The fewer changes there are from the app on your phone to the desktop to the Xbox and so on, the easier it will be for users to discover how to use your app when moving from one device to the next.

Microsoft already thought about that. For example, context menus can adapt their size to the input method being used. If using a mouse or stylus, the menu uses shorter items, and when using a touch screen (tap-and-hold), the menu uses larger items. In fact I just tested that on the latest build of Windows 10, no reboots or mode changes were needed, it just worked one after the other.

That statement applies just as much to any program. Web apps are useful for many things, but they haven't quite replaced all native applications yet for several reasons. Native apps run faster, have more access to device capabilities, and do not inherently require Internet access or use up your data plan.

That statement is blatantly absurd. You must not have experience in the enterprise.

The universal platform is built with all of that in mind. As the developer, you can respond to all the various input methods that you want to support. Apps are responsive, like web apps, so that the developer controls how each app conforms to the screen size and capabilities of the device.

The more consistent you make your UI between your target device families, the easier it will be for users to approach your application.

No, it's taking a universal app and slapping it both on the desktop and phone, as well as Xbox, HoloLens, etc.

The app can easily conform to the size available, similar to responsive websites. (This is nice even on the desktop, because sometimes I'd like my app to work well if I make its window small... so it adjusts accordingly.) Universal apps can easily support various input methods including keyboard, mouse, touchscreen, Xbox controller, and so on.

Completely wrong. Users can sideload universal apps in Windows 10, they just need to enable the Developer Mode setting.

The official name today is Universal Windows Platform apps, or UWP.

It wouldn't be Microsoft if they didn't retire a good name the moment they found one that was worse.

But who needs a cure?

I don't know about a posse, but I don't think it's any surprise that getting one of the first posts (and especially a top-level post) will get you to +5 much faster than if you post further down (such as this level). People see those posts earlier and are more likely to mod them.

Also... I haven't tried to pinpoint when it happens, but sometimes I notice anything below a 3 gets hidden automatically on my view... unless they are at the top level, in which a 2 will suffice.

The system I mentioned, the one ending in 1971, was Bretton Woods. It was not the kind of gold standard where gold was treated the same currency. Nevertheless, currency was convertible to gold at a fixed rate, which is as far as the relevance here is concerned.

As I said before: "The gap may very well exist, but this chart doesn't show it." So far, I haven't seen data that shows evidence to support this chart's claim that such a gap actually exists.

They didn't kill their July 29 RTM date. They suspended new TP builds "briefly", specifically to switch over to using the production channels distribution channels. According to the quote, it sounds likely that they will resume TP builds prior to RTM.

Considering at one time they averaged 2 months between fast ring releases, any new TP release prior to RTM would be much faster.

You think that is a recent phenomenon? It's been that way since Windows came into existence.

It's not that I disagree with you though, the Windows Store is full of crapps. Microsoft has specific plans to crack down hard on those, so I'm going to withhold judgment on the state of the Windows 10 Store until some time after RTM. Also consider that app capabilities will increase due to a larger API set of the UWP and the ability to put Win32 apps in the Windows Store (via Project Centennial).

You might want to look further than the first definition. The next two both use "in consideration of".

That might be a problem if this design language were only useful for tablets, but it isn't.

Command-line text editors are purely keyboard focused, and most don't display any type of toolbar or buttons.

So, you are saying that you are more likely to be misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying.

Or it isn't, because that's not what I said.

Is the person who has trouble with language the one who utilizes accepted vocabulary, or the one who does not?

Welcome to the world of keyboard shortcuts.

It's not about being "afraid" of buttons. It's about maximizing your focused task and getting everything else out of the way.

The thing I'm most afraid of is actually this opposite extreme, this.

No, it doesn't. "In consideration of" implies only that something has been considered, not that it is a cause.