I didn't think it could be all that much better than XP either.

Two weeks ago I set up a new machine and installed XP. After installing all the necessary extraneous software I needed and updates and stuff the machine was a dog (like 5-10 mins to desktop) 5 days in. I never noticed this ever happening in XP before, but then again, the software was newer, so was the hardware (should make it faster, no?).

I've never used Vista, but when I decided to try Win7 RC x64 on this system, same software and hardware as the XP system before it, I thought it was a gamble I would pay dearly for. Not true. Win7 is much faster than XP. Only thing: why doesn't my 3com 905tx work in Win7? I never thought I'd find an OS that didn't support it out the box.

And before you tell me I did something wrong on my XP system: you're wrong. Ask around, Windows 7 is better than XP.

At all the college fairs at my school, the recruiters always ask me this when I state my major as Comp.E.: "do you specialize in hardware or software?". Gives me the impression that they have at least some idea of my field. The recruiters could be more than just HR drones though.

but in all fairness to your degree, out of school, how many of the jobs you interviewed for were interviewing 4-yr degree candidates?

He's not an IT grad. He's a Comp.E.

for the love of god, slashdot, stop confusing engineers with sysadmins.

but what are these flash drives and optical disks containing viruses that autorun when you plug them in? do they come in the mail like AOL disks?

If there's nothing wrong with hiring a secretary to read/filter your mail for you, there can't be anything wrong with utilizing software to do the same for email.

Are there actually specific laws saying that legislators must represent their constituents' interests?

CIA did in fact fly those planes.
For obvious reasons, only civilians (aka CIA) are allowed to fly spy planes.

you can make ethanol non-drinkable (and toxic) by adding a bit of methanol. It's called denatured alcohol. 100 percent ethanol is used as a fuel in many applications. I've used both methanol and ethanol for fueling my backpacking stoves. Ethanol has a slightly higher energy density (more joules per gram); methanol is slightly more volatile (ignites more easily). Ethanol has the edge for camping in the backcountry because I can mix it with lemonade packets for a cocktail. Methanol would make me vomit (or die if I took enough).

If I had to guess why methanol is used instead of ethanol: it's cheaper. It's also possible that the volatility of methanol (compared to ethanol) makes it a more suitable fuel for the technology (fuel cell).

Why suggest we use a fuel because it's non-toxic? Are there confused people at the gas pump trying to drink from the hose?

I don't see how relevant this is to a FreeBSD (which supports a wide range of non-x86 archetectures) release.
If FreeBSD has anything to do with it, in fact there is more to desktop/server platforms than CISCs. IBM (Power architecture) and SUN (SPARC) come to mind. You can say whatever you want about current market share, but this business changes with technology, and technology can change.

I'm not concerned about an Intel monopoly on an architecture they invented. I am, however, concerned about AMD continuing to rest on its laurels and make little progress in their processors. At least IBM continues to develop novel ideas (the Cell).