Sure, it'd be easy in a perfect world for the IRS to handle everything, but it'd require absolutely no unexpected deductions. The whole point of those deductions is (ostensibly) to make taxes more fair, so why should we encourage undermining that fairness?
The way it works where I live (small European country), sometime in March I get a letter with the number the tax office have been given, and a calculation of much I owe or are due. If all the numbers are correct, I do nothing, as doing nothing by May 1st is defined as accepting the numbers. If there are deductions missing, I log in to the tax authorities web site and add the missing numbers (can also be done on paper). It also lets me upload documentation in the form of scanned documents. If originals are required, they are sent by mail.
After the tax office have redone the tax, I will then get a new letter with the recalculated tax.
Pretty simple, and works nice. No taxes needed to change to accomodate the new system.
WIndows 2012 R2 Standard is the server version of Windows 8.1. Windows Server 2012 is the server version of Windows 8.
Windows 2012 (and 2012 R2) Datacenter is not a version, it is a licensing option for virtual environments. The Standard version contains all functionality. The price for the Standard version is $882 (list - two physical CPUs).
The design would need to go through several stages before it reaches the car. Changes in a part require changes in the parts production. Can one or two engineers engineer authorize that? Me thinks not.
And publishing the names of the engineers just show how spineless the management are.
I smell a scapegoat here.
Win 8? They'd have to pay me to use that.
I just pointed out that the price is not high for what you get. If you do not like it... well, there are still Linux. Lots of them.
However, the manufacturer of the equiment had a choice. A real choice.
So Microsoft did not (and have never had) a monopoly on the operating system in any market. This means the story we are discussing is a waste of time as a court case. Probably an interesting case for law students, though.
I have used it on both Windows Vista and 7 (Cool Edit 2000 and Cool Edit Pro - not available anymore).
So new sound drivers do not break the end user software.
Missing DRM support in the driver only means you cannot use protected media. Very little business software (pretty much none) use multimedia.
Having to replace the PC every 8-10 years is not that bad.
My main home computer is a 7 years old desktop which runs Win7 just fine, so I assume any PC not capable of running Win7/8 is close to 10 years old?
Then again, with an updated antivirus and being a little careful with the browsing, the risk is not really that high anyway.
Not the best way to spend money, but I guess some have no choice...
From the outset the arrangement was unethical because the government is renting software rather than owning it, which means having full rights to understand, maintain, and modify the source code
Unless they have a unique arrangement, the software is licensed for use, not rented. Also, if the covernment want it, they may have access to the source code. There have been (and I assume there are) programs for giving large customers access to the source code under NDA. Whether this would give them rights to modify the code is an issue, and even more of an issue is if the government are able to set up an entity which are competent to actually fix the code. Do you think they are? Because if they are not, then why have the code in the first place?
I'd be surprised if much has changed beyond the shell
There must be a reason why so much XP based software apparently does not work on Win 7/8?