Did a few searches on Bing, searched for various linux topics, including Ubuntu; Windows vs Linux; etc; and the results seem pretty unbiased.

...and have Developers! coming out of my arse?

No thanks. Besides, Ubuntu is already brown and it installs from USB just fine. :D

http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/saturday.png

That's quite a mouthful.

With jokes like that, you must really be strapped for cash ;)

I don't need text to speech, infact I hate it, I jsut have trouble with small text and blaring white screens with dark text.

If the device is about 1kg (2.2lbs?) then it'd be perfect.

I agree with the input you mentioned, esp with netbooks and tiny keys. One solution would be speech recognition, and maybe an oldschool trackerball for the mouse.

But for me personally, a 12" screen is sweet. Just hope it's not heavy.

I'm legally blind, so this is something I've been waiting for, for ages.

If I can stick Ubuntu, or anything with a customizable UI on, with a browser / pdf reader that lets me put large, white text on a black background.. surf and read ebooks.. I'm sold.

This is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Was this designed by a Concerned Parent (TM) or a dominatrix?

You make a valid point (as well as the others who replied to my comment above). Even though my religious upbringing did a lat of harm to me as a child and teenager, I still tend to feel that things should be discussed objectively.

My parents were a bit pushy with their religious teachings, when I grew up I realised (to me) it was all nonsense, so I guess when people that are religious or ahtiest talk with a fanatical or pushy tone of voice I immediately shy away from listening.

I admire Dawkins contribution to the world, as an atheist I feel what one believes or considers as truth should be logical and provable.

Even though I find the existence of any god completely bunk, I can understand why people believe in . Perhaps I'm too diplomatic, I just feel when debating something, one should strive to win the argument by facts and logic in a calm, rational manner than with force.

And yes, I know what I just said opens up a lot of retorts about religious people not having/using logic/real proof to prove anything. :)

I think a good summary of my feelings is the old forum-ettiquette of "don't attack the poster, attack his point of view", Dawkins sometimes steps over that line.

Perhaps, I just find that when people push their ideas onto me I reject them even more, so I think some of his methods would be ignored by religious folk just because of his method.

I admire his works and his point of view, but I find a lot of the time he can be callously disrespectful and religiously athiest. I'm an athiest myself but I find his pushy nature to be a bit much soemtimes.

I feel the way he handles some questions and situations doesn't help his cause.

Yeah, they should have given you a very finite amount of VATS points, or allow you to earn them and have slow motion replays ONLY for critical hits.

VATS was OK, but it lacked all the features RPGs usually have, like special moves, weapon combos, or anything meaningful. The only remarkable feature in VATS, aside from the lovely slow motion gore fests was the chance to target the foe's gun, or even better, a grenade.

The AI in Fear 2 was terrible! Well, if it was good, I didn't notice because it was so god damned easy to play that it was more a case of "Hi, *slomo* bye." .. firefights were so short that if there was amazing AI under the hood, I completely missed it.

On the parts where I didn't use slowmo, again, nothing remarkable, and I'm not exactly an amazing FPS player either.