Your argument is OK as far as it goes. But I believe the OP did make a point, while kind of vague, about asking who executes who if you execute an innocent man? It has happened more than once in the past. And we constantly see people exonerated who were convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death after a trial. So who do we execute if the trial finds that an innocent person should be executed and it happens? Do we execute the jury? The judge? The police? The prosecutor? The defense? Any of them? None of them? Why?

For what it's worth, I don't have too much of a problem doing away with someone for murder when it is absolutely for certain that they caught the real bad guy. But I don't like it dragging on for years, and I don't like it done humanely behind walls. Make it horrible and in public. That way everyone sees what's up. Out of sight out of mind need not apply here. And for me, if an innocent person is executed, find out why and execute the people responsible... but at least one of them has to be an official... even if it includes jury members. That would have made trials of blacks by all white juries in the south more entertaining. Let them wear their uniforms while swinging. It would look like putting out the bed sheets on the line.

They focus test for all the advertising spam that pops shows up instead of what you're really trying to search for.

Fix your users... Heh heh...

He didn't "aid" in blackmailing people. He blackmailed people.

implemented systemd

FTFY: implementd systemd

Catch 21.

Off the selves... Nice

I'm talking about what the final version will be like. Come on, try not to be so literal.

I agree with this. If they get rid of a real start menu, I'll make the unwanted switch to Apple if I need another proprietary system.

How much does it send back to Microsoft? I have heard it is much more onerous in this regard than previous OS versions. Can anyone shed some light on the truth of that?

And that was an example of a company being punished. They lost a LOT of money in terms of lost potential at least. And is likely why they are at least making an attempt to listen to their customers this time around (or the appearance thereof anyway). If they hadn't lost market share, they wouldn't have changed their behaviour.

My mistake was to post that at night just before the Russians were waking up. They don't like to hear the truth about their dictator.

You lose your users. So what? Does it cost you?

I use a Kubuntu laptop. That said, what we see here is the downside to open source. There is no real penalty for not listening to users and just doing what you want. If you are doing it for free why would you care what others think, as long as you think you're right. Same deal if you have somehow gained a funding source that also doesn't care. BTW, Maybe Google liked Mozilla fucking up Firefox since that would push people to Chrome (yes I know they have a deal with Yahoo now, but most of the stupid shite was done when they got their money from Google). Gnome was a case of this combined with a crew that got too big for their britches. Design have always been uber-gnu and did things as they saw and see fit, and don't have to answer to anyone but themselves and if you don't like it, use Redhat. So there (sticks tongue out). There are a lot of projects that do care. But I think k hubris is easier with open source when you are less likely to lose a paycheque.

Do you mean build 'Windows 7'? I agree.