I have no answer. I wanted to comment that this is the most pertinent "Ask Slashdot" that I've seen in the last five years. I would guess any router who's firmware was open-sourced.

We are halfway through the process? In the office where I sit, approximately 100% of the applications used by our staff are thick client. Nobody uses web apps because they are slow and have poor user experiences compared to thick client native apps.

Windows Metro is not HTML5 based.

HTML+Javascript is one of the languages that can talk to the underlying OS. So can C++. So can C#, So can VB.NET.

The author apparently doesn't know that Metro *IS* a fat client.

Looks like a map of red/blue states. Just sayin'.

Einstein didn't believe in a deity. He believed in the god of Spinoza, which is just a metaphor for the whole of nature.

How can tablets/phones/whatever replace the desire for a screen bigger than 10" and/or a real keyboard designed for typing and/or a real mouse designed for precision?

Sure, I believe for consuming media content "on the train" and a small fraction of business purposes, a touchscreen is sufficient and arguably better than a desktop, but I cannot see a future where these small touchscreens can replace the vast majority of business purposes which require lots of user input and accurate cursor control on a screen big enough to do multitasking functions.

Even for home entertainment, I have a smartphone, I have a tablet, and I have a desktop. I use all three, however I spend most of my time on the desktop because using a real keyboard is easier than a touchscreen whose keyboard takes up half the view, I have a much larger screen so I can do more than one thing at a time, and I like to game so the precision of a good mouse is important to me.

Their are native application platforms that are easy to distribute. Flash and Silverlight are 99% as easy to distribute/update as html/js apps (at least to desktop boxes).

Visual Studio 2010 and 2011 were both written in C# and WPF.

The GP, if he/she is like every single other Libertarian I've discussed this with, is convinced that poor people are poor because they don't work hard, and government assistance programs are literally stealing from the wealthy to "fund the whims" of the poor, who are poor due to their laziness. These people believe that taxing the rich to assist the poor will just make the poor more lazy as they don't have to work hard anymore, and is therefore counterproductive. They also believe that taking money from the rich to give services to the poor is counterproductive because of the the point in my previous sentence, but also because the rich can put that money to better use (hiring people for example, or investing). In my experience the opposite is true. The poor tend to spend their money on necessities at the most competitive prices possible, directly injecting the money into the economy in a very capitalistic way, whereas the rich tend to save the money (not spend it) or spend it on $5000 watches, $80,000 foreign SUVs, traveling around the world throwing the money away, etc...conspicuous consumption which is not healthy for the economy.

You think that poor people are unproductive and rich people are productive, I'm guessing. If you're ever in the Santa Barbara area, take a stroll through Montecito on a workday afternoon and count the number of people either at the country club, drinking martinis at one of the many expensive restaurants, or just "out for a drive". Now go into one of those country clubs or restaurants and tell me who is actually doing the work. Come back to me and tell me who are the unproductive members of society again.

Let it go to jury... No way a jury would convict her. Doesn't matter if she technically broke the law.

My toothbrush can do this and has been able to for quite a few years...

Linq is Language INtegrated Query. It is used to query anything that implements an interface called IEnumerable, which is basically anything that is a list. It can be used to query all kinds of things outside of database tables (although it is pretty decent at that).

A parable about how a girl succeeds more because she has the advantage of inherited money? Please tell me this isn't meant to make Republicans look good, because it doesn't...