Apparently this thing will deliver about 2kW sustained when in use. What? My water heater draws 2.2kW. It wont even be able to serve me tea, and I'm not even British. My AC draws about 1.2kW. My iron draws more than my water cooker.

Sorry, this is, at this, and quite significantly lower, price point(s) is a joke.

There was a reason I wanted specifics. This is a generic comment and it generally isn't particularly accurate anymore. Do you know of any specific things that would suffer on any specific platform?

Again, not specific, and generally extremely far from the truth. Yes, Javascript runs slower than native code, but that isn't necessarily an issue. It depends on what your app does. Many, many apps are not calculation heavy, they collect data from a back-end server, present it to the user, allow the user to alter the data in some ways and then send the data back to the server. Any slowness in such application will be caused, by network slowness in almost all cases. In other words, the performance of the underlying GUI language is mostly irrelevant as long as it is fast enough, and Javascript is, for a huge number of applications.

So, at this point in time you have not given any kind of arguments that supports your position.

Have you developed applications in Javascript that suffered performance wise? Have you developed any mobile applications that you assume would suffer performance wise?

It's easy to parrot the "wisdom" of others, that's why I asked you to be specific. You weren't.

You really need to share some of the drugs you are taking. They must be awesome. So, what kind of photosynthesis does a car do?

Yes, for a little while. In the fastest growing period. Once the forest is somewhat established, the rotting processes etc in that forest will produce as much carbon as the forest consumes. Sure, the growth stage is semi-long in human terms, but it is both far too slow and far too inefficient to do anything about our current emissions.

As for cars, putting any kind of restrictions on cars to curb CO2 emissions is retarded, since personal transport constitutes a tiny part (4-5%) of the total CO2 emissions. Going electrical is retarded since the electricity used to drive the car is, in the end, produced by burning coal. None of the current efforts to curb CO2 emissions have any theoretical possibility of making a dent in CO2 emissions since they do not encourage, or enforce, a reduction in (or stopping of) the burning of coal.

Germany has gone to 30-40% electricity production using renewable energy. Still, their CO2 emissions have increased at exactly the same rate as the rest of the world. For two main reasons - 1/ The morons are shutting down nuclear plants, and 2/ when mixing renewable energy and fossil burning, the fossil burning becomes far less efficient and the CO2 emissions from coal and oil increases quite significantly.

There isn't. Remember, most of the world is not as closed minded and insane as the average slashdotter.

There was probably a full argument in there in your mind, but you only wrote about half of it.

Sorry to disappoint you. A forest is carbon neutral. It produces as much CO2 as it consumes. Your suggestion will have no impact on CO2 removed from the air.

Yeah, you are right. They have only open-sourced .NET and it is now available on all major (and quite a few minor) platforms. They have open sourced the C# compiler. They have open sourced just about anything web related they are doing. So, what else should they open source? Windows? According to Microsoft that is apparently also an option they keep open.

What, specifically, are you missing?

BZZZT! WRONG!