Yes, typewriters (and word processors) usually have adjustable tab stops. At some point (before I started using either -- pre 1970s), most considered every 8 characters as the standard. As the story goes, it was because it was easier for early word processors and electric type writers to use a number that was easy to handle in base-2, but I don't have a reference for you. It was what was taught to me in typing class in high school, and what the pcs of the time (IBM, Apple, Atari) used as well as all the major printers understood (hp, star, a few others). It's also the default for DOS (and windows), and the web. http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-te...

That door swings both ways. If you are supposed to be using spaces, how do you know that someone didn't put a tab in there?

Yet another person that doesn't understand the difference between random and "I don't understand".

Why are you using an editor that would replace tabs with spaces when it initially reads the file, yet doesn't convert the spaces back to tabs when it saves it? Sounds like a bad editor to me.

On typewriters and early word processors it was 8, and still is usually.

Linus is irrelevant. He's over 40 and will never find a job.

If their resume has stuff where it's not exactly lined up right, they are a spaces guy. If everything is lined up right, then they are a tabs (or columns, or tables) guy.

Well a pilot gets better with experience, but a computer has the experience and knows how to correct every error ever previously encountered.

You mean like the trains at Chicago, Las Vegas, San Francisco, Miami, New York, Tampa, Seattle airports?

From memory for USB (which isn't as good as it used to be):
Keyboard
Mouse
UPS Monitor
CPU Cooler
Webcam
Hard Drive Docking Station
Game Pad
Head Phones
Printer
iPhone/iPad cable
Bluetooth Dongle

I'm sure there is a couple others in there, but I forget without looking. So 11 USB ports minimum. I've tried eSATA, but I found it flakey. And of course, I use two HDMI, and occasionally the DVI port.

Yes because Apple's motto is "it just works... usually".

No, "lossless compression" and "uncompressed' are two different things. A good lossless compression example would be like a .ZIP file. When you uncompress it, the output is exactly the same as the original source bit-for-bit. Uncompressed means no compression was used at all.

Of course there is. The question is how quickly it could be implemented, and what type of performance overhead it would take, and if it is worthwhile.