Not really only with startup only and windows doesn't arrange data effectively enough, nor linux does.

I've got 32 GB RAM on my desktop and I'm using green drives. It's terribly slow, always - when loading applications, when using virtualization etc. On both Linux and Windows. It's effective for some things (Read only and if it was read before), but not for everything.

For servers - it's even worse, some people bypass RAM and write data directly to the disk, reason - safety.

Yep, and flashcache (facebook).
But none of these are included in the kernel.

Picking up tiny SSD is not a solution for notebook or for the desktop - you need more ports, more money, more energy etc

That's correct. Non-fw cache will be more effective.
We don't know (yet), how WD drives work - will we see one whole block device or maybe it will have two SATA ports with two separate drives. I'm not sure they will support access to SSD to the some encapsulated stream.

There are Linux solutions like bcache and flashcache that can deal with cache. So, maybe it's time to use it and include into kernel?

CentOS is not a Fedora derivative, there's a huge difference. CentOS is just a rebuild of RHEL's src.rpm's. RedHat must provide sources for all the changes, but not binary packages, this is how CentOS is born, same with Scientific. Yellowdog is created for PPC arch use.

Mandrake is/was BASED on RedHat 5 (do not confuse with RHEL 5) and has nothing to do now with RHEL. It's a separate product which has it's own commercial way.

Suse was initially same as Slackware, but now it has nothing to do with Slack, and has absolutely different approach.

So, again, why should I have 100 derivative distros doing almost the same, instead of having two with remixes and subrepos?

Testing is for accepting into Stable, so, it's the same without major feature changes and some fixes: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/ch-ftparchives#s-frozen Unstable is more like development version, not the "Debian Fedora". If they're paying attention, if everything is fine, then why do we have aptosid in here? According to distrowatch, Debian has already spawned more than 120 derivatives (c) debian.org (!). RHEL/Fedora have 28, and most of them are very specific, like trixbox, clearos, Yellowdog, centos, scientific. There is a huge diversity in Debian and community is creating general use distros outside the Debian project. Why? Is it so hard to allow maintainers to deliver changes and add-ons via subprojects? At least two mainlines. I guess it's because of Ubuntu, and there we've got LTS. It's separatism and very closed approach, like Oracle is playing with MySQL.

It's a real torture. People are switching from one derivative distro to another, adding 3rd repositories, switching to testing repos etc. All this stuff brings more incompatibilities, decentralization and divides community forces.

Ubuntu is Ubuntu and there are LTS and short lifecycle versions of distros. it's not Debian at all.

Is it so hard for Debian to have two main distros like "Debian Stable" and "Debian Mainstream"? Everybody will be happy. I've heard another post-self-mortification words like "you know we've got 236272927 packages in here". Oh yes, it's scaring, you are using only 5% of these packages and 95% of users - about 15 I think... Who cares about the rest? Why are they so blind?

5 Amps is too much for the standard cable and will require safety considerations such as additional pins, available only on compatible thick cables.
I don't think it's a good idea having 5 amp connection. It's like a gently 1 KW barbecue grill and desperate housewife's desperate iron connected to the standard power outlet - it's unsafe: think about all the problems with overheating, contact problems and sparks.

Also, this standard can be implemented only on new desktops - none of the mobile computers will provide quality ports capable of such current and none of them will have additional 100 watts of power in reserve in case of use of battery and even for power supplies - their size will double.

How many devices, requiring such power have you ever seen? Monitor? Is 16-24 volts a good idea and enough?
I think better idea is to introduce 48V power in modern power supplies:
-> It will provide 100 watts of power using 2 Amp cables - smaller footprint and more safety
-> 48 Volts is a good option: this voltage is "standard" and used in many devices and you can easily get 24 from it, much easier than 48 from 24, it's efficient :)

Dunno, I think this USB guys are bringing new ideas and are not ready to finalize standard, yet...

Which will use two socket, will eat >200 watts and cost USD 1900? And later you will upgrade it to 10-core on same socket? :D
+100 USD and you will get 32 native cores and 64 threads on Opteron 6300.

Both GIMP and Inkscape are far far away from Adobe products. It's worth to pay extra USD 1K for application that will save your time, brain and achieve perfect results.
Unfortunately

FUCK YOU :))

It's not about needs, it's about possibilities and how it works. GSM network requires hard planning in coverage, it's radio part is crappy, has delays.

CDMA/TDMA is not encoding, it's way data is delivered to required phone.
GSM has not switched to CDMA method, GSM has timeslots. UMTS is not GSM. UMTS is based on CDMA entirely and has derived nothing from GSM.

GSM has not evolved at all, all it has done is PSK8 modulation.

What about quality, spectral efficiency, bandwidth?
I don't care about SIM card, if I'm switching from mobile operator to mobile operator - I still need to buy a card.

There is no 3G GSM. 3G is actually CDMA. Technologically there is nothing from classic GSM in there.

Actually not. It had sense when GSM phones were cheaper. Technologically it's much more complicated than CDMA and very crappy.