"Probably the best solution would be for the company to split up. The people who make the Xbox are probably weighed down by the rest of the company's ineptitude. I'd like to see those guys go their own way"

XBOX is running a version of Windows, which, is in many ways better than Linux. What's up for debate is its openness or lack thereof, but featureswise, Windows has lead Unix in a lot of ways.

Even Windows 3.1 had a better device independent rendering model than did the X terminals it competed against. And, ever since Windows NT, Windows has always had better APIs for threading while all many Unix's had (except for Solaris), was fork. DirectX is generally better than OpenGL. COM has its faults but in the long run proved to be the only binary object model that ever got used, and even the Windows desktop and shell has vastly better basic things like file dialogs than does Linux.

Visual Studio is still arguably the best IDE around and has been ever since Microsoft bought the Delphi guy over to write C#, and speaking of which, C# is a way better language than Java. Microsoft Office is still better than Open Office.

It's not that Microsoft has really sucked at the desktop, ever. They've just won so completely at it that they don't know how to do anything else right, although, I do think my Windows 8.1 phone is better than my iPhone 5s in some ways.

Lots of loads can't be palletised. There would also have to be massive investment by the delivery locations as well.

I'm a trucker. I've driven over 2 million miles accident free. Many truckers have. An incident every 100,000 miles would be one a year for me and at that rate I'd hand in my license.

They actually track which stores you visit to monetize ads. If you opt out then a lot of things including Google Now stop working.

http://digiday.com/platforms/g...

They even do the same thing on iOS if you use Gmail, Chrome or Google Now apps.

And they recently stopped snooping on the free Google Apps and email for Schools and even businesses after doing it for a long time to build ad profiles after they didn't dare telling the same lies in federal court that they were telling to the public about snooping on students to show ads.

http://www.edweek.org/ew/artic...

http://www.edweek.org/ew/artic...

But hey, it's Google so they get a free pass here while if MS did anything even close to that people would be shouting from rooftops.

If enough people are out of work without some sort of guaranteed income... they'll just eat the robot owners.

Right. Maybe they'll get lucky and the killbots will have a preset kill limit.

We are rapidly approaching the first time in history, when the rulers will no longer need any human servants at all.

...It's not the Engineers who decide whether or not the people get replaced.

We are within a generation - two at the most - of at least half of the population being made literally redundant. Any job they could possibly do, will be done faster, cheaper and better by robots. Basically, if it's a job involving manual labour, it'll be automated, with the possible exception of high-end positions catering to the luxury demands of the ultra-rich. Many management jobs will also go as collateral damage (don't need to manage robots, after all).

Probably a generation after that advances in AI will have taken over a huge swathe of lower-end "knowledge worker" jobs.

With greedy, psychopathic, neoliberal Governments running most of the civilised world, the future is looking pretty grim for the common man.

So, how about some evidence for these claims? I'm particularly interested actual double-blind testing of 4K versus 2K displays at "normal viewing distances" which is pretty ambiguous on its own.

The difference between an old 15" MBP and new Retina MBP is easily noticable.

I wouldn't have actually believed it until I borrowed a work Retina MBP for a couple of weeks. Now I'm eagerly looking for an affordable ~27" IPS 4k display to replace my existing monitors.

That's terrible. I get that out of my MK4 Ford Mondeo doing 70MPH on a motorway. The most I've had is 70MPG.

I can exceed the values and not have to drive like a nun. I was lucky enough to do an economic driving course with a previous employer. Part of that was driving round a course around Birmingham and surrounding countryside. You were timed at the start of the course and at the end you repeated the run but not only had to improve economy but also do the route quicker and use fewer gear changes.

The biggest mistake and most fuel hungry is how people slow down. Engines use no fuel at all when you take your foot off the accelerator. You should be using engine braking approaching lights, junctions etc backing off earlier than driving to the point where you need to use the brakes to stop. It takes no longer to do the journey but all that distance you're slowing down using engine braking is free. As for the old wives tales about it wearing clutches out, the last car I sold had 165,000 miles on and was on the original clutch. The next mistake they do is not trying to time it approaching lights/junctions/roundabouts so you don't have to stop.

Even 1980s US sports models such as the Mustang were quite poor. The 5L 1987 Mustang had a 0-60 time only 1 second faster than my 1.6L Escort.

No they don't, they tax them based on emissions which has little to do with MPG or engine capacity.

Oh. Dear. So what you've done is make the cornering worse. Mind you given that US cars are a bit crap when it comes to bends you probably don't notice any difference.