Also, new projects have required 100% code coverage for CI/CD.

I've seen a few internal git based projects go a step farther.. feature branch from master, with a per-task branch that's short lived.. branch from feature branch, work on your changes, usually committing local, and/or pushing to internal repo. When ready to apply to feature branch, (optionally rebase) and do a pull request... at the pull request comes peer review (a couple +1's) and you merge up... regular merges in from master, and push to master == CD release.

For smaller modules, the branch is typically PR'd straight to master for that project (with review). It's worked very well, and I have to say that working with multiple local and remote branches in git has been quite a bit nicer than with any other source control I've used, including SVN (of course getting used to git took some time, and git extensions helped with that learning curve).

Heaven help you if you supported both.

I just want to note, that a free market isn't the same as corporate protectionism or IP maximalism.. or even the legal concept of corporate person-hood. A free market only works when the operators within said market aren't given preferential treatment over others, and information is allowed to flow freely.

I've had a couple occasions where I had a really tight deadline, and I pretty much worked/ate/slept as I saw fit.. when I was tired, I slept, when I was hungry I ate (specifically walking away from my workspace, and taking the time to eat)... the rest of the time I worked. It turned out that each day started about 4 hours after the previous.

I don't think it's natural at all for us to sleep only at night... if you look at cats/dogs they don't sleep like that, I can't think of many animals that do. From what I've observed and understand it's likely far more natural to take shorter restful sleeps of 3-5 hrs multiple times a day joined with relatively short naps of 20-45 minutes. We force ourselves into the cycles we have, and most people I feel are much worse off for it. All for the sake of an 9-5 workday.

Which is funny, because the sound is more like shhhgrrssheeeoooow.. but that doesn't spell out as well...

Though I mostly agree.. people once thought the same about computers, now a significant percent of the country has a pretty powerful computer on their person.

Yeah, you'd need a few Supreme Court Justices for that.

Exactly.. first sale rights allow Netflix to buy DVDs and rent them out... the studios can't stop that, except for some contracts that Netflix has agreed to for better pricing and relinquishing some control... The same goes for Redbox.

Windows RT is about much more than just supporting ARM... it's about getting rid of a legacy codebase. By releasing RT on a separate architecture, they can reasonably eliminate the compatibility without much pushback. If they released an x86/64 version of RT, there would be people up in arms. As it stands, it's a gateway drug. You can write .Net/JS based desktop apps and not have to worry about legacy overhead/bugs and one-offs. RT itself is a good idea, but the route they took is a bit backwards imho.

I'm sorry, but realistically proprietary GPUs aren't a big issue... the PCIe slot is pretty standard, and they all come on boards that fit into that slot, and beyond that, the odds of a regular person spinning up a fab order for non-proprietary CPU/GPU/board combinations is just plain unlikely. Having open software that works with said hardware is a *much* bigger issue... unless you are planning on using some under-powered GPU that will have trouble with 1080p 3D that is. That said, having open drivers allows for faster and better integrated updates from linux distributions, and more options as a whole.

For *most* people, I would go with AMD, imho for general purpose at the mid-range, you get a lot for the money with AMD.. so for my parents, grandparents, and the like I would use AMD. Same goes for a starter kids system... you can start with the integrated APU and throw in a dedicated GPU a year or two later. AMD sockets tend to stick around forever, and can generally get an upgrade in.

On the higher end it really depends. If you are doing software development, then the multi-core support of an 8350 might work better for you than an i7. If you are wanting to do video/image editing on large images/files, then the i7 will be a much better option. Video transcoding can go either way and is dependent on the software you are using. If you want to create a hackintosh, then the i5/i7 is really the only way to go.

Well, they seem to be shipping enough GPUs for the likes of the XBone, and the PS4 ... That said, I think if they had the exclusivity with Dell that Intel has had, then they would be able to supply. I see a lot of AMD from most other mfgs, and sales overall are down for everyone, including Intel.

Funny, but I changed from an i7-860 to an FX-8350 last year... It was because the motherboard went bad, not because it was too slow... I find that the 8350 does a lot better for the work I do (web application dev, generally with a couple of different DBs in the background) I have 32GB of ram, but it's only seeing 24 for some reason... next time I wipe and re-install, will probably update the bios. That said, it is still leaps and bounds better than the i7 for me. I cannot attest to gaming, as I don't really game much at all.

I'm no pawn, I'm a mother f**king Rook! I bring order to chaos, I refactor with impunity...