Yes, but like many others here this misses the point of this particular "experiment" - this wasn't about which group of players had better twitch skills (where the keyboard/mouse combo does have an advantage) but simply about which platform had more team oriented players.

The reward was for performing team actions. Like stand next to comrade, press one key or controller button to give them a medkit. There were nearly twice as many console players as PC players yet the PC players raked in the achievements so much faster.

The implication has nothing to do with the FPS twitch skills of console gamers vs PC users but all to do with the difference in attitudes.

My initial thoughts would be that a PC user is more likely to be older, possibly with a job that involves responsibility or teamwork since a gaming PC is usually a bigger investment than a console. This translates into players who are more used to working together to achieve long-term aims vs. the instant gratification approach of potentially more selfish console players. As ever, this is a gross generalisation of course.

The .org thing was both silly and annoying but there's a reason. Shortly after becoming OpenOffice, they found out that there was already a pre-existing product with the same name. A few legal minutes later, and they decided to add the .org, deeming this small modification to the existing name would be less disruptive than renaming the entire project - product, website and marketing materials.

Whether they made the right choice is moot now though!

One of the key points of CSS is the ability to override/disable styles on the client side.

You want that site in plain text? Turn off CSS altogether. Instead of embedding fonts tags, italics, background images and so on in the HTML, it's all removed to the CSS file. Makes the HTML more useful as raw information. Makes it easier to make seepintg changes to the layout of a whole site (change one shared CSS file and voila!) and allows users to override the sites style and layout anyway they choose.

CSS makes it easier to get at the raw information and makes it easier to manage the style and layout of entire websites. If IE played nicely with the spec, then I'd be happy as pie.

Ah, much as I'm disinclined to rush to Apple's defense, they didn't "leave out" multitasking. Full pre-emptive multitasking is part of the Darwin kernel already. What Apple did was deliberately spend effort modifying the API to *hide* this capability. They made a conscious choice to not allow third party apps to multitaks, believing that this would result in a better user expierience. Tru multitasking is only available to the core OS - such as playing music in the background and the various daemons that monitor and control the phone hardware.

Whether you agree or not is another matter. But that's also why the new "multitasking" features are still not true preemptive multitasking.

Unfortunately, if you're serious about boycotting a company then that means avoiding the good as well as the bad. If you say "I'll never but from Sony again. Except this eReader" then you're not really serious about boycotting.

I agree - their e-Readers are great devices and I'd be very happy to own one but, like the grandparent, I've been burnt and put off by the antics of other parts of the company to ever hand them any of my hard earned money again.

It's not just the rendering model though. A lot of these crappy intranet products use custom ActiveX components that simply will not work with IE7 or above - sometimes due to architectural changes, other times due to security blocks (ActiveX Killbits). IE 8 already has a "Compatability mode" for rendering but this is not enough.

ActiveX. Because running arbitrary non-sandboxed code direct from websites is a Good Idea!(tm)

Uerghhh....

Ahh, sorry - you've lost me. There was only ever one Matrix movie.

Don't cross the stre^H^H^H^H pacmen!

If you have a friend on hand (or some serious ambidextrous skills....) click "Inser Coin" twice and use the WASD keys to control MsPacman!

I remember seeing a post from one of the devs on the WoW forums (can't seem to find it atm) - they basically said that although they have no intention to create Linux native ports at this time they do acknowledge that a proportion of their fans like to run their games on a Linux based OS. So they try to keep their software Wine friendly/OS agnostic where they can. That and their codebase is probably already port-friendly by having to support OS X and Windows simultaneously as mentioned above seems to keep their software running with little to no trouble on WINE.

I suspect we'll see the same for Source games. Even more likeley we already have - they've been developing a Mac version for sometime so it's safe to assume that the Windows version already benefits from similair OS agnostic design considerations, D3D reliance asside.

Yes, but once you have that list of results you're wide open to snooping again - those URLs you visit can be snooped the same way a Google search string can be.

The rest of the web is as as open and interceptable as a plain Google search. Far better to do your dodgy web activities from an anonymous location or via something like Tor.

In either case, this is a site that's piggybacking on another company's services for free. Google haven't deliberately blocked them and whatever my personal opinion of the company may be, they are under no obligation to check if their updates break these kinds of sites.

Performance on it's own isn't meaningful for everyone. If I'm setting up a server or better yet a data center, performance against cost has to be considered. And that's not just the cost of the hardware but also things like MTBF and power costs.

I'm not implying that one is better than the other here, but a raw performance comparisson between like-for-like processors is not enough information to make spending decsion with. It may be better value to buy the system with poor performance and spend the savings elsewhere for example.

Don't Google offer an appliance for in-house use? Basically a rack mount server - plug in, config and away you go. Get the benefit of a web-based office suite with none of the security and legal concerns.

Of course that implies that you have full control over the server - I've never worked with one so I can't say if that's so.

If the market was fair and the populace well informed. People don't choose Flash - they have Flash thrust upon them.

I'll also add this in response to the grandparent:

At no point did they say they want to make non-commercial infringement *legal*. They want to de-criminalise it. Most countries in the world draw a line between criminal acts and civil violations. I fully agree that sharing files for personal use should not result in jail time, that police time and effort should not be spent safeguarding movies and music.
However if someone wants to bring forward a civil suit against someone who's been filling their shelves with torrented music and video then fine. I may have that wrong but that's how I interpreted that (although in some nations civil lawsuits are way out of control as well).

All in all I find their aims reasonable, acheiveable and good for society - and not particularly detrimental to honest business either.