When I read in the summary that Unity was now a "beautiful swan", I clicked on the link, hoping to get a review of why this is the case. Instead, I get a long summary of the biggest new features in the latest version. Not very convincing.

Not only that, but I would like to add that I do not think personally that the few books I have read from project Gutenberg are suitable for educational use... I don't want to slap the project Gutenberg, I like what they do, but the few books I got from their website (mostly French literature) were shock full of spelling mistakes, probably caused by faults in OCR recognition. Maybe schools could run classes where students would have to fix a few chapters during their semester and give back the output of their work to the project (after revision by the teacher, of course).

Patent litigation.

I am not presuming that people are idiots, please read my post again if you think so. I am just pointing out that
- not everybody is interested in computers all that much (and there is nothing wrong with that, there's lots of things I'm not interested in either), so giving the ability to create virtual machines or encryption is not very helpful for most people
- the features which the OP suggests should be part of the basic Windows installation are not, in their current form, all that useful to increase security. The virtual machine makes it so that the end-user now has to remember to update not only his computer, but also the virtual machines that it runs. Running the browser in a VM will do someone little good if the VM is compromised and he types his credit card number in the browser window which is inside of it. As for encryption, chances are higher that the end-user will suffer some data loss because of it than to avoid getting his computer compromised.

TLDR: Your post is mostly orthogonal to what I wrote. I said that VMs and encryption (in their current form, shipped with Windows) are not useful as security features for most people, and none of what you said answers that, sorry. And I didn't say people are idiots.

I can agree with that, although I have to say that I don't know of any other OS which does this either. But then, Windows appears to be the only OS which really needs this...

Either you're trolling or you are vastly overestimating the general public computer abilities. Do you really expect Joe six-pack to setup a virtual machine to run his browser in? Even if he has a knowledgeable friend who sets this up for him, now try to explain to him why he can't apply a wallpaper he downloads or install a game without copying it from the virtual machine to is computer (which, by the way, defeats to large extent the usefulness of the virtual machine in the first place)? As for encryption, I'm not really sure of how it protects a computer from viruses and random malware, but I do know that it makes it much more difficult to recover data in case of hardware failure, sometimes impossible if the encryption depended on some certificate which had to be backed up (which wasn't done, because the user didn't know about it). You can argue that Microsoft should offer a simpler line of products, but I don't think those features are particularly useful in regards to security for the general public.

Yes, I agree that it looks interesting. I just hate it when someone repeats the same thing again and again in a discussion, when it's not in every discussion he goes. I'm fine with discussing the merits of LLVM, this looks like the appropriate place for it. I just don't want to read the same discussion four or five times because one person ignores what has been said on the topic and just repeats his original message.

Are you an Apple shill in your spare time?

I'm trying to read this thread, and I have to put up with your repetitive posts about how great clang is. Why don't you read some of the replies to your crap? They do a good job of debunking your claims. I have mod points, but I just hate moderating people down, even if they waste my time repeating unfounded assertions (also known as bullshit).

Yeah right, I'm sure he didn't mind spending nearly 50 thousand dollars to defend himself from something which most people would not consider to be a crime! As for the defense bit, you will have to elaborate, because it is meaningless. Are you saying Canada gives a public defender more easily? Last I heard, you need to be dirt poor to get one, just like in the US, notwithstanding the fact that the accused is not even a citizen of Canada.

You're saying your company switched to Google Docs because of the new ribbon interface in MS Office? I have no particular like for the new interface, but I mean, Word and Excel contain nearly all the functionality of Google Docs in the first tab of their respective application... I can't access Google Docs right now, so I can't test this, but last I remember, copying and pasting data from a Google spreadsheet to another document was painful. Finally, the interface is sometimes slow enough to be annoying, especially for things like sorts. I do not mean to call you dishonest, but I just don't see how it would be possible to be more productive with the Google Docs interface unless you mean to argue that the lack of options and limited power of the tools available makes someone more productive. There sure are valid options for choosing Google Docs over MS Office, such as versioning out of the box, easy sharing and collaboration features, no need for backups, etc, but increased productivity because of a superior user interface? Not so much (or as least it seems to me).