so all kind of products trying to claim they're healthy while they're absolutely not isn't happening, and never has happened?
under which rock have you been living?

Or not 95% of the SSD buyers will never read this, and this negative publicity will just be a small dent, but overall still profitable

I was thinking the same. The probably most "correct" response would be to make it technically impossible to get the data from Canada, but there is no other way to do that than to just block the data worldwide. Otherwise a simple proxy in another country would circumvent it (or even just imperfect detection of whether the user is in Canada or not).

It seems broad, but unless we've got extremely tightly DRM/Firewall of china kind of restrictions on all data, removing it completely is probably the only way for google to make sure it can no longer be accessed from Canada...

It's still not nice to see such rulings, but unless anyone here has a better idea that isn't trivially circumvented, it's probably also totally legit.

i'm from belgium, and here inches are still dominating. it's indeed odd to see that when i go to a german site, that everything is in centimeters (though it would be nice to finally make the switch)

i guess that's a compliment for my good english, but i'm european :p.
and i know very well how much 27cm is, but i find it hard to translate to screen diagonal. I however know perfectly how big my currently 10" tablets screen is, and i've never looked at it as a 25cm tablet :p, or maybe i'm getting old and will have to face that slowly screens will be measured in cm and not inch.
Knowing how much 27cm is, for me at least, doesn't give a good indication of what you'll exactly have. you have to compare it to similar screens you have experienced, and for me i've always seen them described in inches, so that's the reference for me.

here in west europe, i also see it sometimes, but most of the times it's still inches. And when i see it in cm, it's just strange :p

well, screens are even in metric countries still mostly measured in inch. a 10.5 inch screen is clearer than a 27cm screen.
It's indeed strange and stupid, but unless there is a sudden movement to get rid of this convention, it's rather convenient to keep it that way. Everybody knows the sizes in inch of the screens they have, so if a new screen then also measures it in inch, it's easy to compare it to what you currently have.

If i read somewhere the screen diagonal measured in cm, it's most of the time a tiny TV they're trying to make it sound bigger than it is...

I don't know, if they're the first to devise a working setup to achieve that, haven't they discovered how to do it?
It was already discovered that it should be possible, but they might be the first to actually describe a possible apparatus to do so, so i guess it's fair to say that they discovered how to do it?

Just because you keep repeating that, doesn't make it true you know...
The article at the point where it's mentioned that it's most expensive immediately states it is due to the 5 year plan, and sorry, but a migration of win2k -> winxp (where you can keep most apps you were using, and most users will still be fairly familiar, and tech support won't need to learn much new things) vs windows -> linux where just about everything changes just isn't the same order of magnitude.
They also continue to say further on in the article that by their own estimates they saved money by now (about 12 years later?).

So stop your trolling (or work on your reading comprehension, it's seriously lacking)

And i almost feel like a karmawhore/linux fanboy when responding to you (even though i'm a happy windows 8 user)

And you took that out of context. That was on the initial 5 year plan, where moving to linux was a big migration, while moving to windows XP from windows 2000 would have had far less impact.
So of course in the first years such a massive migration and education of your users costs more. But now 10+ years later they estimate they saved money (and that was also mentioned in the part where they mentioned that linux was more expensive. For the 5 year plan microsoft was cheaper, but strategically they were pretty sure linux would be cheaper after that).

and ceos and religious leaders and [fill in random position with a lot of power]

since a lot of recent phones are surpassing tv's in resolution, i doubt it...

you can't possibly expect a journalist to get a single number right in an article?