Nope, you've proven you're a typical moronic American who thinks there's a difference between the "blue team" and the "red team".
This is exactly it, in my opinion. Democrat voters are idiots who will back anything their Dear Leader Obama does, even when it was something they were bitching about during Bush's reign.
And Republican voters are just as stupid. They're now bitching about things that they were perfectly OK with when Bush was doing them, but now that Obama is doing them, they're up in arms.
This is because the crowd you hang out with is not representative of mainstream America. These polls are important because they show what the majority of Americans think about things, and those people are who vote for our leaders. Your little peer group does not have sole power to choose our governmental leaders.
What this shows can be argued different ways. Are young people these days generally more conservative than older people? (seems unlikely) Or is it because they're aligned with the Democratic Party, and since that party is currently in power in the Executive Branch, and their Dear Leader is all in favor of NSA spying, they too are in favor of it? Personally I think it's the latter. Americans are really stupid politically, and simply choose a "team" and then mindlessly back anything that team does. If Obama came out in favor of tax breaks for the rich and against abortion, Democrat voters would adopt those positions immediately, while if the Republican Party suddenly came out in favor of gay marriage and abortion rights and extremely progressive taxation (i.e. rich people would be taxed much more heavily), Republican voters would immediately adopt those positions too.
I wonder how much of this is a lack of decent alternatives which are well-marketed, versus simple cultlike behavior.
Think about it: if you want a PC-like computer, what are your choices? There's Apple which is well-marketed and attractive and shiny (but has downsides which aren't as obvious unless you're really familiar with the industry), there's Microsoft-driven PCs where you have to use shitty Windows and deal with all its annoyances, and there's Linux where there's pretty much no one actually pre-installing it and marketing it to consumers (plus there's a ton of different graphical environments, and the two most publicized ones are radical departures from Windows/Mac and have a lot of usability issues, and the one which is a great fit for Windows converts is simply ignored by the Linux community for some reason).
Maybe if there were another company making PCs with an attractive, stable OS which was very usable and could market it decently, we'd be seeing more people abandoning Apple.
This analysis of course is for PCs, not mobile devices. But over there the situation isn't much better; there's Android which has huge marketshare but still you have to deal with a complete lack of support after you buy the device, and then there's Windows Phone which is tainted by everyone's memory of Windows and MS problems. But still, Apple has lost a lot of marketshare in the phone market (though some of that is simply due to the market expanding, and Apple not aiming at the lower end).
That's not even the biggest problem with Google and Android; the biggest problem is the complete lack of support Android devices get after they're a few months old, which makes them security nightmares. Cyanogen promises to fix that, but it's only going to work if they have better device coverage than they have now.
That makes no sense at all. Cyanogen is a bit player; how many people do you know who are running it? (If you do know any, exclude all the tech-heads and answer again.) MS doesn't care about destroying something that's barely larger than a hobby project.
MS *does* care about hurting Google and improving the marketshare for Windows Phone, or somehow improving their own presence in the mobile arena. So any actions here are going to be towards that end.
Perhaps they see any move to help Cyanogen as something which will help destabilize Android in general. Or, more likely, they see it as something that can use to get a big foothold into the Android space, and then use it to take it over from Google. Embrace, extend, extinguish.
There's also code besides the driver code; the Broadcom chips themselves have CPU cores (not sure what kind exactly) running their own firmware, which of course is loaded by the driver. This code is completely closed-source and secret. (The driver code is partially open; you can see their open-source Linux code in the kernel tree; it's "brcmfmac" and "brcmsmac")
I wonder if Apple's recent updates updated the firmware blobs for the Broadcom chips? This could also explain the problems.
I've worked with the Broadcom driver source code; it's crap. It doesn't surprise me they're having problems. What's funny is (now that I think about it and remember this from a prior job) Apple is easily Broadcom's biggest wifi customer; you'd think they could do a better job with their software for them, but apparently not.
I wonder if these are Broadcom chips, with the driver code actually being supplied by Broadcom. Broadcom drivers are shit.
I thought everyone liked the 3rd one the best of all the Prequels. I haven't seen it myself yet, but every single time I complain about the Prequels to someone and then I mention that I haven't seen the 3rd, they say that I missed the best one.
Well that's the whole problem: democracy is subject to the voters, so if the voters are blithering idiots, well you're not going to get a very good government.
This is why democracy simply doesn't work in countries with moronic, uneducated populaces such as Zimbabwe, Egypt, or the United States.
I always thought Pascal was better for most purposes than C and its offspring.
Ok, has anyone ever written an OS kernel in Pascal? How about bare-metal code which tweaks registers?
Nope, Beta was not far, far superior. You're totally forgetting that Betas could only store 1 hour of video. (They later fixed this, but by then it was far too late.) Who wants to change tapes in the middle of a movie? VHS tapes could store a whole 2-hour movie, so they easily took over. Not having Sony's stupid licensing costs helped too. And by the time Beta was on the way out, VHS had caught up to it video-quality-wise too.
But there are a number of times where explicit copy/paste is much nicer.
I don't know what DE you're using, but in KDE, both modes work, and they go into different buffers. So if you feel the need to do the explicit copy/paste with Ctrl-C/V, it works fine, and you can even highlight something else afterwards, then paste the two separately with middle-click and Ctrl-V.
No, having one buffer is not better in any way. It's stupid in fact. Better is KDE's Klipper, which keeps a history for this buffer and lets me choose things I previously highlighted or copied.
Yes. For people who use real computers, middle button = "paste selected text".
Yep, that's exactly what I use it for too. I make very frequent use of this function.
However, I have no problem just pressing on my mouse's scroll wheel to do this. I'm using a Dell laser mouse I picked up on Ebay for $6 and it works just fine this way. My previous Logitech G5 worked fine this way too (unfortunately I had to stop using it because the laser part stopped working for some reason).