many? all atheists believe there is no god, by definition.

some atheists might want to actively fight religious views and beliefs from invading public and private aspects of life in society. these are "atheist activists".

the primary goal of atheist activism would be to enforce laicism: to set a "no-bullshit" common ethical ground where anything could be discussed rationally, keeping religious beliefs in the private sphere where spiritual stuff belongs, and where nobody should ever give a crap about each others'. turns out this is way harder than it seems.

looks like a damn big stretch to me.

promoting laicism is the daunting task of convincing every other breed of theist to keep their gods for themselves and off the discussion table, so everybody can discuss. religion is about letting a reduced council with privileged connection to some random god decide, so there's no discussion at all.

ofc there might exist "atheist activist" groups with their own agendas (i don't really know much about them, and i'm an atheist). but they're still that: activist groups. in comparision, religions are goddamned megacorporations, most specially middle-east and western ones that have been doing just that for centuries, at large, directly engaged in social and individual control, all of them entrenched in power still to this day.

a possible mitigation is designing "mobile first" (an industry meme that actually makes sense for a change). this forces to focus on providing core functionality in limited space (i.e.: clarifying what the core functionality is in the first place), from there expand to desktop version. it's not a silver bullet but IF you want to go the "responsive" route it can help and is the way to go. ofc also in maintenance. if that extra column (whatever) doesn't fit well int the mobile version then it might be woth reconsidering if it is a worthy feature at all, or if it's time to start over ... maybe with separate designs.

sure "responsive" adds a great deal of complexity, and usually results in poorer interfaces and performance (sorry, i should have said "user experience") in general. it should be avoided but it's just all the rage now. guess what, i stopped arguing long ago, i just enjoy laughing my ass of when things get really surreal, which they often do!

gui technology? it's the whole software industry. you need aprox the same amount of "experts" to print a fkucing report from persisted data nowadays. not to mention a herd of managers, several whiteboards and a shitload of postits.

current users aren't supposed to be able to do that without extra help or risking injury. didn't you notice the window managers / desktops most of them are using? split the screen? are you nuts???

by they way, *their* fix for your problem would be eradicating desktop design versions completely. "develop once, works in every device". why should we go through the hassle of developing a desktop version for elitists like you if we're anyway served well enough with a single tap mobile interface, which is what our average collective brain can afford to handle! go away!

indeed. why?

see above.

of course you didn't count predators for fun. I read in UK there are boar farms for hunting (yeah, humans do exist who find great pleasure in shooting at animals from a safe distance with riffles, go figure). I also read about an alleged wild boar population surge in germany in 2008, but thas was some reuters news, pretty vague and sensationalistic, could as well be surreptitious advertising. if you could share any reliable sources on the subject i'd appreciate it, tia.

... are a waste, and I'd gladly cover your cost of disposal.

you disabled it yourself by upgrading to w7. if you don't want to find yourself locked up in a walled garden, you shouldn't walk into them, no matter how large or cool they may appear at first. besides, this thread is about discontinuation of *services*, not about software compatibility, so wrong place to shed your otherwise futile tears. you might learn the lesson, though.

said the pro who thinks html has variables ...

because "responsive" already meant "exhibiting consistently fast reaction". in that sense, designs can't be responsive at all. implementations might be.

funny thing is that what you call "responsive design" is actually "2 or more designs" implemented together. this usually comes at the cost of extra resource usage and, if anything, this overhead can only negatively impact overall "responsiveness". so "responsive pages" are likely to be less responsive by definition. see the nonsense?

it's semantical nonsense because it reuses a term that expressed an overall characteristic of something, to refer to a particular feature of it. it's confusing.

btw responding to changes in the size of the viewport or container wasn't even new, it's a cool feature that had been already around for decades on many platforms and was called "dynamic layout" or "fluid layout" or simply "using a layout manager". ok, that might not be catchy enough for current buzzword standards, but choosing "responsive" for it was really lame.

use of tables for top-bottom layout was the one thing css should have relied on and even promoted, but they chose to bury it, and brought up that bizarre bottom-top layout model that barely mimics what tables already did in a natural way. it was about semantics, thay said. but, hey! now you got plenty of semantics! we have col_sm_4, and even col-md-1!!

ftfy. thanks for the hard laugh xD

not if you manage to sheep users to use the same dumb ui model, which is why everyone is carving to accomplish exactly that (a copycat of apple's, which is shiny and famous and cool, all the way down from google to ubuntu, crashing through several windows)

always wondered what idiot first chose "responsive" to brand that "dynamic layout" thing, which is absolute semantic nonsense but just stuck because who cares about semantics nowadays (because who could resist getting fancy words thrown at!). any clue?

doesn't surprise me that we now have "responsive" labelled webapps that are actually less responsive than ever.

except there is ample evidence of MS having bribed key people in several institutions in the past. so unless you have relevant evidence of GP's mother being involved in professional sexual services, you are making yourself appearing as full of shit (for the fallacious comparision. no doubt you are a shithead anyway just for the derogative use of the term "whore")

I didn't see any actual complaint yet, nor any meaningful description of the main perceived defects. Did you? I'm not saying they don't exist, I just highlght that the actual motives are not stated and thus the explanation is totally insufficient.

On the other hand ... it's pretty damn too easy to produce a document in ms word that renders like crap on open/libre office, I see it happening all the time. The problem is never the content, but dumb and irrelevant formatting practices. Comparing MS to a global infection, it is hard to heal by acting on a single point. TFA actually hints at this: "Wenn die ganze Welt mit einem Standardprogramm arbeitet, dann ist es wichtig, dass wir auf dem gleichen System sind". Sad, but they might have a point there.

The other alleged flaw, that someone had to wait weeks to get mail delivered on his smartphone because some obscure special mail server had to be set up on linux is obviously absolute bullshit. This, if at all true, speaks of incompence, not of platform suitability. So, this whole issue really stinks.