internet traffic into and out of your home—is added to Comcast’s, that would result in a pretty giant network. Therein lies a potential redundancy issue: If millions of post-merger subscribers are on the Comcast network and a catastrophic failure like Wednesday’s happens, millions more people would potentially be affected than would otherwise be the case. And in a post-merger world, those customers could wind up with fewer options for leaving Comcast if they got fed up with network issues, putting less competitive pressure on the company to address any network issues that arise.
Comcast’s network engineers are undoubtedly already thinking about this, but as the debate over the Comcast-TWC merger continues to heat up, expect this map to show up again — and sure enough, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said Wednesday afternoon he’s ordered an investigation of the Time Warner Cable outage as part of a merger review.
“Dependable Internet service is a vital link in our daily lives and telecommunications companies have a responsibility to deliver reliable service to their customers,” Cuomo said.
It's a YouTube-based workaround
Instagram’s new app Hyperlapse is pretty nifty for creating silky-smooth timelapse videos with your iPhone. Sharing your favorite Hyperlapse videos on Instagram and Facebook is super-easy right from the app, but what if you want to tweet them as an embedded video? That’s a bit harder, as Instagram disabled Twitter embeds back in 2012—not long after Facebook bought Instagram in a $1-billion deal.
But embedding Hyperlapse videos in your tweets is possible, with this workaround.
After you’ve made your Hyperlapse video, it’s automatically saved to your iPhone’s Camera Roll as a normal .MOV file. To get that bad boy on Twitter as an embedded video, simply upload the .MOV to YouTube (preferably over Wi-Fi, as big .MOV files can really eat into your data plan). You can do this either automatically through your iPhone, if it’s linked to your YouTube account, or by emailing the .MOV file to yourself and uploading it on your desktop.
Once your Hyperlapse is up on YouTube, simply tweet out the YouTube link and your video will appear embedded in the tweet:
Done and done.
Maybe the next fashionable rebellion is to become “unlinked"—only reachable face-to-face
On June 1 of this year I resolved to take a break from all social media. No Twitter, no Facebook. No visiting click-bait video sites, news aggregators, or any link with the words “… you won’t BELIEVE …” in the title. I logged off on June 1st and planned my return for Tuesday, September 2.
In the first week alone I dropped 15 pounds, re-watched Krzysztof Kieslowski’s The Decalogue, built a sustainable small-yield garden for my daughter, and learned knife throwing. By the second week I’d read all three volumes of Karl Ove Knausgaard’s My Struggle, completed a triathlon, and cooked the first half of Marcus Samuelsson’s Aquavit cookbook. By week three I had melded my consciousness with the sphere-bleed of galactic central point’s sentient Time Shell and hiked the Andes.
Actually, I spent the first week silently lurking on Twitter, checking my “@” mentions, visiting the feeds of people I both love and despise. I did the usual Google searches of my name and played game after game of GemCraft: Chasing Shadows. I gained weight. I started but still haven’t finished Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall, Herman Melville’s Moby Dick, and Howard Cruse’s Stuck Rubber Baby. I still clicked on videos. Visited my usual news aggregate haunts. Wasted time.
The second and third week weren’t much different, but … they weren’t the same. A couple of times, in line at a grocery store or coffee shop, instead of taking out my phone to stiff-arm the creeping ennui, I’d look around instead. At the world. At the people around me. Most of them looking at their phones. We now inhabit a planet where the majority of the population is constantly staring downwards, entranced, twiddling like carpenter ants. Do pickpockets know they’re living in a second renaissance?
Sometimes I’d catch the gaze of a holdout like me. A freak without a phone. Adrift in this gallery of bowed heads. A teenager, whose phone had probably died. Or a slightly older “millennial,” probably waiting for a video to load. But they were unique and far between. It was, mostly, people my age, and older—stooped, staring statues, peeping at windows in their palms.
Once I’d gotten past the first month, though, I noticed an interesting pattern. By this point I rarely looked at my phone. The only times I’d use Twitter was to re-Tweet a link to a project I was involved in, or help promote a friend’s documentary, or fundraising effort, or album release. My phone only came out of my pocket if I needed to call someone or, more often, text someone. More and more, my eyes met the world. At eye level.
Those holdout freaks I talked about? The teen whose phone battery I assumed had died? Or the older millennial I assumed was downloading a video? They were the ones not using their phones. They had the strongest immunity to the devices’ pull. It was the older people, the over-40s like me, and those way older, who couldn’t escape the tiny gravity of connection constantly yanking us out of existence.
Maybe it’s because this younger generation doesn’t have the demarcation we have—of a world before cell phones and then after. It was always there for them. So it’s not a novelty. And thus has less power. They don’t remember the endorphin rush of sudden connectivity, like when people my age first logged onto dial-up Internet and, after 10 minutes, sheepishly searched for their own name. Or the first time we received an email. And when those things happened on our phones? It was like the apes touching the monolith at the beginning of 2001.
I really enjoyed these three months away. Slowly weaning myself off of social media has, ironically, made me feel younger. At least, I have the habits of a much younger person now. I used social media—at least for these past 90 days—at the frequency of a 20 year old. Occasionally, like it wasn’t some exotic novelty, and didn’t need to be consumed like a wine whose supply was finite.
Here’s a thought—what if the next fashionable rebellion, from whatever generation rears its head after the millennials, is to become “unlinked.” Only reachable face-to-face. Hmm.
I think I’m going to do this every summer. June 1 to post–Labor Day. Eyes up, logged off. Remember how, in The Matrix, mankind had become batteries, so the machines could feed off of us? Well, it’s happening now, just 140 words at a time. It’s too late to go back, but you can carve out three hot months to recharge.
Oswalt is a stand-up comedian, writer and actor.
GOG.com, nee "Good Old Games," is throwing its hat in the DRM-free video ring, hoping to eventually persuade the big studios to liberate all movies and TV shows.
GOG.com–the encyclopedically stocked go-to site for older versions of PC games refurbished to play on existing Windows, Mac and Linux computers–is getting into the DRM-free movie business, or it’s trying to anyway. The company just announced that it’s going to pull the trigger on a slew of film and TV content that it’ll let buyers download or stream at leisure.
Movies and television shows would be completely new territory for GOG.com, media content and distribution mechanisms it’s had no experience with to date…save for one crucial component: the DRM-free part.
Today, say you want to watch movies at home, you have any number of options: stream from a service like Netflix or Hulu, buy and download from an e-tailer like iTunes or Amazon, or if you’re old-school (or like my wife’s parents who live at the ends of the earth in rural Iowa, stuck in an Internet black hole) you rent something on a physical disc from your local grocery store or Redbox vending machine.
But grabbing any of the above without digital rights management is essentially verboten. The content isn’t yours: It’s either borrowed or earmarked for use with a proprietary distribution mechanism. Short of poking around websites that catalog video in the public domain, attempting to decouple physical discs you’ve purchased and want to rip for backup or playback purposes from their copy protection bulwarks, or flat-out turning to piracy, DRM-free video isn’t an option in today’s world.
GOG.com’s position on DRM is, you could argue, its primary PR cachet. The site’s mantra is “you buy it, you own it,” period. No copy protection, no download or reinstallation or backup limits. Nada. That philosophy’s allowed the site to carve out significant space in the currently Steam-dominant downloadable PC gaming scene, and it’s apparently driving a sustainable business model.
In that light, wading into film and television with a DRM-free angle makes a certain amount of sense. It’s by no means clear the company’s going to succeed, of course. The deal starts with “over 200 partners in the gaming industry,” so publishers like EA, Square Enix and Ubisoft alongside various indie studios. That means documentaries, largely, at first, though much of it will start off unique to the site. GOG.com says the service will include world premieres like Gamer Age, The King of Arcades and Pixel Poetry, as well as award-winners off the festival circuit like Indie Game: The Movie.
But I’d wager most people see the phrase “movie and TV” used in a sentence with DRM and want to know when they’re going to be able to download a DRM-free copy of the first season of shows like Breaking Bad or True Detective. (That’s what I’d want to know, anyway.)
“Our initial idea was to start with the big guys, but the process is not easy,” says Guillaume Rambourg, GOG.com VP for North America. “In our first round of talks, the response was largely, ‘We love your ideas, but we do not want to be the first ones. We will gladly follow, but until somebody else does it first, we do not want to take the risk.’”
Rambourg claims most studio officials agree with GOG.com that DRM is “pointless,” but says they wind up punting to conservative legal departments, which of course have no intention of lowering their respective DRM drawbridges. GOG.com says it decided to regroup and prove the concept first, thus it’s launching its DRM-free film section “with documentaries catering directly to its existing community: gamers and geeks.”
GOG.com says these films, which can be streamed or fully downloaded as preferred, will include additional content, and that two of the launch titles–Art of Playing and TPB AFK: The Pirate Bay Away From Keyboard–will be available free of charge. Buy a video on GOG.com and you’ll get a file, says the company, which you can play whenever and wherever you want. New movies should arrive thereafter at a rate of at least once a week, and it sounds like the company’s starting with a flat price model: $5.99 a piece.
So no, not the place to go if you want to own shows like Treme or Fargo free and clear, but it’s a start, and who else is offering even that much? GOG.com says it’s “aiming high,” of course, and that its goal is to free “all movies and TV series from DRM.” It’s hard to imagine any of the major studios cozying up, but then the idea that you’d be able to buy hundreds of legacy PC games for peanuts, play them on modern machines and outright own them, DRM-free, after decades of code-wheels and pass-phrases and all sorts of other copy protection shenanigans, was just a pipe dream until GOG.com came along six years ago and proved it could be done.
Dropbox's new unified Pro subscription plan brings it (almost) into alignment with Google Drive.
The verb “slashed” may not do what this amounts to justice: Dropbox just collapsed its Pro-member pricing model, allowing you access to 1TB of storage for $10 a month, or $100 a year.
Through August 26, Dropbox allowed Pro subscribers to buy any of three monthly plans: $10 for 100GB, $20 for 200GB and $50 for 500GB. But as of August 27, you can have twice the prior maximum storage offering for one-fifth of the monthly cost.
What’s more, the $10-a-month plan is now the only plan on the block. Everyone pays $10 a month, everyone gets 1TB of storage.
Here’s how the plan stacks up to some of Dropbox’s competitors:
- Google already offers the same rate for its Google Drive service, and includes several others besides: $2/month for 100GB, $10/month for 1TB, $100/month for 10TB, $200/month for 20TB and $300/month for 30TB.
- Amazon also offers cloud storage plans, but on a yearly basis that’s more expensive gigabyte-for-gigabyte, starting at $10/year for 20GB and climbing to $500/year for 1TB.
- Apple’s new iCloud Drive (due with OS X Yosemite and iOS 8 later this year) looks similarly steep by comparison, with prices said to range from $1/month for 20GB to $4/month for 200GB.
- Microsoft offers OneDrive personal plans for $2 and $4 per month for 100GB and 200GB, respectively, and a business-focused 1TB plan for $2.50 per user per month.
Google and Microsoft, for their parts, give “free” users 15GB to play with, whereas Dropbox, Amazon and Apple still draw the line at 5GB.
But this is an important move by Dropbox on its subscription side toward making the service competitive with Google’s offerings (some will understandably quibble with the lack of a comparable $2/month-for-100GB option, but on balance, it seems like a considerable step in the right direction). And today’s update comes with other collaboration-related enhancements, including the option to place passwords on shared links, set expiration timeframes on shared links and tweak permissions on shared folders such that select recipients can be set to “view-only.”
The company’s also added a “remote wipe” feature, allowing you to zap your Dropbox files off a lost or stolen device (but without removing them from Dropbox’s servers).
For Pro members, the new features should go into effect “in the next couple days,” says Dropbox.
The tablet market is one that has greatly polarized many who follow the technology industry.
The initial debate centered around whether the tablet would kill the PC. Then, the tablet market began to slow from its once triple-digit annual growth rates to much more modest single-digit growth rates. The market for tablets is still growing in terms of annual sales, just not as much as it did in 2011 and 2012.
The tablet remains an important product and it will continue to evolve, but one trend we see happening may shed some light on what we can expect for the future of tablets.
It appears the tablet is segmenting. This is something our firm has been highlighting for some time in our tablet presentation:
We are starting to see tablets being built for kids, tablets being built just to consume content and media, tablets that can replace PCs, and now with the latest entrant from Nvidia, we see tablets being specifically built for hardcore gamers.
The market appears to be segmenting. Part of this has to do with the diversity of the pure-slate form factor. The design itself opens up the possibility that, through software, tablets can appeal to a wide range of use cases. This is what makes the tablet form factor so exciting.
Segmentation in many markets is not new. Specifically in the PC market, desktops and notebooks are examples of purpose-built segmentation. PC gaming machines are another example of segmentation. So it isn’t surprising that we’re seeing segmentation in the tablet market as well.
People often criticize segmentation without realizing that these are very good business moves. The Nabi kids tablet, for example, sold nearly two million units in the U.S. during the holiday quarter last year. Nvidia’s creation of the Shield tablet may be an even smarter move still. The hard core PC gaming market may not be the largest one but it is still lucrative. DFC Intelligence estimates there are upwards of 270m core PC gamers.
However, to target these segments, companies have to truly understand the market they are building for and make products uniquely tuned to fit their needs. The Nabi tablet includes custom software for kids. They offer a range of tablets targeting at different age groups and create custom experiences just for those age groups.
The Nvidia Shield tablet has a hardcore gaming processor and can stream games over a Wi-Fi network from the gamer’s computer to the tablet, which can in turn connect to a TV. By giving gamers access to all their PC games in mobile form on a tablet, Nvidia has custom-built experiences for its tablet that check the necessary boxes for serious PC gamers.
I expect more segmentation to come as hardware manufacturers discover parts of markets that are underserved or not served at all. Ultimately, this segmentation is what can continue to fuel the tablet market. There are all types of every day use cases for tablets: Many will be general purpose like the iPad, but many will target certain verticals like the ones I mentioned above. Despite anyone’s opinion on the tablet market, I remain bullish on its future.
Bajarin is a principal at Creative Strategies Inc., a technology industry analysis and market-intelligence firm in Silicon Valley. He contributes to the Big Picture opinion column that appears here every week.
Answer by Han Qin:
I can not speak for the rest of the Facebook employees, but I can tell my stories to explain why I believe the 99% approval rating is pretty fair.
After I joined Facebook in 2010, I worked on a secret project “graph search”. Within a couple months, I attended two Zuck reviews to discuss the project. He absorbed our ideas and provided feedback and support. I am not sure how other CEOs work, but as an entry level engineer I was really impressed. In the later years, I attended more Zuck reviews and saw Zuck reviews happening every day (his office has glasses walls) with both VP/directors and eng/designer/PM.
In 2012, Facebook IPOed, so we had an in-campus celebration event at Hack Square. Everybody was drinking and laughing. I was trying to push my code out so I was a little late to the party. When I walked into Hack Square, Zuck was talking to someone else but he turned to me and said “congratulations”, I was so surprised that I said “thank you”. Looking back, I think he was actually the one we all should have congratulated but I am so touched by the congrats he gave me (again, an average engineer) first.
I can list more details that Zuck is so awesome but I think you can get some sense from my stories. He is a really unique CEO that I will forever love to work with. He keeps great relationship with most CEOs in the industry. He loves his wife and always mentions how much he owes her in front of the whole company.
If you still wonder why Mark Zuckerberg has the highest approval rating after reading all the answers, join Facebook and you will know for sure.
Answer by Amir Memson, iOS Software Engineer at Facebook:
Because he is just that awesome.
There are several reasons why we “approve” of him:
- The story: He built this billion user and billion dollar company from his dorm room, overcame one obstacle after another, and assembled a company with some of the most talented employees in the world.
- The principles: He is dead-focused on “making the world more open and connected.” The guy doesn’t waver; all the investments in R&D and acquisitions have been along these lines.
- The heart: He was the biggest donor of 2013, and is generally a minimalist. He is clearly committed to , even though that’s not necessarily where the short term revenue increases are. We really feel he wants to change the world for the better.
- The guts: What other CEO has the… guts… to purchase a chat company for $19B??? It’s a very smart purchase for various reasons, but still, $19B! Even other Silicon Valley CEOs acknowledge Zuck’s fearlessness:
- The wisdom: When we hear him speak, he gives us brain wrinkles. He has this uncanny ability to make all the right strategic moves, and when he explains the reasons for making those moves, it simply makes sense. Sure, mistakes have been made, and hindsight is 20/20, but at decision time, it was for all the right reasons.
- The trust: He doesn’t make all the decisions, in fact far from it. We feel entrusted and empowered to drive our features the way we feel is best for the people that use Facebook. This is drastically different from many top-down corporations. We’re happy with the balance between management-mandated and grass-roots-inspired decision making.
- The character: He wears T-Shirts and jeans, talks with humility, and he just seems generally very approachable. We like that.
- The business: Facebook is a rock solid business that is rapidly increasing in revenue as we speak. It makes more than 70% more in revenue than it was making just one year ago.
- The free food and perks: Yes, this makes us like him and the company too. He has the ability to put an end to it at any time, but he keeps it coming. If somebody gives me free cookies, I like them, this part is not rocket science.
And, no, having a lower approval rating is not a good thing. People don’t “approve” because they agree with everything, rather they know that they have a say, and that their opinion matters. It’s a good thing to like your boss.
This question originally asked on Quora: Why does Mark Zuckerberg have a 99% approval rating from his employees? See more: