Correct. I'm in Australia. It's standard.

Because 2 TB hard drives are about 130 dollars.

Because that's where his friends are, drinking beer.

IE9 onwards is an entirely different beast to previous versions. If you haven't used IE since version 9 came out, it is worth at least testing (if you're on windows at least). There isn't really a major browser out there at the moment which doesn't suck in various ways, but in terms of suckage recent versions of IE aren't actually bad.

Not only that, but IE4 (yes version 4) performed faster in the real world than Netscape at the time. IE6 came way later, the game was well and truly over by the time IE5 came out.

... that open source is superior. owait...

Signed packages are a bit different to checking code signatures on executables/scripts at run time.

HP elitebook 8570 with AMD video, latest available driver from HP, plugged into an HP 1920x1080 display. Laptop has 1920x1080 display option.

You mean like Windows explorer, Office 2013, internet explorer and the Windows 2012R2 RSAT? It's a joke. And yes I've tried all of the things you mention. Windows 7 just leaves the scale the fuck alone and it works.

Pretty much.

They have removed/hidden a bunch of the options you used to get when right clicking a connection in the task bar. They've also removed a bunch of options you could use to get more information and remove/re-add a connection via the control panel.

What about the setting "Let me choose one scaling level for all my displays"

Was waiting for someone to mention that. It doesn't work. I have noticed no appreciable effect. And to clarify, by "re-size" in my above post, i mean that it does a really shitty job of scaling things to what seems like non-native monitor resolution - exactly like if you were to say, run you 1920x1080 monitor in 1680x1050 resolution. Blurred fonts, head-ache inducing and difficult to read. My laptops internal screen is 1920x1080. My 23" monitor is 1920x1080. In 6 months I was unable to get this behavior to stop. Yes, i understand what Windows 8.1 is TRYING to do - make my windows the same physical size on both screens, but it doesn't work and makes things nasty to use - and can't be disabled, it would appear. Whether that is due to a driver issue or what i have no idea. But its a deal breaker for multi-monitor support for me at the moment.

... it is a custom build. What would firefox rather they do? Not offer it? Fork, calling it something else and erode Firefox's market presence? Or give them some free publicity. This strikes me as cutting off their nose to spite their face on the part of Mozilla.

What are your thoughts on code signing, and do how do you see the development of such proceeding in the free unix world. In Powershell for example, i can set a system-wide policy to only run scripts if they are signed with a trusted certificate.

This means I can, for example, delegate script development to an underling, review the script and then sign and push into production, knowing that the script will not run if it has been modified in the field without authorization - enabling proper change management process to be enforced.

Other platforms require all code to be signed before it will run.

Do you foresee anything like this (obviously with the master signing authority being the local site admin) for OpenBSD?

Pretty much that. My observations with FreeBSD at least have been that whilst Linux might get something FIRST, it will typically go through 3-4 (more?) iterations before the actual long term supported version emerges. Until someone decides to rewrite it anyway.

The FreeBSD (and likely other BSD) way seems to be to design things properly first (which takes some time that Linux skips), implement and then the user-facing interface stays the same for a long period of time.

Sometimes however, it does mean BSD gets features first. E.g., multichannel audio. Mixing has transparently happened via the FreeBSD audio driver for about 10 years now. Linux has gone through a bunch of different audio subsystems in that time.