Yeah, typed out that comment rather quickly and after posting noticed that typo... :)

Someone mod this guy down, he doesn't know what he's talking about. You think some of the top yacht builders in the world, working for the most exacting clients for millions of dollars have somehow made a huge and epic mistake and made a yacht which actually can't sail at sea at all? Are you crazy? You think you're the only guy in the world who suddenly has identified this fatal floor in the boat? And not the small army of engineers who were working on it for months?

I've sailed on 50 ft yachts with windows on the side and been fine. These windows aren't standard glass like your bathroom mirror, these are custom engineered for the job they do, and they can easily handle some waves hitting them.

They had a massacre in Australia, they banned guns, no massacred since. See, I can do that too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia#The_Port_Arthur_massacre_and_its_consequences

Guns are designed to be the best method for one person to kill many other people. Knives don't even come close. Don't even begin to compare knife attacks with someone armed with automatic weapons, it's a meaningless comparison. Guns have no other use other than killing. If the guy yesterday had been armed with a knife, how many people do you think would have died? Comparing knives with guns is a ridiculous and meaningless debate tactic, if they were comparable, why wouldn't we just send out soldiers in with knives rather than M16s and M4s, it would certainly be cheaper.

Are you crazy? Teachers having guns in the classroom? Really? More guns is the answer is it? Do you realize how insane that sounds?

Strange really how the USA has the highest rate of firearms related deaths for Western World Countries. In fact, the USA has a higher rate of firearms deaths than a lot of 3rd world countries too. Strange isn't it that those countries with less guns and stricter gun laws have fewer deaths? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

More guns equals more people dead by guns. End of story.

Switzerland actually has much a much higher amount of gun related death than other Western World countries. In fact, the USA is the only Western World country that has more gun related death per capita than Switzerland. So in fact you're wrong, more guns usually equals more gun deaths. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

This isn't a valid comparison. Guns have one use, for killing. Hand-guns and assault rifles are designed for killing other human beings. Knives are used for cooking and various other peaceful uses, cars are used for travel, rocks are used for building, martial arts for fitness, and so on.

If guns are illegal and there are no gun stores, where are the "fucking lunatics" going to get their guns?

If a teenager wants to shoot up his school, let's say he's a 15 year old boy. Let's say guns are illegal and there are no gun stores. Where is he going to go and buy his pistol or rifle and all that ammo? Is he going to go to the local "criminal hangout" and ask to buy a gun? Even supposing there were such an obvious criminal hangout I doubt he would be able to go there as a pimply faced teenager and get a gun so easily. And that's the point, it's about trying to MAKE IT HARDER to get hold of a gun. If this guy had to spend weeks or months trying to procure a firearm, he might have had second thoughts, people might have noticed his behavior, he might have started feeling better and less depressed, and so on.

What about the domestic dispute between a man and wife that turns nasty and the man has a gun in the cabinet? In one rash moment someone could die. Countries with bans on firearms have much smaller incidences of firearm related deaths, surely this is obvious. More guns = more deaths from guns. It's not rocket science.

Here's the statistics for per capita death rate from firearms. Note that the USA had by far the most per capita deaths amongst all the developed western world countries. The USA has similar rates to countries like South Africa, Montenegro, and Mexico...

I'm not saying you are wrong about the logo, it's a matter of opinion of course. However, I think it's somewhat specious to compare the logos of drinks companies and software companies. When it comes to drinks companies, let's be fair, there's basically no difference between any of the 100 different types Coke, so, in this this case branding is hugely important. In the end, all the drinks have the same "functionality" which is to quench your thirst, taste sugary, and provide you with caffeine. So all Coke can really do is push their name and history and "secret" formula and it's famous logo.

However, when it comes to Microsoft Server software and say Linux server software, these are two very different products with a vast array of differences and relative positives and negatives. The people in charge of choosing whether a database server gets Windows Server 2008 and SQL Server or Linux and MySQL is going to be looking at up-times, security, compatibility, and so on. The point I'm trying to make is that the branding of a company is definitely more important for some companies than others and soda especially is an example of where branding is hugely important, business software, not so much.

Call me crazy but I think this is really a case of "different strokes for different folks." And in general it seems that anything Microsoft does gets criticized at Slashdot. I mean. I've been a member here since 2006 and lurked long before then and I don't recall many instances of people praising anything they've done, so this comment is very unsurprising.

That said, I actually like this logo (yes, feel free to mod me +funny). I think that simple and flat shading evokes modernity and that trying to be fancy and use gradients or otherwise trying to make things pop-out or use 3D-ish looking elements is on its way out.

As far as boring goes, we are talking about a large software company that makes most it's money of licensing software for big business, it's not a games studio or a high-octane energy drink company, the logo was never going to be neon green with a lightning flash. I wouldn't call Apple, Google, or Facebook's logos exciting either, they are functional. These companies live or die based on their products, not their logos.

Do not want.

What on Earth are you talking about? I'm talking about BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY, do you even know what that means? It's like saying that a Playstation game will play on a Playstation 2. This means that PS2 is BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE. Windows 8 is backwards compatible with Windows 7.

How do I know this? I've been developing Windows 8 apps (for Microsoft) since October of last year.

Who's the moron?

Sorry to burst your bubble but any app that runs on Windows 7 will also run on Windows 8. It's totally backwards compatible.

I mean, I know it's the fashion to bag Apple now they're the biggest company in the world, but I thought it was common knowledge that virtually all big companies do everything they can to avoid taxes. In fact, I don't see how it's much different from pretty much every individual in the USA trying to pay as little tax as possible either. If an accountant said, "Oh hi there, I can help you avoid $3000 bucks in taxes and it's all legal" what would you say, no?

Ok so here my two cents as an engineer currently building a Windows 8 game. I've been using Windows 8 since DP4. I.e. Developer Preview 4. Currently I'm using DP6, which is the latest build since the Consumer Preview (CP) was released. I have gotten used to the Metro interface and use it as an app search and launchpad. Basically I see the whole Windows 8 thing as basically a faster, cleaner, sparklier Windows 7 with a revised Start Menu. It's clear some optimizations have been under the hood to make the OS load faster, run faster, and in generally be more efficient.

As far as the Metro interface goes, it's fine. I use it with both my touchscreen monitor and mouse and keyboard. It doesn't make my day to day job any easier or harder, it's just different. Also, keep in mind that as a primarily back-end dev, I need to use all of the more advanced features of Windows and so far haven't found my experience to be any worse than Win 7. The only bad thing right now is the massive buggy mess that is Visual Studio 11.

Win 8 is basically Win 7 with bells on. You can pin Non-Metro apps to the start screen and the app/settings search is fast. I use the start screen merely through my keyboard. Hit Windows key, start typing app-name, hit enter. That's it. As far as Metro apps go, I don't really use any except the game I'm working on,,, which rocks.. ;)