Touch typists generally use more verbose variable names and more comments, because it's much more natural for them to type a lot of words. This makes their code a lot more readable, which saves money in the end since a *lot* of the cost of software is in maintenance and the only performance factor that really counts is not cpu cycles, memory usage or bandwith utilization, but euros, dollars, rupees, yens or whatever your legal tender is. The programmer's time is (one of) the most costly aspect(s) of software development. A crufty codebase is much easier to read and maintian with comments *really* explaining fixes and variable names explaining what they're used for. I see so much code with comments like '// Issue #24654' or variable names like 'i' or 'j' in functions that span more than 50 lines (or whatever fits in one screen).

Of course there's more than typing speed involved in making maintainable code and I'm sure there are non touch typists who force themselves to make their code readable, but being able to type fast without thinking helps a lot.

This tool only seems to work with files. If I examine my own computer use, I see that I don't use files directly anymore. I edit/manage my photos with Aperture, it doesn't matter to me where they are on my hard drive. I manage and play music in iTunes. I'm happy to let it manage the files, because it's a pita to manage a huge music collection by hand. At work I work with Visual Studio and TFS. Yes, I know what my local working folder is, but I don't have to. Whenever I need to edit a document, the fastest way is to open the word processor and open the file via 'Recent Files'. I rarely need to access the files directly or know where they are.

Besides, I don't want the same format on every device. I don't want a 16MB RAW file on my phone, just because I used the same file in Aperture.
Just because I made a document in Word, doesn't mean I want to have the word document on-the-go, when I just have it there for review and an e-reader optimized version is a lot easier.
I rip my cd's in Apple Lossless or iTunes Plus, because that's how it works and I have lots of hdd space. On my netbook, those files are way too big and everybody knows how much of a pita iTunes on a slow Windows box is. At the moment, I have to manually manage a shadow library with 160 kbit mp3's.
And what about contacts? Bookmarks? I don't want those things as files in a certain format, I want to use the appropriate program to access that information.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a library with source files on DropBox Online and a set of filters to generate the right libraries, protocols and formats for use on your devices?

And that's the problem. Your tablet is as useful as the apps it runs. Apple understands this. They even did this on the original Mac, where they didn't give developers the tools to port DOS apps, but forced them to rethink the UI for the new interface.

To me, it doesn't matter what OS it runs under the hood, they just have to force developers to add a Tablet View (with specific tablet-oriented controls) to their Visual Studio apps. They should also replace the windows shell with a tablet-friendly shell, but that's secondary because you don't spend that much time in the OS.

Where I work (as a lowly code monkey) we have 2+MLOCs of Delphi code (migrating to C#/WPF atm) and whenever we get new people, it's a good first test to see how fast they become used to Delphi's Object Pascal and the shitty and buggy IDE (Delphi.Net 2007). Most people need a week or two for that. And then a year to get used to our internal framework.

And again, here's the typical 'It's perfect because nobody robbed us yet' argument. If only a few percent of the stores are equiped with this 'DNA spray', I'm pretty sure that the criminals will target the other 95+% of the stores with more traditional security measures.

We'll only know if this works if a significant percentage of the jewelries and retail stores in the neighbourhood are equiped with this. Criminals are creative, but above all they're lazy, just like us developers :P

10.0 was a public beta, 10.1 was a toy, 10.2 wasn't worth anything without the Classic environment. The first really serious version of OS X was 10.3, released in october 2003, six years after Steve came back.

5ct/GB is too expensive for you?

Prices don't suddenly drop because of this announcement. I can't believe how they manage to make drives as inexpensive as they are.

A RAID array won't save you from fire, floods, system faults and your own stupidity (nobody's perfect). You need backups if you care about your data.

When he came back to Apple in '97, he put OS Classic on death row, but he had to keep it alive because it would take six years to develop a stable, workable version of OS X out of NeXT's OS and there were no alternatives to bridge those years and there was a bunch of software to support.

Let's call it 'Coaxial WiFi' :)

Because PC makers work with far lower margins. If one of the component-makers give you a $0.50 discount on their components if you put their sticker on every laptop, and if you know that all your competitors already do so and have a 50 cent advantage in their battle for the customer (or any step between you and the customer), you don't have any justification to not also add another useless sticker.

Apple has far higher margins. Part of the design-tax is the absence of stickers. Which costs them money.

Why did they develop a solution that has to be installed on the part of the infrastructure they have the least control of and that has the biggest diversity?

How will they roll this out? Forced install? For every OS? Including the OS on my media box with its crappy bittorrent client? And since the software physically runs inside the homes of people, that could open up a ton of legal troubles. What's so hard about making a law that forces ISP's to install monitoring software?

Somehow I'm happy that this seems to be a typical govenment IT-f#ckup.

A big part of efficient health care is to keep people out of hospitals. Prevent, inform and make basic health care easy, accessible and inexpensive. If this patient you're talking about had the option of going to a local doctor for a basic diagnosis and medicine for free (or a couple of dollars), I guess he would have done it. If his only option was going to a hospital where the doctor would give him unnecessary treatments and squeeze every dollar out of him while losing his insurane for the rest of his life, a first sign of a disease would mean as much as a personal bankruptcy for him. It's no wonder people are going to try to live with easy-to-cure diseases until it's too late and expensive treatment is necessary. You say he's an idiot, but actually he just decided that getting rid of a small inconvenience wasn't worth a personal bankruptcy.

Besides, the whole financial incentives system is broken. If a 400lb patient comes to the cardiologist, what is the financial incentive to just assign the patient a lifestyle coach, which is the only long term cure for his/her problems?

http://kerneltrap.org/node/6884

Hybrid drives aren't made to be first choice. They're made to be an affordable choice. If you want to assemble an affordable but fast PC nowadays, you'll probably end up with a 40GB SSD for OS+Apps with a cheap, silent and big hard disk for storage. The problem with this approach is the barrier at 40GB. What if your SSD needs more space? What if it turns out that some frequently-used data is on the hard disk? Or that 60% of the OS files are hardly used? Hybrid drives try to decide for themselves which data should be optimized.

But I'm not really sure that they're optimizing at the right level. Maybe they should expose themselves to the operating system as two separate partitions and let the filesystem implement the optimization while showing up as one single volume to the end-user.