That's the thing; who is ever going to pay for that? Software companies work by selling licenses to the people who end up using the software. How much money do you think goes into making the next version of Windows / Photoshop? How many developers / engineers / managers salaries do you need to pay over that time period? How much is spent on equipment to develop and test it on? And you're honestly suggesting that someone will come along, pay for all of that, then happily give it for free to the next bloke who wants to use it?

That's crazy. Software development, for large products that require a small army of people to make, cannot work that way.

It's a little more simple than that; I'd imagine that the actual clock tick needs to propagate the entire chip as well. Otherwise you'd have all sorts of skew between chip components.

Agreed!

They'd need the support of the Bloc as well. Liberals + NDP = 114 seats to the Conservatives 144.

Um, no? (One of many.)

Don't forget Clinton introducing the DMCA....

It's reasonable that a person would remember a key combination to their favorite function for their favorite program. It's not reasonable to expect someone who sees a "please restart your computer for the updates to take effect" prompt to know 1.) what the update was for and 2.) that if it was for the video driver (and only the video driver) that they just have to kill X and let it restart.

By disabling their ability to reply to the email... duh.

If you install any Windows Updates on Windows, 99% of the time it'll want a reboot and nag you until you do so.

Wow. Wrong. I have a Windows 7 machine I leave running 24/7 and it only asks to be restarted every few months. It does Windows Updates daily.

Yeah, grandma has known that trick for ages! Especially when the updates through the gui suggest needing to restart.

They skipped 13 for superstitious reasons. Just like floor numbers in a building.

Um, from the review you linked to:
Once again, we had no luck when trying to play our Blu-ray ISO rips over the network as that format continues to be one of the most elusive.

But if _I_ modified it, then the checksum would be different.

We studied something like this in my social computing university class, only it was about slime mold "solving" a maze. I never understood why that (or this) was at all interesting; the growth of the slime mold is just a brute force search for food. What you end up with is a minimum spanning tree between the food "nodes." Meh.

You assume that accepting blame and fixing the problem aren't mutually exclusive. Just because Microsoft said "that's not our fault" doesn't mean they won't fix it.