It depends on where your bottleneck is. Hard drives are typically the lowest performing pieces of hardware, mostly because they're spinning media. You can have the fastest CPU in the world, but if you're waiting on a 5.25" full height MFM drive, your performance is going to suffer.

clod yells at cloud

Been hearing this argument for years. It's still valid, but comes down to how much you care. I store my music with Amazon, but that's mostly because I want to have access to it everywhere. My CDs were ripped years ago and exist on my home server and Amazon and Google. I use Amazon and Google, but if something happens to either of those, I still have my originals. It's more likely that my home RAID array will eat itself before Amazon or Google get corrupted.

Verizon gave me a free router for signing up for FIOS. It's still in my basement collecting dust but it's not a line item on the bill like the cablecard.

Take a look at where NASA operates and why. Research divisions everywhere. Rocket design in Huntsville, launch from Florida, but mission control is in Houston. Why? Because politicians can get jobs and dollars in their districts. What Cruz is really saying is "spend more money in my state and not in anyone else's".

That was obvious the second Microsoft said they were porting it. They want to expand their base for their services. MSFT no longer has a desktop lockin that they used to years ago and so now they have to compete on quality on platforms they don't have control over. Remember when Apple ported iTunes to Windows? Or switched over to using USB rather than firewire? Those weren't to make Apple users feel any better about themselves - it was to target a group of people that didn't use their services.

I have 4 Thinkpads in my house. One personal, one from my employer, and one from each of two clients. They're all within two years old and they all have horrible trackpads. Enough so that I do most of my work on a macbook.

Maybe you should reread what I wrote. Then compare and contrast the facts that are listed.

If you ignore all the other (and more serious) reasons the Ambassador was let go, sure.

Yes, and? If you have an Ambassador that doesn't support the decisions made by the US Government, there's going to be a problem. What he uses for e-mail is probably at the bottom of the list of problems.

He resigned his office in disgrace and his name has been poison for 40 years. Any good things he did was overshadowed by Watergate and it's proving unlikely that history is going to be any kinder to him than has already been.

Presidents these days look to legacies to see that they're remembered well. Clinton is, Reagan is still a tossup (Republican slobbering is the only reason he's remembered well at all), there's an attempt to rehabilitate W's disastrous time which isn't really succeeding. Nixon's legacy is ruined.

Worse, turned the Republican party into a group of people that saw what happened, seethed with rage, and turned into a party that just wanted revenge in any way possible. Most of the poisonous things they've done since then (Clinton's impeachment, the "NO" response to Obama, etc.) have all been a direct result of that action. It didn't start with Nixon (see how JFK was treated during the 1960 election) but his legacy remains with us in all but a good way. Sad, really, for the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower to turn into the party of Tom Cotton.

But you're thinking I meant legal consequences. There's more than that to consider.

So which of the information that they linked to is untrue? AP, Foreign Policy, New Republic, the State Department OIG? The MM article even cited the Federalist:

"The Federalist did not mention any of the other failures highlighted in the OIG report, instead playing up several news articles which mentioned his email practices."

Huh. Why would The Federalist ignore such issues with the ambassador?

Then there's what really happened:

http://mediamatters.org/resear...

The private e-mail thing was the least of his worries. It's like saying you got busted for drunk driving with a beer in your hand after having robbed a bank at gunpoint and kidnapped one of the tellers. But a tail light was out (gasp! shock! horror!).

No, it's "Bush did bad things too, and suffered no consequences over it. So why are you up in arms over it now?"

Nixon suffered consequences over what he did.

Most companies that buy that many systems have their own image they just blast onto the laptop. Since it's usually a base install of the OS plus required drivers and software, there's no Superfish installed.