I was so used to the old YouTube design that it never occurred to me how ugly and impractical it actually was. Gladly, the Google guys (YouTube is part of Google now, just in case that’s news to you) currently redesign all their services to fit in with Google+.
On YouTube, you have to enable the new design called Cosmic Panda yourself. Go to this page and hit the big button to do so. I strongly recommend it , even if you’re watching YouTube videos just occasionally.

Thx to Jeriko for mentioning Cosmic Panda on Google+.
GigaOM gathered some comments on Cosmic Panda from YouTube content creators.

As you may have recognized, I’m not a native speaker and if you’re reading this blog, you most likely know that I’m German. A recent comment on Facebook made me realize that an explanation why I write in English can’t hurt. Plus: I plan to address the way I recognize language in general and the implications an English-dominated media and news consumption has for me in more articles, so this is a good one to begin with anyway.

• No. First of all: I don’t write in English because I spent a year in the US (I didn’t) and suddenly became too cool to express myself in German (yeah, maybe I would’ve).
• Exercise. In school, they taught us English. That was fine, but after the 5-6th year absolutely redundant. I wouldn’t know any English today if it hadn’t been for all the TV Series and movies I’ve watched since. I remember starting by watching some ‘Knight Rider’, even with noting some vocabulary that I liked. It was fun, no kidding! But professionally and in general: as a person living in the 21st century, I want to, nay: feel like it’s a duty to be able to express myself in English. Especially because my language skills beyond German and English aren’t worth mentioning. But television only covers listening comprehension and maybe some talking, the rest of my English skills aren’t kept up by that. So the writing part needs some exercise, and here we are.
• Accessibility. I’m far away from an international readership, I realize that. But writing in German certainly keeps more people out than writing in English. And all the German people I know can understand English, so this is an easy one.
• It’s English anyway. I don’t cover topics that only make sense to be written about in German, like politics or local topics. On the contrary: especially the tech stuff forces me to adapt many English terms anyway. But I have to admit: Sometimes I miss writing/ranting about wrong usage of language in general or certain words by my fellow Germans.
• Iven did it. I never even considered writing in English before ivenwinkelmann.com existed and worked very well in English. I honestly had thought I couldn’t pull it off, but seeing it going very well made me try.

Watching this film shocked me. It was the first Bond film that came out when I was old enough to recognize. ‘GoldenEye’ was the first Bond after a six-year interruption caused by a lawsuit (what else?) after Dalton’s second and unfortunately, last part as 007 in ‘License to Kill’.

1. I was six years old. I probably didn’t watch it till I was eight years old or so, but that’s not imporant. This film just seems older to me than any of the 80’s Bonds. The special effects are the worst. When, sat the beginning, the satellite dish came down, I couldn’t believe it (don’t even get me started on the train Sean Bean tries to escape in at the end of the film). It looked like a random ‘Mac Gyver’ or ‘Knight Rider’ episode. Well, the special effects in the older Bonds seem cheap now, too. But with the pre-‘GoldenEye’ ones, it never struck me in this particular way. I really was shocked, but why? All of it looked accurate to me once, that may be the reason for my strange feelings. Really weird. This also may be the very first step of getting old, I don’t know. It certainly disturbs me more than I could my first grey hair imagine to. But on the other hand, and this took me some time to realize: the movie is frikkin’ 16 years old. Sixteen.

However, I have some more notes: Bond’s car is, among others, a BMW Z3. I even remember liking its design as, say: ‘fresh and sporty’. Now, it almost looks like an 80’s car to me (especially the back), but without the charm and cool that you’d expect to come with that.
An female antagonist-sidekick that jills off by firing a whole AK-47 magazine (come and get me, weapon nerds) at a bunch of people is certainly a nice touch, but I really didn’t like the implementation here. It was just weird how the Russian General looked at Miss Onatopp¹ when she moaned full of lust, clearing her magazine. A slightly quieter moan would’ve added seriousness to the film and even more sadism to the character (less freak show). But the average 90’s viewer needed that, I guess.

Yeah, that’s what was strange about the film. Regarding the Brosnan-semi-reboot and the film itself: The only strong character in it is Judi Dench’s M. Brosnan delivers kind of a 90’s version of Dalton’s Bond. More serious (than Moore), living by principles and so on. But the whole character-building consists of some random cliché lines between him and the Russian programmer chick (‘Oh, you boys just want to kill each other!’ - ‘We have to.’) with no further effect. Very different from Daniel Craig’s Bond, whose disenchanted sentiment really marks the film and is a whole different level of acting.

Oh, and what a cheap ‘Thunderball‘-ripoff the ‘Oh, where’s the huge satellite dish?‘-part at the end was.
For what it’s worth: ‘GoldenEye’ in the International Movie Firearms Database.

1. ^_^

Third party market place - Build & Analyze #31, 1:09:30
Marco:

You need the diversity and size of a third-party market place to both solve less common needs and provide variety in the common needs.

This, in a nutshell, is why Android is the OS manufacturers chose to run on their smartphones (the new Symbian) rather than being a mobile OS that makes your smartphone part of an ecosystem.