Google is acting irresponsibly to the users of the vulnerable devices by refusing to patch the vulnerability in its software. Period.

.
imo, there is NO excuse why this vulnerability will not be patched. NONE.

Google has the resources to fix the vulnerability, what they are saying is that they do not have the desire to do so.

Criticisms based on old information and outdated implementations also plague object-oriented FORTRAN 2003.

.

It does not appear that the internet providers are all that concerned about obtaining the users' permission to track them.

.
Coming from a google exec, the statement is laughable, and ominous.

Political stories generate a lot of page hits. I doubt if they will stop.

That's basically the reason why I never really ramped up my google+ usage.

.
google was so rude about making me use google+ in areas where I did not want to use it, that I stopped using it altogether.

Now I notice that I cannot even reply to comments left on my youtube.com video channel, even though I am logged into my youtube.com account. I suspect the reason has something to do with the fact that I've all but abandoned my google+ account.

.
Unfortunately, google cannot control the people who use google glass, so there will always be glassholes and google glass won't succeed.

.
"...or are otherwise suspected of breaking school rules...." So, if a student doesn't have a halll pass, the school administrators can make the parents turn over the social media passwords?

I went paperless and got a discount. But my insurance company allows me to download PDFs of everything (including a PDF of the insurance card that I can print).

According to TFA, Progressive says, "We are confident in the performance of our Snapshot device – use in more than two million vehicles since 2008"

.
And which version of Visual Basic is being used in the class? The old versions that worked, or the re-architected versions that suck?

Yes, they are two different things. But in the world of Windows, no one really cares that they are two things.

It's Windows. Period.

The real question is: does any other popular consumer OS need that level of support?

.
If Microsoft did not mess up the "next version" as much as they have done, there wouldn't be the need to stick with a particular version for so long.

As an alternative case in point, my three Windows PCs tend to stay with a version until that version is no longer supported. While my single Macmini has had the OS upgraded to the newer version a few times, and all at no cost or bad experiences to me.

With the Macmini, the OS upgrade to the next version has been a fairly smooth experience, as opposed to a Windows OS upgrade to the next version which is more of a traumatic experience.

Maybe that is the cause to the need to have long support cycles for Windows OS versions?

Probably because Microsoft messed up the "next version" and people do not want to upgrade.