Humiliation? WTF? How's that work? It's not humiliating, it's frustrating. Like I said, it's the "you're not my boss, fuck you" attitude that really turns people away. The attitude you just displayed right there. Are you a developer on any open source projects?

To this day I remain a late, late adopter of technology. I wait until the market has sorted out the winners and losers, then go and buy the most standard piece of equipment I can find. I was deeply scarred as a youth by Betamax video tapes and the Intellivision game console. My family owned both. Both were clearly superior to their competition. It was visible to the naked eye and owners of competing systems admitted without shame that it was so.

However, back then it was considered a flippant waste of money if you had more than one standard, so that was what we had. I couldn't trade games with anyone but this one kid whose parents wouldn't let him trade games. I couldn't rent most of the tapes in the video store. I couldn't copy tapes and give them to friends. AND THEY WERE BETTER SYSTEMS! In every measure, technically, visually, flexibility-wise, the list goes on and on.

Ever since I moved out of the house and bought my first VHS, I've mistrusted my ability to judge what will win. Sometimes the only winning move is not to play. Otherwise, I'd probably be one of the people they quoted for this article.

Rebuttal:

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."
-- Charles Dickens, David Copperfield

BeOS' problems weren't technical, that's for sure. They were purely created by evil humans. BeOS should have won, but didn't, and for a very good reason.

"I once preached peaceful coexistence with Windows. You may laugh at my expense - I deserve it."
-- Jean-Louis Gassee, CEO Be, Inc.

See, arguments like this are precisely why people like me quit contributing to open source projects a long time ago. It's just the "fuck you" attitude that gets to us. When users demand features, you are supposed to listen. But nope, this stock answer is trotted out every time as a way to avoid doing work.

The MIT nerds are just ignorantly stereotyping BBQ chefs. You'd figure that they of all people would be sensitive about looking down on others, but I guess not. BBQ chefs aren't morons who use old oil barrels for pits (they're not food grade and will make your food taste like shit). If they do reuse an old barrel, it's one that has held food like olives, and it is reused because it's cheaper and better than buying a brand new one. Seriously, duh.

Just check all this out. Science, science, science. It's all over BBQ these days. All the wisdom of the elders has been tested, trialed, and the old myths like "salt gets into meat by osmosis" and "pink chicken is not safe" have been busted and thoroughly debunked. Just check out the following SCIENCE:

The Thermodynamics of Cooking
What You Need to Know About Wood, Smoke, and Combustion.
The Maillard Reaction And Caramelization
The Science of Wet Brines
Basic Meat Science
Why We Don't Need Grill Marks, and Why You Should Flip Often

And there are about a kajillion more articles like this on this one site. There are many, many more sites all across the internet. All of them are full of science. MIT isn't breaking new ground here, as much as they'd like to think so. Up to and including computer-controlled cookers that turn out perfect meat every time.

I am so tired of these posts that say that paper ballots are some kind of panacea. The PRI in Mexico rigged elections for 80 years using nothing but paper ballots.

Because it triggers victims. Here, read up on the subject.

Just wait until Google removes the " disable automatic updates" button. You know they're aching to do so. Why not? Google can choose better than me...I might make a mistake! Better to remove that silly chance of error in the first place.

Since this post will obviously flush out a bunch of people who know, what's new with DOS in the last 10 years? What's been happening? Just curious.

When modern computers are on but idle, they consume a tiny amount of power. Remember the "Energy Star" campaign of the 90s? Yeah, we've had 20 years of advancements in that arena.

We all appreciate your yearning for a dark, cold, miserable life for the rest of us, though. Certainly, tax the fuck out of us some more, God knows we all have plenty of financial cushion for this kind of thing.

Really? Do you actually know Microsoft's track record and what they did? They singlehandedly held back the progress of computers, year after year, with disgusting, unethical tactics. That kind of reputation doesn't wear off easily. Are you one of the pro-MS consultants paid to post on sites like these? If so, good move posting anonymously so it can't be tracked back to you. If not, why are you writing about a mega-billion dollar corporation that can defend itself quite well?

The Atari was the best seller of an entire generation of consoles. It was enjoyed by millions and envied by millions more. Where'd you get the idea that people back then thought video games were dumb? This is backwards thinking, isn't it? Applying the standards of today to a time when different standards were in force.

Can confirm this. I've been with Chinese people who went to have artifacts verified, and they've got the whole mass spectrometer (or whatever it is they use for solids) set up. There are tons of companies involved in verifying pricey things, because Chinese of all people are well aware the market is full of fakes.

"The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity."
-- Edsger Dijkstra

Who wants to bet the person who posted this has never heard of Dijkstra? He invented the shortest path algorithm, structured programming, and was the first person to label GOTO as harmful. Professionally immature, indeed. I'd go farther and say incompetent.