Microsoft has every right to do the same.

I see the real reason behind this hubbub being 2 fold.

1. There are a lot of formerly non-Apple programmers who are coming to terms with the mercurial nature of the CEO and the company itself. They are infamous for sudden changes in direction without a backward glance. Blessing or Curse? I'm sure this thread will be filled with hundreds of examples of each.

2. The uniqueness of this move. Yes, we all know that game consoles have this kind of "we control all" development structure to varying degrees. However, I am not aware of a console originally allowing something (by not explicitly denying it) and then taking that option away after developers had put time into it. That's got to sting.

As I said at the start MS could do this if they chose. However, MS has never been overly concerned with the user experience or the quality of 3rd party software. (I'm of the opinion that they prefer mediocre 3rd party software because it makes it easier to "Embrace and Extinguish" when they move into that market themselves, but that's speculation). They've also never been very comfortable with angering their developers, which is not something Apple has ever had an issue with. In the end, it's the culture at MS that prevents them from making this kind of move, not legal or moral. And we all know that the culture at MS and Apple are as different as their CEO's

There's nothing wrong with that. The patient thinks that he has 10^100 inflammations or irritations.

According to Dungeons & Dragons mythology, your reward or punishment in the afterlife is to be blessed/cursed with being with/having to put up with a bunch of like-minded people. That's actually a pretty clever concept.

Because they are too busy laughing their asses off.

Perhaps the same thing that happened to the Islamdom?

Google is your friend: Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change

They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Terri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

There is one last chance: the Board of Education will make a final vote on Friday, May 21.

    Actually, those were suppose to be separate statements. Sorry. :)

    A lot of cars (regardless of their transmission) couldn't navigate the hill due to lack of power.

    4wd vehicles usually have an advantage of a 4L gear (4 wheel output, lower gear ratio).

    Of vehicles of equal rear wheel horsepower (including overall gear ratio), they are equally drivable, if the driver of each knows how to operate his vehicle.

    A slipping torque converter can be a significant cause of transmission overheating, so although it may seem like a momentary advantage, it's a long term (and expensive) disadvantage.

I don't perceive any true elements to that statement. Are middle Americans driving over exotic flora and fauna in their SUV's by shortcutting through the 'glades to get their groceries quicker? Or are acres of rain forest being burned and cut down every day by subsistence farmers in financial straits where they have no other options?

Only a small portion of the world can really argue from the position of having comfort to sacrifice things over, and those are in virtually all cases not the portions of the population on the front lines of our encroachment against nature.

I am not trying to tell you that reversing this trend is impossible, but we should not kid ourselves what socially deep roots would need to be cut or rearranged in order to affect change. So why don't you start by illustrating what comfort you could conceivably give up that would give Brazilian farmers an alternative to deforestation? Hint: it's not buying a hybrid.

We would... but there aren't any anymore... jags are now owned by someone else as are land rovers, etc.

Google Chrome 5.0.375.38 beta seems to render the demonstration page perfectly on my system (Windows 7 x64)

So does Copenhagen. Such are the benefits of living somewhere with history that reaches more than ~250 years into the past ;-)

There's no bright side to a basement. Especially if you have to pay rent.

A few tags don't bother me at all. I'm fine with that. That's usually proper use of the tag.

But a dozen or so tags in one section/paragraph is usually an indication that the tagger is doing something wrong[1]. The tagger should instead tag the entire section with: "This section may contain original research or unverified claims." and then take the whole thing to the talk page.

[1] When that happens, if you go and check the history or talk page, usually one or more are fighting some sort of personal war. And to the "wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a repo of OR/trivia" folks, guess what, encyclopedias should not be littered with [citation please] tags.

Was the crack distributed separate from the game? If no, then you might be able to argue that the crack as it exists is a derivative work. If yes, then you can not make that argument.

The crack is clearly a derivative work either way. A derivative work need not include the exact code of the original work. Game mods are derivative works, for instance.

No, they only made the game run without CD.