This change is only for Kindle Unlimited and the Kindle Owners Lending Library. You can't download books through those programs (and therefore can't convert them to other formats); you can only read them on a Kindle or with a Kindle app. (There are surely nefarious ways around that, but it's very different from a standard downloaded Kindle book that can be easily converted to another format.) Books that you buy from the Kindle store are not affected; authors still get paid when somebody buys one of those, whether or not it actually gets read.

Amazon probably is tracking what you read on a Kindle or Kindle app in any case. They're just not using the data to determine payments.

Amazon's planned change to payment of authors does not change the payment for books purchased for a Kindle or a Kindle app. It only affects books that you read using a Kindle Unlimited subscription, or though lending privileges granted to you by a Kindle owner through the Kindle Owners Lending Library program. Those programs pay authors using a model that is not unlike streaming music services: they look at all the books read over the month and divide up the revenue from those programs based on that readership.

It's a move on Amazon's part to limit gaming of the Kindle Unlimited program. Authors have been encouraging their friends who subscribe to download their books and open a few pages, which resulted in the author getting revenue as if somebody had read the book. Now they are shifting to actually checking how many pages you read and paying on that basis, so you can't throw money to your friend as easily. It also reins in the practice of carving up a novel into multiple smaller pieces to increase the amount of money received by the author for reading it.

It does have some possibly unintended consequences. First, it means that long books will pay more than short ones, assuming that readers actually read the entire book. (They are using a normalized page count that eliminates variables like typeface and size choices.) It also reduces the amount of money received by authors of things that aren't meant to be read cover to cover, such as reference books.

Java bytecode should always be compatible across platforms, and they have done a good job of keeping that true. There may be rare cases of compatibility issues but I haven't heard of them.

Native code is another matter entirely. That will fail if you move to a different architecture, as could happen if you moved from an old PowerPC Mac to a newer Mac or an x86 system, or when you try to move Java code to a system with an ARM processor. And the libraries have not been as good about maintaining backward compatibility as the JRE has.

Almost anything is more trustworthy than Sourceforge these days.

The direct downloads from the Document Foundation have always been crapware-free; you just have to click past a request for donations to get to them. Windows is the only platform that gets an installer; Mac has a .dmg like most Mac applications do. Linux has RPM and DEB versions, though most users get it from their distro's repositories instead.

An Android developer. I also know of some video player appliances that use Android. Not much point otherwise for now. I believe that Chrome OS and Android will eventually unify, at which point there might be more reason to run the combined OS on a laptop or desktop.

There will always be some situations where a reboot is required after patching. If it's the kernel that gets updated there is no way around it that I know of. A weakness of Windows is that it often requires a reboot for updates that DON'T involve the kernel such as updates to Windows services; on other OSes, including anything Unix-based like OS X or Linux, you can just restart the service.

Kodi is still available on Google Play. Amazon pulling it from their app store only really matters if you have an Amazon tablet or a Fire Phone; anything else that has access to the Amazon Appstore should also be able to access the Google Play store.

I'm curious - what audio hardware do you use when you're trying to do a mix with, say, 16 or 32 inputs? There aren't many computer interfaces that have that many and you would still need a way to connect the interface to your Surface Pro. One of those new Behringer mixers with the Windows desktop application would work but I haven't had the opportunity to check one out yet - the release was delayed multiple times and they are still scarce.

According to seatguru.com (link: http://www.seatguru.com/airlin...), some of Delta's 737-800 fleet has USB power at every seat. The older version does not, but the airline is in the process of converting their 737-800 fleet to the newer configuration. First class and economy comfort seats have AC outlets; economy seats do not.

Again according to seatguru.com, Delta's 737-900ER fleet (link: http://www.seatguru.com/airlin...) does not have USB power anywhere, but has AC power outlets at every seat. Your experience suggests that their information is inaccurate.

The price of the Surface Pro 3 means that few people will buy it just to run the fairly small number of Windows applications that are designed for tablets or are touch friendly. If you just want to do those things there are less expensive options, and buying an iOS or Android tablet will give you a much larger selection of touch friendly apps. The less expensive Surface 3 might appeal to some users who just want it for touchscreen use.

There are some use cases that are exceptions. Music mixing, mentioned in an earlier post, is one. Photoshop, despite your doubts, is another; although it won't work well with just a fingertip because of the size of the controls, it works quite well with the Surface Pen, and that's an accessory (and it's included with the Surface Pro 3 so you don't even have to buy it separately; if you buy the Surface 3 the pen will cost you another $50) that somebody who is using the tablet mostly for Photoshop and/or Illustrator will want.

The reason that ARM didn't work out for Windows (just as the versions of Windows NT for PowerPC and Alpha failed) is that Microsoft has been unable to convince the developers of Windows applications to make them available for multiple architectures. Unless they can make that happen, Windows for ARM is a non-starter on the desktop. (Microsoft plans to continue to support ARM for phones.)

Back in the NT era, Microsoft might have been able to force the issue by making multiple architecture support a condition for getting Designed for Windows certification. (Older applications were being obsoleted by the transition to a true 32 bit OS anyway, so most users had to update.) But they didn't do it, and now there are far too many existing applications that people will want to run on their new computers, so it would be impossible for Microsoft to switch desktop Windows to another architecture. It could be done with a binary translation layer, but there are performance and power consumption compromises to that. And there is a fundamental difference between Windows and Mac users; Windows users tend to have a much larger number of applications installed (though not so much in the number that they use on a daily basis), and many Windows users stick with old versions of applications rather than upgrading.

Tablet-controlled mixers aren't for everyone; getting used to the touchscreen controls can be challenging for people who are accustomed to knobs and sliders, and you can't see the entire setup at once. But they are a wonderful solution for some use cases. You can control the mix from the listening point without the need to run a snake, and you can have multiple people controlling different parts of the mix (for example, have a second person set up the monitor mix or even let the performers adjust it themselves). Mackie was first to market but there are a number of choices now; QSC has one, PreSonus has a mixer that has conventional sliders but also offers iPad control, and Behringer has a series of mixers that have Windows and Android control apps in addition to one for the iPad.

The Surface Pro 3 and Surface 3 are normally sold without the keyboard; it's a $130 extra. The Surface Pro includes a pen; it's a $50 extra for the Surface 3.

Microsoft has offered Surface bundles that gave you a discount if you bought a Surface or Surface Pro and a cover. No bundles with just those items are currently available, but there are bundles that offer a discount if you buy a Surface or Surface Pro 3, a Type Cover, a sleeve, and an extended warranty. The Surface Pro bundle also requires you to buy an Office 365 subscription; the Surface 3 base price currently includes one.

Microsoft's marketing line for the Surface line is "the tablet that can replace your laptop". (They originally used that for the Surface Pro series but are now also using it for the Surface 3.) Sounds to me like they are marketing it as a tablet.

If I am calling for a specific individual, I accept the fact that the person won't always be available. But if I call customer service in general, there should always be somebody there to talk to me now or after a wait of no more than a couple of minutes. I don't EVER want to have to leave my number for somebody to call back.. I'm the customer so it's your job to be available when I want you to serve me, it's not my job to be available for you.

Yes, I know about your web site. You don't have to remind me of it incessantly in your hold message. Unless you are my ISP and I am calling to report a service outage, I already tried it. The only reason I'm calling you is because I need to do something that your web site can't handle, or because I already tried it and you didn't help me within a reasonable amount of time.

Finally, I know that some of you won't let me cancel your services on your web site, and instead insist that I talk to a human so they can try to talk me out of canceling. Don't do that. If you make the experience of canceling pleasant, I will come back if my needs or finances change again and I once again want your services. If you make the exit experience unpleasant I will NEVER return, and I will tell all my friends to avoid you.