Definately not what most people want -- I certainly would hate that, too.

If you want it though, it's easy enough to enable: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/private-browsing-browse-web-without-saving-info#w_how-do-i-always-start-firefox-in-private-browsing

Tuesday

Even better, people said Google+ was a ghost town and dismissed in it its first week of being online. Well, gee, I wonder why there aren't millions of people using it as soon as it comes out.

Google+ gets plenty of activity for me.

XUL isn't the prettiest GUI API, I wouldn't necessarily say they got it "right". But there's a whole host of even more atrocious APIs (Win32 comes to mind), so there's that.

Sometimes handy for quickly testing a program, but installers pretty much remove the effort to figure out where to put programs, or that required to make shortcuts to them.

(FWIW, Firefox used to provide plain zip files for Windows for a long time on the FTP... iirc even 3.6.x releases had them. Though on looking, it appears it's only available via installer in recent days.)

Zoidberg made the list.

zero

Little bit too short of a topic because of restrictions, but basically: why is Mac OS X always considered undeniably a (near-)perfect UI or operating system in general?

I'm sorry, but this isn't just out of ignorance of never using a Mac -- I had started to use one, though not full time, a few months ago with version 10.7. What I saw is a land of horrible complexity even compared to Windows, much less Linux. IMO Linux has far outshined everything Mac OS X does:
1. The window management is stupid. As an example: Apple is allergic to secondary mouse buttons so you have to do things like click the titlebar followed by cmd- to switch it to another workspace; it's a non-intuitive gesture that makes no sense in any context other than pretending mice still have only a single button.
(minor bitching point: the shadows on OS X are grossly overdone. Makes Windows Vista look traditional and conservative in comparison)
2. No good package management. Linux blows OS X far out of the water here; there's no scurry around trying to figure out where things installed too, and Mac OS X carries a ton of dependency hell, seriously.
3. Open source apps don't usually have precompiled Mac OS X versions -- this one actually surprised me. You seem to be expected by most projects to compile it yourself, which is error-prone and doesn't often work. Compare to Linux distributions providing everything under the sun pre-compiled.
3a. Just as an extension, I never got Wine to work. I thought it would be easy enough, even the home page says "Run Windows applications on Linux, BSD, Solaris, and Mac OS X" -- of course that last one is the only one that doesn't come precompiled. It is easier to run Wine on Solaris than ****ing Mac OS X; something is seriously wrong there.
4. Docks blow. I always had the feeling of hatred towards docks based on Windows/Linux implementations. I had some small hope that maybe Apple did it right as the chanted mantra goes. Nope, in fact it was much worse than some of the others I've tried, and I hated those too. Give me a Win95-style task bar any day.

There are more points I could probably put out, but maybe I just failed to drink the Mac OS X koolaid like I was supposed to. Everything about the operating system seemed antithetical to actually using the computer. It felt like I wasn't actually expected to treat it like a computer and instead treat it like a dumb box to play music and movies from; fuck that noise, I can do that on Linux without compromising my desire to run applications and use sane window management.

((Obviously) a Lisp fan (as well))

Emacs at least has a sane excuse being 30 years old or so.

Chromium is just what, four or five years old? and it's already passing Emacs's version numbers.

bandcamp sells FLACs, and they're not the only ones. Want to run by how no online store sells FLACs, again?

But they did release it via Git which makes it trivial for anyone (including you!) to simply make a github repo for it.

Portability is a HUGE advantage to the VM architecture. Quake 3 has been ported to many OSes and CPU architectures that didn't even exist when the game first came around (or many of the mods). With the QVM, it's no problem to have a native Quake 3 port to Linux x86_64 and still run all the old mods without having to rebuild them. Additionally, ports to Android (Qauke 3 on ARM) also don't affect mod compatibility.

I think it's a huge step back that they regressed on the role of the VM in Doom 3.

use UUIDs and it can.

One of GRUB 2.00's features over the previous 1.99 release is support for GRUB Legacy configuration files. It's recommended that you upgrade to the newer format, but you don't absolutely need to.

Not again...