Until SP3 it had an issue where randomly the registry would get corrupted and it would blue screen at boot, requiring a system restore. It didn't happen often, but no matter your configuration, the longer you used it, the closer to 1 the probability of it happening. The issue was fixed in SP3 and then life was good.

XP also took until SP2 to be bearable... people forget history so quickly.

At the same time, now Powershell (which can be accessed remote and ecnrypted, like a typical Bash over SSH), can do pretty much everything out of the box without needing to add anything (aside a certificate if you want the encrypted part), so you don't really need the UI anyway.

IIS, Exchange, SharePoint, SQL Server etc, all support it just fine, and you can obviously run any command line utility through it for anything that supports it.

Its rare I ever hit RDP on my windows servers anymore. There's no point unless you're dealing with software that seriously needs an update.

Yup. The customers pay for downloading from their ISP to their home. Netflix pays for streaming from their CDNs to their provider(s). What happens in between is the problem of the ISPs.

Comcast wants BOTH the customer AND netflix to pay for the download part. Thats where it gets messed up.

There's a few "3-monitor-in-one" curved monitors around (I don't know if they're actually sold and too lazy to check, but Alienware showed a prototype years ago). It looked pretty freagin cool in games.

While too short for taste, Nexus devices at least have a well defined/known EOL, so they're good for that.

Too bad the nexus program is probably not gonna go on for much longer though :(

There's 2 big use cases for desktop virtualization. The common one is to run a ton of desktops of off little hardware, with the idea that most people only read emails and use MS Word all day anyway. Big cost saving.

The other is purely to have desktops centralized in a data center so you can have data center admins deal with them instead of needing (as many) on site tech monkeys.

I worked in companies where it was the later. The users still needed 16+ gb of RAM, dedicated powerful hardware, etc, but now if something blew up, you didn't need to send someone at their desk to fix it, and you could still just move the image to a different machine while the first one was being fixed.

This technology seems very well suited toward the later.

Of course I do. This one has the nice side effect of easier collaboration than any other I can think of, though!

Auto-commit is probably overkill, but: distributed source control.

I commit to my local branch at every semi-reasonable checkpoint, and yeah, after a while my commit messages look like those from that XKCD about git. Every so often I'll push to a private remote branch as a backup.

Then when I squash my commits and push the atomic change to the main repo, yeah, that will be a deliberate, reviewed and well explained commit. But only then.

We're not all on SVN and SourceSafe anymore!

and how do you plan to get your free movies over the "innernetz" without doing business with the same monopolies? Who cares about cable TV. Its cable internet that doesn't have an alternative in most places. TV's easy to replace, the internet is getting close (not the same, but slowly creeping up) to being as important as electricity.

Unrelated to the topic, but being qualified for the job and being qualified for the interview is 2 totally different things in the IT and software development field, since there's so many bad interviewers out there.

I wish I could screen for the interview before agreeing to do it. Would save me a lot of trouble.

Historically, so far, the easier you make it, the harder the problems become.

One of the most visible examples of this is in frontend web development. Now that we have jquery and a billion javascript librairies, we don't do the same simple web pages we used to in a fraction of the time (something that would have taken a month back then takes literally seconds today). Instead, we do crazy shit that were never meant to be done in a browser.

If we make that crazy shit easier, people will just go and do crazier shit.

Google's search can't remove a part of a page though. Either the whole page goes, or none of it goes.

Google already has search parameters to not look at older content though. Its in the search options, you can look for stuff of the last year, last month, last week, etc.

Its downright necessary if doing any search on JavaScript technologies, since they change every other week and anything older than a month is virtually irrelevant.

It does have ramifications though.

if I don't like a news article on a specific news website, can I just post a comment under the news article, then request my right to be forgotten to get that link taken down?

Careful though. FiOS is 100x worse than Comcast when it comes to throttling. On (most of) the east coast, if you have FiOS, you'll be happy to be able to stream Youtube at 360p with buffering (Google for a while had a page with their statistics on that, and FiOS streaming speed for youtube was a fraction of anyone else's, INCLUDING Comcast). And their peering agreements are pathetic, so if you're playing an MMORPG thats somewhat far, hello unplayable lag (and a VPN that changes the route or shape traffic will fix the issue instantly).

Don't get me wrong, I hate Comcast, I want them to die in a fire and suffer. But FiOS is worse. Much worse.