Taking into account that it's for kids in a charity, I'd go with Ubuntu. I already set up Ubuntu machines for kids and excluding one or two bumps along the way (which Windows XP isn't imune to) it works just fine.

These are my reasons:

1) Windows XP at this point is too vulnerable to malware. I've seen networks in businesses based on XP that were basically breeding grounds for all sorts of viruses, even with paid AV software up to date, and I assume you'll have only free AV protection in them. Also note that you can't use the latest browser from MS so to be up to date on that you should use another one. If I had to bet, I'd say those computers in the hands of kids will be full of malware in a very short time.

2) Ubuntu is easy to use. I'd go as far as to say that it's more intuitive than Windows. Of course, this won't apply to people that lived their whole lives using Windows but since we're talking about kids here, I don't think that should be much of a problem. I'd stick with Ubuntu classic desktop instead of Unity though, since it's just easier to understand.

3) With a centralized repository of software, kids can install new games and other apps without looking in the wild west of the internet and dealing with installers and potentially harmful stuff.

4) In terms of content and applications, a new installation of Ubuntu is much superior than a new installation of Windows. Of course, this is not a problem if you intend to put some work setting up your Windows with more software before donating, like an office suite, etc.

5) No licensing issues whatsoever, no matter how many people use it, how they use it, how they access it, etc. This may not be a problem in your case.

I liked one that I received with the HR manager of my company in the From field, offering me a new job with a ridiculously high pay and working from home.

I accepted but I didn't get the job :(

The thing that Evolution had that played a big part for us in adopting Evolution, was that it had really easy MS Exchange connectivity. I don't know if this was a factor in Cannonical's decision in the past but it was for me.

You can use little "formulas" to determine chord progressions that will sound ok but you can't make a good song with formulas. It's not about having tempo x to be successful, it's about having the appropriate tempo for that particular song you're writing. Using statistics to make these sort of decisions will lead to mediocre results at best.

Also, about the study, if the tempo on most hits average out at 119.80 bpm, that could just mean that all songs (hits or not) average out at 119.80. The same could be said about all other variables in this study. The only merit I see in it is in studying trends over time.

This is a fascinating subject though. One day we may be able to generate new songs on demand with some piece of software that would mirror the kind of algorithms we use ourselves to produce music and to judge its quality, whatever they may be.

I don't see what's the big deal here. Why are so many people offended by this? Is it wrong to try this new model? I don't see why, unless the costumers aren't warned about it which isn't implied in the article.

The model itself isn't good or bad, it may work with some kinds of games and some kinds of gamers for a lower price. I don't think it would succeed for most of the market though. There's no reason to rally against this practice as some comments seem to encourage, it's just a new kind of product out there, if you don't like it, don't buy it and buy something you like instead.

What I read on my rss feed was "Gay whale... seen in N. Atlantic"

I'm kind of disappointed now that they haven't found a gay whale...

Soon it will be time to start working of viruses. I can't wait to hear my car's engine singing flight of the bumblebees for no reason.

Just remember to change the folder name from "pirated" to "thoughtful gifts from online 'friends'"

The kinds of games that are made are the kind that get sold. If games are targeted at men it's because they're the ones that want to buy them. I believe that there are games targeted at women (or at least not targeted at men specifically) already so I don't see the problem there. Maybe advances in technology or shifts in the gaming interfaces will make the medium more attractive to women in the future. Games, like any other product, will always be targeted to wherever the demand is.

Remember that a lot of stuff was apprehended. I'd bet that on most of these cases, data on these guys' pcs will give away information about other members.

Very well put.

So its user base decreased around 3%, so what? I'm not a big facebook user but I find it funny how these little fluctuations always give rise to these sort of news saying that users are angry and whatnot.

Actually no. Anonymous Coward is correct in that some punctuation is placed inside the ending quotation according to the American standard but this does not apply to question marks or exclamation points, for obvious reasons.

Any vigilante could potentially do good things but would you really trust random individuals (as egotistical and immature they may be) going around making justice by their own hands?

What kind of news would you want if you wanted to get rid of internet anonymity?

Probably this kind and the kind we've been reading for the last months.

I don't see the lulz in this.