It doesn't even make sense. Changing your app install behavior to work the same way as other distros is assuming your users are wiser than average?

And, Fedora's designers have assumed that its users are wiser than the general run of users. 'For example, in earlier versions, ordinary (non-admin) users could install software on Fedora without access to the root password. As of this version, however, local users will need to enter the root password before they can install software (as they do on almost all other Linux distributions).'"

(Emphasis mine.)

Another poster suggests "better than free", which I think is the least ambiguous way of phrasing it.

The story doesn't seem very anti-Google at all; in fact, reading TFA (omg shock people do that? etc), it seems that he's praising Google for their ability to disrupt (i.e. out-compete) their competitors. I mean "Google’s brilliance doesn’t stop there" doesn't sound very anti-Google at all.

From TFA:

Today we’re introducing Raindrop, an exploration in messaging innovation being led by the team responsible for Thunderbird

So he'd be right to assume so. ;)

No, Konqueror still uses KHTML, which WebKit was based on, but is inferior in many ways. There was some talk about switching it over to WebKit a while ago, but they eventually decided it was infeasible.

I was surprised Konq and iCab weren't in the list, though; they're pretty important browsers. And I didn't really understand why they published things like Acid3 scores, considering the majority of the browsers on the list used rendering engines from the four major browsers (two Gecko and two WebKit browsers).

By the way, I wouldn't recommend using Konqueror. As a Web developer, I consider KHTML one of the worst major rendering engines to support (yes, even worse than Trident from IE7+).

Well, I was exaggerating a bit. Of course security fixes are important. But as a developer of the aforementioned game, I'm kind of more affected by the rendering bug. I mean, when's the last time an OS X security bug has had an exploit in the wild? Compare that to not insignificant number of Warzone players (Windows and Linux are supported, too! Come try one of the most popular FOSS RTSes today!)

Unfortunately, it looks like nothing important was fixed, either. The OpenGL bug on NVIDIA graphics cards is still there. :/

Have you heard of iCab? It's the only Acid2-compliant browser that runs on Mac OS 9, and is much more standards compliant than Gecko 1.3 (the version used in Classilla).

Although iCab is no longer maintained for Mac OS 9, its last release for Mac OS 9 was in 2008, far more recently than Gecko 1.3 (2002), and the Mac OS 9 version is still a full-featured modern browser with tabbed browsing, built-in AdBlock, excellent standards compliance (iCab was the first browser with an Acid2-compliant public build) - the only thing it's really missing is CSS3 opacity, and all that good stuff.

Did you check "Enable pre-release features" or "Next generation" in the Google Apps domain settings? It's my impression that only explicitly enabling beta features like that would cause the "beta" label to appear. If those are unchecked, you should see no "beta" label.

What are you talking about? Google Chrome has been stable since December 2008, and Chrome 2 has been stable since mid-May (and scores 100/100 on Acid3).

What?

Microsoft is doing exactly what any other software company in their position has done, and would do. You have GenericSoftware 3.0. Then, GenericSoftware 4.0 is released. You either you have to deal with a mixed software environment, or you have to upgrade everyone to GenericSoftware 4.0. How is what Microsoft's doing different from what every other company is doing?

And don't tell me open-source doesn't have this problem. Windows XP was released in 2001. If you asked for support and patches for, say, Mozilla Phoenix 0.3 (released 2002), you'd get laughed out of pretty much everywhere. And if you actually cared about using open-source, you'd be using Linux and you wouldn't have this problem in the first place.

And it's not compatibility, either: Windows 7 is coming with Windows XP Mode, which will give you all the IE6 you'll need for your buggy ActiveX webapps.

So tell me: What's wrong with what Microsoft is doing with Windows XP?

Considering Wave is an online service, it would be pretty difficult for them to make it Windows-only. None of Google's other Web pages are Windows-only.

For a more well-known example of a localized programming language: TI-BASIC 68k (the variant used on TI-89, TI-92, and Voyage 200 calculators).

This causes many problems, since it means source code written in one language will not run in a calculator set to another language. As Wikipedia notes, various configuration strings are also localized, so even binaries can be incompatible.