That's Received Pronunciation (aka the King's/Queen's English) you're describing. More common now is Estuary English.

Stuff like this is why people are scared to install native apps for Windows. On iOS, you install apps safely, and with about 2 or 3 taps. On Windows, you get apps via 30 clicks, and you get your browser configuration screwed up, unwanted toolbars, and bonus adware for good measure.

This is the sick, sad state of Windows apps.

The Windows 8 app store promises to address these concerns. We'll see how they deliver.

Your last paragraph shows your true colors; you believe Israel has no right to exist and is a "made-up" state. That's anti-Semitism.

If you doubt this is anti-Semitism, step back for a moment and ask yourself this: do you apply that standard to any other nation? Do you deny any other nation in the world the right to exist?

If you don't, you're singling out the Jews: anti-Semitism.

There can be valid criticism of Israel without being anti-Semitic. However, the new anti-Semitism often hides behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of the Jewish state. The Sharansky Test has been formulated to distinguish between valid criticism of Israel and anti-Semitic rants:

The so-called “new anti-Semitism” poses a unique challenge. “New anti-Semitism” is aimed at the Jewish state. Since this anti-Semitism can hide behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of Israel, it is more difficult to expose. Making the task even harder is that this hatred is advanced in the name of values most of us would consider unimpeachable, such as human rights.

His test is simple:

I believe that we can apply a simple test – I call it the “3D” test – to help us distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism.

The first “D” is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz – this is anti- Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.

The second “D” is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross – this is anti-Semitism.

The third “D” is the test of delegitimization: when Israel’s fundamental right to exist is denied – alone among all peoples in the world – this too is anti-Semitism.

...And Firefox added support for that only after Microsoft demoed IE9 at PDC.

Seriously - why isn't the header for this story "Some Guy says something outrageous".

Since this guy is no-one in any position to implement this sort of policy, leave him to his distasteful opinion.

Why? About the only people left who use Fahrenheit are Americans - everyone else has been managing quite happily using Celsius for decades. The rest of the world should now relearn an anachronism to keep Americans happy?

But to follow your logic through, you're essentially telling people to carry two single-function wrenches, when one multi-purpose wrench would do just as well. Both wrenches achieve exactly the same result, but one can be used for purposes other than removing pedals. Why carry both?

It does rather sound like you are trying to justify your sentimental attachment to the system with which you are most familiar, rather than accepting it as an anachronism and moving on. I mean I get why that might be hard to do, and there's nothing wrong with being sentimental, but let's call it what it is.

I saw this. The designers claim it works out about 10% cheaper than conventional PCBs.

As they are here also, if the damage is caused by the lessee outside of "normal conditions of usage".

Lessors are responsible for repair/replacement of "normal wear and tear". If the vehicle fails during the lease period under conditions of normal usage, then the lessor would be expected to provide repairs or replacement. The same is true here of residential rental accomodation - periodic replacement of things like paint and carpet and repair of plumbing and electrical faults is the landlord's (lessor's) repsonsibility - they factor the cost of those things into the rental charged for the property.

Mind you, I'm not sure Australian law would even allow a 20 year lease on something like a car.

But it's a lease. If for any reason the vehicle fails during that time, the owner (not the lessee) would be obligated to provide a vehicle that does work, either by repair or replacement. I don't know how leases work in the US, but that's how they'd work in Australia.

I don't think they're expecting that people will commit to a single vehicle for 20 years, merely that they will commit to lease a vehicle for 20 years, that will likely be upgraded several times during that period. Committing to a 20 year lease means you are committing to the lease, not to the specific object being leased.