54,000,000.0 would be an accurate. 54 million processor hours is only accurate to 2 digits and could mathematically be between 53,500,000.000000000000000.........1 to 54,499,999.9999..........

Google paying you much? I'll agree to the update needing to restart the OS is ridiculous in my opinion too. There's no call for that. But other than that, the UX is not much different, performance is on par with Chrome or better, depending on the tests, and search... really? How on earth is search any different between the two since they both use Google? Unless you're talking search on your mac, in which case Spotlight is about as fast as you can go.

Egads - once a week shut down your computer? Mine runs for months... on an SSD... in what could be termed an "interesting" configuration.

I've got an Intel X25-M, 128 GB, running as a system disk. OS - OS X 10.6.8 currently, with hibernate file turned off (changed hibernate to be non disk persistent) which removes the writing of up to 24GB of RAM into the SSD on sleep. Page file is relatively innocuous, although I do swap occasionally. Users are on a HDD volume, as are some other frequently written files. My performance was more than I had hoped, and my next laptop will be setup similarly. Oh, and the SSD has been in non-stop operation and several OS SPs over the past 18 months.

Note that I'm using it mainly for low latency reads as a system disk, which changes seldom. Used for high write DBs? That's a recipe for door stops, and since they're so small, they don't do that well.

Because Safari generally works better on macs than Chrome, some people aren't comfortable with running a Google browser since they feel Google has enough tendrils in them already, and Firefox isn't a bad browser, I still use it occasionally for development. Firefox's major flaw (and Safari's too, Chrome fixes this by running each window/tab? in a separate process IIRC) is the single thread running the JS engine across all pages. One badly written JS script can lock up all windows and tabs. In Firefox it's worse because of the memory leaks that abound in the JS engine implementation. (Note: stopped using FF as main browser around the 4 release, so no idea what they've done since with the JS engine, it was supposed to be replaced) Safari has significantly fewer JS leak issues, and Chrome virtually none if you open new windows and close existing ones (or tabs, again, haven't researched this in depth). A good way to see how badly your browser's JS implementation leaked used to be to use the ebay auction countdown timer, and let it run to 0 and leave the page open (available in the last ten minutes or so of an auction) I believe they've fixed whatever the bug was that caused GB of swap page use over the course of a few hours after an auction ended.

IE 9+ maybe.... pre 9 I no longer bother for flashiness unless someone wants to pay. But, even then, since we're doing truly standards based development or utilizing supported toolsets on 99% of our websites anyways, we have very good odds of a large percentage of the website working all the way back to IE7, and the important workflows, i.e., ordering and purchasing, are tested thoroughly. That image flyover on hover, not so much.

but they call themselves true mormons.

Really? What skills? BASIC? MS BASIC sucked so bad they replaced it with GW Basic in MS DOS 3.x (3.3 came with GW Basic, don't recall if it was put in earlier than that). After that, I'm kinda hazy on what he may have worked on that required technical skills. Conning skills - definitely.