Julia, Julia, she's our guide,

She directs us far and wide.

If you're lost and can't find your way,

Julia's here to save the day!

- Julia, Islandia's robotic tour guide (c. 1990)

I'd *much* rather part with the small amount of vertical space tabs currently take up, or even double or triple that, than the horizontal space they'd take up on the side, because I like to have two browser windows up side-by-side.

I really hope they let me keep my tabs where they are.

To paraphrase an old joke...

Q: What version of Windows will most people be running in 2100?

A: I don't know, but it will be called "Windows XP".

Though not my favorite game ever, I did like X-com a lot. For pure longevity in my games library, Starcraft takes the cake. Not better in every way than other games (e.g., Total Annihilation had the *best* unit control), but overall Starcraft is still my favorite RTS. If I were having a LAN party this weekend, I'd want to fire it up.

I think I must be misunderstanding, because it sounds like the company broke your physical copy because you used their on-line service, and you think this is a good thing.

I'd like to thank you for helping me understand Steam better. Now I'm *sure* I want no part of it.

Service charges are a big consideration for me, too. I'd be really tempted to get an iPhone, even though I can't "upgrade" to it, but it's too much $/month.

If an Android phone comes along that has a more reasonable monthly charge, I'm there. :)

I don't know enough about astronomy to comment on it and telescopes, but as for CS: I'm not sure we all agree on what "Computer Science" means. And by "we" here I don't just mean readers and posters on /., I mean everybody involved with CS.

Specifically, I think an open question are, should "Computer Science" include Software Engineering? Historically, it has: CS degree programs teach not just the science of computing, but how to build software (to some extent, anyway), too. And of the people with a CS degree, far more do engineering than science.

If you think this field is mostly about the engineering, then Dijkstra is wrong. If you're building actual artifacts that people are going to use the properties of those artifacts and the "materials" used to build them are very important. Physicists are not taught, do not know, and do not do the same things as engineers whose disciplines use theories from physics. For example, when I was in college, the civil engineering curriculum included a class on dirt and one on concrete.

I think most current CS programs are suboptimal for most graduates (and the companies that hire them), because the instruction is focused on science but the vast majority of their students will end up with engineering jobs/careers. I'm not saying that, for example, knowing physics isn't useful for building bridges, just that if you know you want to build bridges, you'd be a lot better off studying civil engineering.

Anyway, I wish everyone everywhere could be clear whether when they say "Computer Science" they really mean software engineering. They're related, obviously, but they are not the same thing.

I've written a really big technical document (>200 page dissertation) in FrameMaker and various smaller ones in Word, LaTeX, and OpenOffice. Since I was a student at the time, Frame was merely expensive, not insanely expensive. And it did a good job. It has a sane document model that can, for example, keep captions with their figures (unlike Word). But it's in no way free and pretty darned expensive. And it doesn't play well with version control.

I dislike writing anything bigger than a page or two in Word, and despise writing anything in it of any length that contains figures. I once wrote a technical paper in Word that had over 20 figures. Then I went and edited some of the text. Suddenly, many captions were no longer with their figures, and some of the figures overlapped each other. (This was extra fun when a large figure covered a smaller one. Where did Figure 18 go? Guess what? It could be hidden under any other Figure.) I've also had bad experiences with Word cross-references just suddenly becoming wrong and having to correct them manually.

If you're willing to put in some learning time, LaTeX is an excellent technical documentation tool. It is fairly novice-hostile (moreso than Emacs, IMHO), but extremely expert-friendly. There are decent tutorials on- and off-line, and front ends like LyX that make it easier. And it plays really nicely with version control.

Whenever I have a choice, I use LaTeX for docs more than a few pages long. (For short ones I use OpenOffice and/or Emacs to write HTML.)

"Distributor shall not distribute any Adobe Runtime for use on any... internet-connected device."

Well, so much for distributing it for use on most desktop computers out there.

At my office, I plug in: 1. power, 2. keyboard+mouse (thanks to the USB outlet on the keyboard, I only need one for both), 3. external monitor, 4. network (faster than the wireless), 5. usb-to-VGA adapter, 6. audio out to speakers

I really like the auto-sleep when I close the MacBook, but I don't take it to as many meetings as I would otherwise, because connecting & reconnecting is such a PITA.

Agreed. I like how Steve Jobs put it in Triumph of the Nerds:

I agree. I work at a small technology company where nearly all employees have a laptop and no desktop computer. MacBooks have made some inroads here (I'm typing on one now), but they're not as good players "enterprise-wise" as their Windows counterparts. (My personal peeve lately: no docking station? For the MacBook "Pro"??? (Yes, I know there are 3rd party ones, but give me a break. They're a joke compared to ones for ThinkPads or Dell laptops.))

With the increasing integration of work and home, and people wanting to use the same technologies everywhere (e.g., smart phones), it seems it would really be good for Apple to be more business-friendly.