Awesome. I'm totally down with that. Can I play that file on my android phone or tablet or other third party boxes? Oh? No? Then I don't own it and I don't want any part of the whole affair.

Really? "Stifle descent?" You couldn't have corrected that to something that makes sense?

So you don't have any competent Windows administrators? That's all I got out of this.

Housing and condo boards will also be total assholes about this. I've had them browbeat me about satellite dishes even after showing evidence that there's a federal law that says they can't tell me how many dishes I'm allowed to have (I had 2). All they care about is that every house looks the same and their devotion to local housing politics pays off in the form of pushing people around.

There seems to be a lot of crossover between "whimsi-geek" and "useless executive desk toys" but whatever makes you happy. I'd rather get an arduino or another raspberry pi or something.

Yes, because we should put people in jail based on wether we like them or not.

"And therefore they can be herded into giving up their freedom by a combination of convenient features, pressure from institutions and the network effect." Or, perhaps, they judged what they want and what they are giving up and chose something of their own accord because they don't care about the same things in their computing experience that RMS does. Crazy, I know.

Sadly, most most locks are easily opened by "bumping," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock_bumping) which is something any casual thief can do, and which is discussed in one of the books. I wish it got more time in the review.

Oh. That sounds pretty valid. My bad.

To me this looks like the 3D printing version of an " X but on a phone" patent. Using a break-away scaffolding on a solid object is a classic part of casting.

There is not. Chrome OS is literally that: an OS that runs a browser and only the apps that work inside of it.

Find me the Atom chip that has more performance per watt. Go ahead.

I read the whole review where the Atom N570 fared extremely poorly in comparison for more power draw. Nothing in that review supports anything you are saying. And I don't see any links to any Haswell demos in any of your quotes. If you can find me anything showing equivalent performance per watt on the Intel side, please link it. I would be interested in seeing it.

I was thinking of EXACTLY that review, where they mention all it needs is a lower clock speed. As opposed to the much slower atom used there, which has a higher consumption, or the apparently equal performing atom used in the test above which has a 35W draw AT IDLE with chipset. The Exynos 5 chromebook as a whole system including display has a draw of just over 11W when running a benchmark. So no, the Atom isn't even close on power draw, and clocking it down will not make it work in a phone.

What the hell? Maybe if the Atom was operating in the same power margins. The whole point is the arm is using way less power, hence why you can see it in phones.