We've just changed what we live in and what we fight over. Does that truly indicate that it works?

It's not for the 90% that the capital costs are high. Further north, NorthwesTel has to cover the entirety of the Yukon, NWT and Nunavut with these services. Many, if not the majority, of the communities in these territories have no all-year road access. The capital costs for these places is huge. Everything is run through satellite connections (phone, TV, internet), and all the infrastructure must either be brought in by barge or by air. In addition, due to mandates about allowed downtime per year, maintenance costs are very high (imagine flying in technicians and supplies every time internet service goes down). While I'm not saying the costs of these is comparable to the cost of the infrastructure required for the millions living along the borders, the cost per individual is higher by several orders of magnitude.

I realize I wasn't particularly clear. As long as we're on the same page now :)

Yes, they support open-source, but they are by no means supporters of openness. They certainly aren't "liberating" users by going against Flash.

Wait, wait, wait. You're praising Apple for helping get rid of something closed-source? Really? Apple?

Good choice of words.

I'm confused by this statement. Are you implying there is a type of screen with which PuTTY doesn't look abysmal? (For the record, I love PuTTY. But let's be honest...)

Presumably, the same things that keep our cars from flying: time and money.

Where Asimo was made, four feet three inches is human-sized ;)

Not sure why this is modded Troll... Unfortunately, it's quite true. While not blatantly stupid as FOX News, the National Post does use its fair share of twisted facts. In addition, it's well-known as the more right-wing national newspaper in Canada (the Globe and Mail being more left wing), and would therefore be more inclined to present facts in a right-wing-friendly way. Got to love the "free" press.

That'll show me to do my research. Checked up on the Radeon HD 3300 (which is not part of the HD 3000 series...?). True enough, it does look pretty damned good. However, I will refer to my point above that although this may be enough for some, even most people, there are still those of us who either require or desire more power than even that particular set has to offer.

From here. Perhaps this is the wrong chipset, if so, please correct me. If not, emphasis on the word "discrete".

While you are absolutely correct on most points, including the fact that most people do not play anything more intensive than Farmville, people are becoming more obsessed with the pretty on their screens. It simply seems that it is a constant battle between graphics processing power and the number of pixels people want to see. At this point, playing a Blu-Ray film on a desktop/laptop with integrated graphics is viable, but not excellent. In addition, don't count PC gaming and PC enthusiasts as dead just yet. There are still plenty of people that want and need more power than integrated graphics can provide at this point.