Well, I'll still support that over GTK+'s ugliness that, at least on Windows, looks nothing like a Windows app.

There is also Qt, totally easy to use (macro-based C++ code style). On Windows and Mac, it actually calls to load the native widgets instead of making its own, unlike so many other APIs for Windows.

UI inconsistency has been a problem forever and it seems to never end. Microsoft fails to keep the UI consistent, Apple at least tries, and Linux has UIs in whatever way the developers want them. Open up XChat, there's no File Edit View menus, there's XChat View Server menus. It may make sense once you get used to it but it is still inconsistent. There are no 'files' to deal with in XChat but the menu names are inconsistent. Then there's Pidgin with different menu names as well.

KDE and GNOME both try to fix this problem by having interface guidelines, just as Microsoft and Apple do. The problem is when someone (even someone like me) wants a quick and dirty solution that needs a GUI, they could care less about GUI guidelines and they want something that will work for THEM.

On the web, we cannot standardise UIs that are programmed with JS or whatever you wish to use because every site has their style sheet to keep their site unique. All we really need is completely standardised JS and web layout across the board for browsers.

Well, I completely agree. I hate the terms Kibi, Mebi-, etc. Stupid and random. I for one would be embarrassed to use those words anyway.

If you buy a set of DVDRs, you quickly find out they are measuring totally wrong on the package. It is definitely NOT 4.7 GB. This is a wild exaggeration if they would stop using SI GBs to measure (GB = 1000 MB). So if a DVD holds 4.7 SI GBs, then it holds ~4.34 GiB (Gibibytes, and I HATE that word).

Legality: the manufacturer LABELS the item stating that they measure a GB to be 1000 MB and not 1024.

Hard drive manufacturers do the exact same thing. A few years ago they were sued for not doing so, and won because they agreed to label their packaging about 'their' measurement of sizes.

Good one. Lol

LTC-KB = Kilobyte but it means 1000 bytes. 1024 bytes is a Kibibyte (kilo binary byte) according to Wikipedia according to the International Electrotechnical Commission standards defined in 1998-2000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibibyte

True, but I am not affected. Largest drive I have from Seagate is a 500 GB. Beyond that, as a consumer (and not an enterprise), since when do you update firmware of your hard drives? I have never done that before and would be very weary to do so.

I do not think I will be buying this one, or another WD. It is really hard to witness so many dead hard drives (including many DOA) and have your own experiences with their hard drives that just die so quickly. And another thing, why is every WD so damn big? They squeeze into every slot you put them into, not just slide in nicely like any Seagate (or most other brands). This goes for desktop and laptop. No wonder they are making their own external drives. Generic ones may not even fit their drives.

I have had much success with Seagate (lasts 5 years or more) and Hitachi (louder than most HDDs but they last). I do not know the warranty of WD, but the warranty for both Seagate and Hitachi are great (especially the Seagate one).

I am sure some people have luck, but after 2 dead hard drives (and many DOAs at a shop I worked at) and physical size problems, I will probably never give WD another chance, no matter what the price.

I agree. I really thought it was Google and other companies killing Microsoft, not Linux. (By the way, Linux is a kernel and a trademark, nothing more.)

The attitude seems very unprofessional in some sense when you compare to the proprietary software companies who will always claim they do what their customers ask of them (even if they do not).

Pidgin users were furious over a feature change and the Pidgin developers simply responded: "We do what we like." Pidgin is nearly considered part of GNOME because it's still GTK+ and right now it is IMO the best alternative to real AIM (AIM also has a Linux version now).

I agree 100%. GNOME has those stupid big ugly buttons (which always look better with ugly colours too; brown, beige, etc). And I've heard 'The bigger the better'. Even the old KDE design guide says it. Regardless, there is a reasonable limit and GNOME just goes too far. With that, I found GNOME to be TOO simple as a GUI and not for power-users. KDE all the way.

Do you use XP Lite? I would like to know. I know nLite has the option to 'remove' Internet Explorer. It will break a thousand things and more and cause some pretty irregular functionality, and also, stupid programs that rely upon the engine will not work at all.

Honestly, XP Lite just seems like a commercial alternative to nLite. And all nLite does is edit WINNT.SIF for you; I am sure (as it is required) XP Lite is still the same.

If you do use XP Lite and have removed IE with their app, go into system32 and see if you still have any IE-specific DLLs. These are required for explorer.exe to run. Namely: IERTUTIL.DLL, BROWSEUI.DLL. Or you can use something to see if explorer is still linked. Regardless, I am sure IE is not actually removed as it is not technically feasible without a lot of work.

This would be great and help the Wine project. As well, it would definitely hinder the creation of exploits (viruses, certain spyware), etc. The benefits of an opened API are great.

However, don't forget that the Windows API (and every part therein) is a bit crazy to understand. Too many typedefs, and a lot of bugs.

Monopoly is not the correct term at all. But Microsoft has the foothold of the market. This does mean (because there are no specific laws) Microsoft can include a web browser and whatever they like with their OS. Still, in EU or US, they CANNOT abuse their market dominance. This is akin to including a web browser and making it seem there is no alternative. On top of this, they have made Explorer and Internet Explorer integrate so tightly (even after IE7) that separating IE completely would be very difficult. If I go and 'remove' IE, all Windows does is remove the shortcuts. Does not delete files (except the .lnk files), does not fix dependency problems that would result, etc etc. nLite can remove IE from XP and 2000, but not completely. There are a great number of 'Internet Explorer' DLLs in system32.

People are comparing this to Apple's inclusion of Safari, and even KDE with Konqueror. At least on a Mac, you can remove Safari very easily (drag the icon from /Applications to the Trash). On both, the browsers are actually good (compliant with current standards and almost never go off creating their own). Perhaps people like us on Slashdot would not be complaining so much if IE was actually a good browser? I know I would have less of a reason to complain. Also on KDE, you can now use Dolphin which has no built-in web browser.

Windows needs a package manager that works. An installation system that is secure and works. I could go on and on.

Furthermore, old programs that called upon IE's engine (Quicken, McAfee to name a few) need to run in a special mode that is secured from the rest of the OS. HTAs and anything else directly reliant upon IE or the engine need to do the same. IE and Windows Explorer are tightly linked (contrary to popular belief). Remove one and you may have functionality but not full functionality.

The biggest reason why Windows sucks when it comes to security and stability: backward compatibility. This is a major reason why Microsoft (and probably many of its customers) would like to see IE stay included. I, too, like being able to run Windows 3.1 games on XP or Vista. But the size of the WinSxS (the folder with multiple versions of each DLL which all happen to have the same name stupidly) is huge, and for security reasons this is NOT worth it. This also could have been prevented. Make the number on the DLL file longer and change it with every major revision. This is exactly what happens with .so files on *nix.

The other problem is the great number of sites made for IE. Active sites like this need to be updated or be rejected by their users. Inactive sites are handled decently with WebKit or Gecko but they still exist and should be viewed correctly WITHOUT the need for IE.