I agree. I went from cheap to the most expensive consumer routers in several steps (the current one is above 200$) but I have trivial problems with all. Because of this I slowly migrate all of their functions to a PC. If the current router fails, I will not buy a new one. I believe these home routers are useful only if you do not want to touch them at all (after setting the password). If you do anything more, and have enough space, use a real PC. It does not consume too much power, a usual PC uses less than 80W if it is idle. If you do not have a surplus PC, thenn buy an AMD AM1 APU with an ITX or mATX motherboard, and the idle consumption will be less than 25W. And you can use your favourite unix/linux OS.

I have to sanitize DRM ePubs immediately anyway, so I can backup them. As a side effect, I can read them anywhere, ePub is an open format. Of course, Kindle does not support it, but that is their problem, I simply do not buy a Kindle. Every book which is available on Amazon is available in ePUB too, while the opposite is not true. There are books available in ePUB, which are not sold by Amazon.

I regularly do restores from an LTO-3 drive, and the whole process takes no more than 5 minutes. If your data is useless after 5 minutes, then it is indeed unecessary to backup it, not to mention archiving it.

I can easily imagine that Verizon is correctly saying that the backbone providers have not got enough bandwidth to them. After all Verizon knows very well if they intentionally crippled these connections and agreements. Backbone providers gladly build better connections. Their customers, like me or anybody who rent or colocate a server, or maintains his own datacenter, for example Netflix, pay them to have good connections to end users.

It does not work that way. Even if Apple or Samsung or anybody else invents all the components themself, they still have to pay the same royalty to the original "inventors", because they received monopoly for 20 years.

Software should not have been patented, and software patents are indeed not allowed in Europe (although they are lobbying hard to bring the broken US system into Europe).

I am yet to see a software patent which worth the effort of reading and decoding its intentionally unclear text. In the best case they are basically direct applications of unpatentable mathematical knowledge produced by real scientists, and not the inventors mentioned in the patent.

So yes, anybody who uses software patents for litigation or for any other purpose except defending against a troll, is indeed a patent troll.

It is not the file systems which mess up the data (at least with journaling file systems), but the SSD drives without power loss protection capacitors. What a journaling file system could do, if it successfully syncs the journal, but after a restart the journal is gone, the result of later partial writes are there? This is the so called serialization error. It happens with costomer HDD drives too, but it is much worse with these SSD drives. Take a look at the publication I linked in my other comment above.

I don't expect total power loss protection. I do expect reasonable behaviour, like data already synced to the drive is there even after a power loss. SSD drives without capacitors fail spectacularly, they are much worse than HDD drives. Just google for "SSD failure modes abstract", for example: https://www.usenix.org/system/...

No file system can deal with the situation when data synced to drive is lost. And that is the better case for SSD in case of a power loss, they frequently lose completely unrelated data.

Actually I cannot think of any scenario, where I would use such a drive. We have lost 3 desktop drives which has no capacitors. One is still working. Meanwhile there are no issues with four drives which has capacitors.

To be fair, queued TRIM is actually useful. The old TRIM killed performance in a high IO environment.

"mSATA solid state drives performs extremely well" It has no power loss protection capacitors, so if it performs extremely well, then it also lose data extremely well. Maybe you can put it into a laptop, but I would not risk even that. This is another useless "customer" SSD drive.

Actually we also upgraded to Java 7 I just forgot to mention that in my original post.

I am not sure what do you mean on deprecated calls. In new Java releases they deprecate functions or classes but they never remove them. Therefore deprecated functions do not cause backward compatibility issues. As others already mentioned likely you mean calls into JRE internal sun.* classes. Those are never deprecated, because they were never public! No code should call them, except very special applications in very special circumanstances, but then they should always provide a default fallback algorithm, and advertise this issue on the very first page of this documentation. Actually the only software I know which has a good reason to call internal sun.* code is the big data database, Cassandra, which is assumed to manage memory in the hundreds of gigabytes range.

However, I understand you, because with such a large amount of code you likely run into each and every bug in the JRE class libraries at some point in your code. But your situation is definitely not the usual, and based on your disappointed tone, I believe your organisation is doing something strange. You say that you have 74 gigabytes of code, but the entire Java EE codebase is less than 80 megabytes of binary code. It is quite strange that you blame that 0.1% code for all your problems. You should either pay for Oracle support, and receive bug fixes early, or pay developers who can quickly fix JRE bugs themselves, and that will be still a tiny fraction of your IT budget. Java related costs must be compared to the similar cost of some alternative technology, so you could tell whether Java or that alternative is the more cost effective in your situation. I do not know anything else which seems to be better for us.

I am working on a 80 000 lines long Java web application in the last 15 years. I have upgraded through 5 major versions, from Java 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3 to 1.4 to 5 to 6. I do not remember a single issue related to any of these upgrades. There vere about 2 minor issues when we migrated from Unix to Windows to Linux (related to the case sensitivity of the file system).

I am sure that a visit to a site which distributes cheating tools is only one of the many factors in the evaluation of whether the player is a likely cheater or not.