Computerworld's Gregg Keizer reports that based on NetApplications current adoption statistics for Windows 8, the operating system is not achieving market share as fast as Windows Vista. At the 2 month point Vista was at 2.2% of all Windows devices. 2 months past Launch Windows 8 has achieved a share of only 1.6%. In a related note, Fujitsu President Masami Yamamoto has joined the chorus of PC OEM executives complaining of poor sales. Pointedly Yamamoto blames Windows 8 for Fujitsu missing their annual projected sales targets.

The voicefive.com script that's taking forever to load on slashdot these days is used for usage tracking. It's harmless. But the server is so overloaded that it's taking pages forever to load.

It's time to talk about the hard turn.

Change has been in the wind for a while now. The times, they are a-changing. We are going mobile. Windows PCs undersell mobile devices now by a rate of 1:2, and the change is logarithmic. This isn't some fad: real change is happening.

Some have read the weather well. Samsung especially, but Acer, Asus, Philips, Sony and Lenovo too. HP and Dell, not so much.

We're entering a new world now, that doesn't have legacy bindings holding us back. Let us make the most of it.

In the run up to Santa season I see dozens of 7-9" Android tablets in the retail market with Android 4.0, capacitive touch screen and decent performance. A lot of them now marked "sold out". I think it's amazing that so much technology can be made so cheaply in such a small package. This is awesome.

Both Intel and AMD came out last week with chips that are focused on "Windows 8 first" and don't even pretend to be openly documented or available to all. That both would so suddenly reverse course on being open was a surprise. There are good reasons why Microsoft needs advanced access to integrate their software with innovative new processor technologies, and why AMD and Intel might be persuaded to cooperate. Together they are defending the "Wintel PC" ecosystem against the world's largest corporation by market capitalization, Apple, who is engaging in "vertical integration" by designing software and processor and other platform technologies together in a way that optimally balances the tradeoffs between what hardware best does and software best does. That is powerful leverage. But for Intel and AMD - and you and I - this is a trap and the consequences of this solution are dire.

It's about software patents. By Microsoft convincing Intel and AMD to focus on Windows only for the launch of these new power technologies, to secretly work with Microsoft on development, Microsoft get a jump start on the software patents. While the hardware interface is obfuscated Microsoft has six months to a year to file for patents on every possible software use of the hardware interfaces they can think of to use it. You can bet they're churning out patents by the hundred as I type this on things anybody reading the plain specifications would find obvious but the patent office will not. Microsoft will own utterly all the software uses of this hardware innovation, and by extension prevent all progress it enables that Microsoft does not control. Because of the ridiculous way patents work, this hands Microsoft complete control not only of these innovations but the entire systems which use them, of which they compose only a miniscule part.

Then when the facilities are openly documented and the open systems come out that leverage these technologies: BAM! Software patent lawsuits out the wazoo, and the Windows monopoly is protected against competition and progress for another human generation - unless Intel and AMD are killed utterly. Much like Samsung makes the touchscreen and owns huge patents on the technology, and then Apple and Microsoft sue Samsung for making devices incorporating touchscreens because they patented software that interprets certain software implementations of swiping and tapping.

As an unintended consequence Intel and AMD -only- get to move forward if Windows moves forward since Microsoft has all the patents on using the technologies they invented. By selling Microsoft this advantage for whatever they got in return, they've mortgaged their future to a single vendor and lost their ability to compete in open systems against ARM and Android. They've sunk their own boat. They can expect that Microsoft will use that lever to best advantage against their "partners" Intel and AMD, as Microsoft never misses a trick in that regard.

Intel has announced that "future platforms" with their technology will be open to Linux. AMD has announced that "Hondo" is being retrofitted with Android. Unfortunately, it is already too late. They have been cooperating with Microsoft secretly for many months before these announcements. The first patent applications on the most obvious uses of this hard-won hardware innovation are almost certainly already filed, with more to follow.

Don't pay to make yourself a victim again. Avoid these chips and anything tainted with this technology. Make AMD and Intel start from scratch, open from the start, if they want your money. At least then the open software implementations have a fair shot at establishing free and open prior art before Microsoft's lawyers have a chance to file their stupid software patents. Only with open hardware with well-documented interfaces available from the start can progress move forward, and even then only if the people who want to do interesting useful stuff step up and publish at least one way to use it before somebody who wants to control it utterly and prevent others from using it can whip up their patent thicket applications and beat them to the patent office.

I've had numerous comments over the last couple of days receiving troll for which that tag is clearly unwarranted. I wonder if someone is hoping to break my karma max.

Since apparently we have to decide the future of American politics around this issue of whether insurers should be forced to offer contraceptives and pharmacies be forced to carry them the freedom or religion question again comes to the forefront.

The progressive propaganda machine is out in full force trying to accuse conservatives of forcing their religion on others and or trying to sell us all on the idea that these measures are in some way protecting them from the tyrannical religious views of the minority. The sad part is its working in that public is actually entertaining the idea this has anything to do with religion. It may be to an extent but if is than the conservatives as usual have the more supportable position even if most of those would be ïïSantorum votes and the candidate himself are blind to it.

All of these âoeprogressivesâ who see their boy Obama as a hero pushing common sense over the religious right, are as much the fools they like to make the Santorum supporters out to be or the worst kind of hypocrite. I personally suspect its pretty even mix of both; frequently found in the same individuals. Almost any of them would be willing to argue that âoefreedom of religionâ means freedom from religion and Iâ(TM)d agree. It follows though that âoefreedom of associationâ its in that same amendment, should also mean freedom from association. That means as an individual, or private business, I should have the right to disassociate myself form any person or group of people I chose for any reason, however stupid. This is the view I take as libertarian. Its incumbent upon me to not pick stupid reasons but if I do; well to damn bad right? So if an employer, insurance agency or pharmacy does not want the sort of customer or employee that interested in contraception coverage well that ought to be allowed. So toss out all your civil rights acts, quota laws, and similar non-egalitarian derk.

The Supreme Court of the United States disagrees with me; partially. The have held you can only exclude members from your group if their presence would make it difficult to express you view point. Clearly in the case of Catholic organizations who have the view point that contraception is wrong, would have a problem espousing that viewpoint while having a membership with the expectation they are going to pay for it. So their covered but the pharmacy that does not want to carry Plan B, they are not a religious organization, the are not pushing an agenda other than make buck; so they canâ(TM)t just dissociate themselves from a certain group of customers right? Well I guess you got me there, or do you? I say the the Supreme Court is wrong. I say this because if the the freedom of associate is in fact not freedom from association than its terribly inconsistent to take the view freedom of religion is.

If your not forcing people to violate the tenants of their own faith with say biblical-y inspired laws than those must be okay, as that would be consistent with the Courts rulings on association. Sorry Atheists if the Christians want to hang the Ten Commandments over the door and start the school day with a prayer I guess you must let them. You canâ(TM)t have it both ways, well not and be honest anyway. Lets face it honesty and integrity have never really been part of the progressive agenda though have they?

  hmm some other thoughts on the subject.

What about the basic freedom reserved for the states and the people, you know ALL the ones not enumerated elsewhere in the Constitution. Like say deciding what to stock in your store. If a pharmacy has to carry Plan B, does my auto mechanic have to stock parts for my thirty year old import? Does JC Penny have to have beige pants in a thirty-one inch waste in stock at all times? Where is line? Clearly its totally against the character of this nation for any central governing body to be dictating what a retail operation has on their shelves, at least I hope that is still true!

Finally can we just dispense with the totally ridiculous notion that contraceptive drugs are âoenecessary for womenâ(TM)s health.â Clearly when prescribed for âoecontraceptive useâ they are not. Effective inexpensive contraception for men and women is available at just about every gas station, drug store, and many a public rest room across this country. If you really canâ(TM)t of any of it for whatever reason you could just keep your pants on. Sure it might ruin a Saturday night but it wonâ(TM)t kill you. I would be willing to entertain an argument that these medications might be necessary when prescribed as they frequently are for other health reasons. Doing so than places it on the doctor writing the prescription and their professional integrity when they attest to why they are doing it. Seems like a reasonable compromise. This simply is not an equal protection issue. Its just not.

Lets face it contraception is NOT specifically a womenâ(TM)s issue unless fathers have no obligation or rights to the consequences of not using it. Oh wait nobody is happy with that idea? Thought not.

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/20/10194014-poker-players-sue-to-get-to-the-bottom-of-online-cheating-scheme

I've just posted this submission.

Reddit is going dark January 19th in opposition of SOPA/PIPA.

If you like the submission, it would be nice if you helped bump it up the firehose. If you don't like it, but want to help then please submit a better article.

I adore /. for its purity of thought, its perfection of moderation that lets me see all the words writ by any who would write, even though most have little useful to say.

The egalitarianism of the moderation system is perfect in its design and execution. It's a beautiful thing. Some seven years I've read and subsumed every comment reading at -1, and learned quite more from the -1's than the +5's. Among other things I have the 2^8 days read in a row achievement, and that was just when I was logged in. You can be assured that if you've writ a comment on /. in the last seven years, it's likely I've read it. If you've been wondering if anybody bothered to read your work, rest easy.

Even though I've posted things when I was a drunk ass and would like to erase them, I appreciate that you can't take /. comments back or edit them once posted, and worked that to my advantage.

Today though, I have a different issue. Once upon a time at /. there was a particularly difficult user: twitter. Twitter's a guy. He's got issues, but he knows his shit and he's tapped into the tech vein that we crave.

/. is a good thing, but it has one thing I cannot in good conscience bear. Somebody on the /. staff has it in for the user "twitter", and unlimited modpoints such that even referencing the name "twitter" is proscribed. I'm not OK with that. twitter was an idiot sometimes, quite open about his sockpuppets, and gaming the /. system. He was also one of the most prolific posters of timely and interesting articles. Whether he was good or bad is irrelevant to me - that some moderator can transparently banish him so thoroughly that I dare not mention him for fear of being modded instantly from +5 to -1 just for mentioning him, is.

I'm an American, and this looks like prior restraint of speech to me.

I love me some /., but this is a game I won't play.

If /. can't bear the mention of twitter, maybe I should try Reddit. I hate the Redditor thing, but maybe it's better than a site that pretends to be purely open except that it can't bear "twitter". Reddit looks to me like a site more open to dissent than one that can't bear a twitter.

Wake up people.

Slashdot: please turn off new registrations. We're being infiltrated by shills.

I'm really getting annoyed by the +5 comments achievement thing. A long time ago I hit 2 to the 7th +5 comments. I'm sure I've had 128 more since then. Why don't I have the 2 to the 8th achievement? Is there a cap?

The new user interface increased the difficulty level considerably, but I think I've earned that 2 to the 8th achievement and I want it NOW.

I'll tell you what... I'm getting pretty tired of people bringing the "color of his skin" issue up with this guy Cain. Tired of it because it's so oversimplifying the issue as to make it become a fiction... a construct.

Of COURSE there are people who just see the color of someones skin or their race, and attribute certain things to them. Those people are in the distinct minority (I would say 3 to 5% of the population), and could be objectively classified as mentally deficient.

It's not that simple as "race".

It's about CLASS. Why people are unable to make that leap in logic is beyond me. This fixation with "race"... I don't know what's up with that, and why people are stuck on that, when it's obvious it's all about class for 95% of people.

Do people REALLY believe that their opponents are racist? Do they not really understand that they are actually classist? I honestly don't know.

Dear Valued Customer, en español

Your privacy is an important priority at Verizon. We want to let you know that Verizon will soon participate in a program that will improve the ability of advertisers to reach our Verizon Online customers based on your physical address. The goal is to provide online ads that may be more relevant to you.

This program uses your address to determine whether you reside in a local area an advertiser is trying to reach. However, Verizon wonâ(TM)t share your address with advertisers as part of this process. Advertisers wonâ(TM)t know itâ(TM)s you specifically or where you actually live. If you do not want us to allow advertisers to send you ads based on your geographic area you can let us know by selecting here.

What does this mean for you?

Certain ads youâ(TM)ll see while browsing the Internet may be directed to you and other Verizon Online customers in your area, so these ads may be of more interest to you. For example, a pizza chain may want to deliver their ad to give a special offer to people living in a particular area. Using this program, national brands and local businesses can tailor their offers, coupons, and incentives to your local area.

Protection of Your Personal Information

Verizon protects your personal information as described in our privacy policy. You can learn about Verizonâ(TM)s ad practices or let us know that you do not want to participate by selecting here. If you donâ(TM)t want to participate, you will need your User ID and Password to access the opt-out page. Please note that declining to participate wonâ(TM)t impact the number of ads you see, just their potential relevance to you.

For answers to your frequently asked questions, select here.

Sincerely,

Verizon

Hemos, a co-founder of slashdot.org started his new job on 8/15 as a program manager at Google. This according to his Twitter