Quite the opposite. Macs ship with the biggest piece of bloatware there is, and it's quite hard to get rid of. It's called Mac OS X.

Try something like Steam where buying and installing a game is something like four clicks (one to select the game, one to click install, one to confirm the payment information and one to start the game). They have quite a few "classic" games as well, updated to run on the latest version of Windows with sound and graphics.

The grandparent was making a claim ("Does anyone really like Microsoft, other than those who swear by their products and services? I really doubt it.") trivially disproved by example, so I thought an anecdote appropriate. I have never doubted that there exists people who really don't use Windows at all - in fact I know some of those as well, but this was not relevant to my point, which was solely to point out that there are, in fact, computer geeks who use Windows by choice.

Does anyone really like Microsoft, other than those who swear by their products and services? I really doubt it. Most users just seem to be forced to put up with it and are either ignorant of other options or afraid of trying something unfamiliar.

I have used Linux, BSD, MacOS (X) and Solaris but my home computers (laptop, gaming PC, two servers) all run Windows, because it gets things done and I haven't had a BSOD or a serious issue with it for years. Finding drivers or apps is never a problem because everyone develops for Windows first, Mac OS X second, Linux probably never or perhaps a distant third.

Being a geek most of my friends are as well and Windows is still by far the most common OS on their home PCs. One guy bought a shiny MBP and promptly installed Windows on it. Pretty much everyone who runs Linux dual-boots with Windows. So yes, when given a choice, even very computer-literate people will freely choose Windows. Because it gets things done, doesn't crash and has drivers for everything. Simple as that.

My phone runs Android, though.

Sadly traps like these are a time-honoured ingredient in adventure games... you reminded me of this ancient E2 node, well worth a read. http://everything2.com/title/King%2527s+Quest+5+design+flaw

You chose to wear that leash, don't complain if it doesn't fit.

I have a desk job with a computer and e-mail. I have a cellphone with my work e-mail so I can stay updated while I'm not in the office, but I only really read it while I'm working. I guess if something really important came up my boss could call me in, and I'd be happy to oblige if I could because I know I would be compensated for it. So far this hasn't ever happened, though. My work weeks are 40 hours, although I feel no need to keep track of every minute - sometimes I leave a bit early, sometimes late. My boss doesn't really mind when I leave so long as work gets done on time. There's no punch clock where I work.

You may claim that my situation is unique and that I've been very lucky but this has been the same for the last three places I've worked in. I only left those jobs because I wanted better pay and more interesting things to do. The same goes for pretty much everyone I know. If you find yourself "leashed" to work, your cellphone or your boss's whims, switch employers. There are plenty - PLENTY - out there that care about keeping their employees happy. It has nothing to do with technology.

I wonder if this is simply a more expensive version of ReadyBoost. Similarly, it takes your most frequently used files and puts them on a flash drive for faster access times, in a way that is transparent to the end user. In this case I wonder if there would be any speed gain from using this on a PC running Windows 7 with ReadyBoost? Caching always introduces some overhead, so rather than using multiple levels of "flash cache" it might be better to simply turn ReadyBoost off in that case. My experience with ReadyBoost has been that it does indeed improve performance, but in no way close to using a real SSD as the system drive.

Windows Mobile does not have a backwards/forwards compatibility problem with desktop Windows because both run .NET. The GUI parts are different in places but you don't want to re-use those anyways as a desktop UI looks and works like crap on a mobile device. For the most part, though - and certainly including such basic bits as color management - .NET on the desktop is a perfect superset of .NET Compact Framework on Windows Mobile. Furthermore, the docs neatly outline what is available in CF and what isn't. At one of my previous jobs we used to literally compile the exact same (non-GUI) C# code for Windows Mobile and Windows XP/Vista. Only very few #ifdefs were required.

Now that Microsoft is going with Windows Phone 7, where apps will apparently be entirely Silverlight-based, I am guessing compatibility will be even better. Imaging building a web/desktop app in Silverlight/WPF and then changing the compiler flags to make an app that runs locally on any Windows Phone 7. No #ifdefs in sight. Nobody else has anything close to that level of portability between desktop/mobile except maybe Adobe.

Of course. Every PC hardware site worth a penny does regular articles on which CPU is currently the fastest and which will give you the most for your money. As well as comparisons between Intel/AMD. My favorite site for such things is Tom's Hardware, though Google will likely find you many more.

Which CPU is actually fastest heavily depends on what you will be using it for. Your list of "regular geek activities" does not narrow it down enough. Also, many applications contain optimizations that target a particular CPU family or architecture.

CPU articles: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/review/Components,1/CPU,1/

Best (gaming) CPU for the money as of dec 09: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/best-gaming-cpu,review-31755.html

All CPU performance charts: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/processors,6.html

Yet each one of your "solutions" has the obvious effect of stopping me from doing my job. My time is too valuable to the company to have me waiting for a sysadmin, authorization from higher-ups or jumping through bureaucratic hurdles every time a trivial task like installing or upgrading an application/library/whatever has to be performed.

Of course I have local admin rights on my workstation. It's trivial to re-image should I mess it up (hasn't happened yet, mind) and it lets me do my job as efficiently as possible. Of course, since I'm a professional, I don't abuse my admin rights to do anything that might be a nuisance to anybody else. Not that I could do much with just the admin rights to my own workstation. Saturate the network, perhaps - but then an admin would drop by to give me a slap on the wrist within minutes, as the network is properly monitored.

Did I mention, me and my co-developers also have admin rights on the testing, and production servers? Yes, production. Again this is about empowering professional developers to carry out their jobs as efficiently as possible. What if I should screw up and drop all the tables on the production db, you ask? Well, it's obvious I wouldn't do anything like that intentionally, but otherwise, that's what backups are for. Not that I'd expect to keep my job should I make such a mistake.

Perhaps if you work in a "shop" full of pimply-faced code monkeys who can't be trusted with admin rights to the testing environment, or even the computers on their desks, then lots of policies and nazi sysadmins are quite in order. But perhaps then the real problem is with the recruitment standards. I for one wouldn't want to work in a place were such restrictions were necessary.

Set up a reoccuring transfer at your bank's website. Since you are posting to Slashdot I don't believe using an on-line bank would be a problem for you. You only need your landlord's account number, and you'll save him the bother of cashing in the checks.

Disregarding how stupid it is to give someone a blank check, you could just give him your contact details and reimburse him later. Or make arrangements directly with the bicycle repair shop.

On-line transfer. Dunno what bank you're using but mine lets me transfer money from my account to anyone else's using my phone (either by calling their service desk or by going to the bank's website via 3G).

If your bank does not provide basic on-line services, switch banks. I wish we could just do away with cash altogether. The problem isn't techical, it's political. We have all the solutions we need to replace cash, we just need to make sure that switching to electronic money doesn't let the guv'mint (or anybody else) monitor all our transactions.

In what country are high fees associated with bank transfers? Where I live (Sweden), going to my bank's on-line service I can transfer money to any other bank account at no charge whatsoever.

I believe the 2004 olympics already tried that.