if successful it could make his tenure less secure. That is, from the CEO's perspective it is better to jettison a potentially successful project for which he will garner no credit and could potentially make his efforts seem weak in comparison. Too bad corporate ethics are never enforced, where only the top dog's needs are now met.

Only if they measure up to the minimum published standards, otherwise, not.

Perceptions play a major role, hence, to claim victory base upon the public's mass use of ubiquitous of Linux variants hidden in devices will not be perceived as a victorious. That is, when that Public is blissfully ignorant. Moreover, with ready cash in hand and hired help in all fields these victories could so easily be overturned. Premature claims of victory lead to humiliation.

I would suggest several tags be added to this story alone with arrogance and hubris. out-of-touch, unreality, ...

HP not being a software powerhouse with years of success can at best seem to imply it might drop Windows on its PCs. That is, if it is not given a cash gift from some outside benefactor.

Even if it does not work it has lost nothing by allowing sales of its OS on a small fraction of the PCs it still sells, i.e. to those that do not insist on having those must have MS applications and games that run only on its OS. So, at worse, for MS it is bled a bit more than it might otherwise, however, if they buy off HP their cash flow from one of their few cash cows has been lessened.

For HP the risks are minimal either way, if their OS sells into the corporate market they lessen the clout of MS. Or if they are bought off, they never promised anything to their customers other than a tablet and some phones. However, their cash flow is enhanced or they can undersell some of the competition. Either way they gain.

You speak from experience, I would presume, or is it that you wish to monopolize all the pleasure for yourself and your ilk? However, from your description you are well versed in the techniques of extreme S&M, in that case I will gladly give it a pass.

will wipe the Taliban out. Capitalism at Work, i.e. Cost Efficient Bribery.

They are doomed I tell you.

Fine, but do you numbers include the necessary infrastructure costs (plus maintenance) of electrical distribution? Moreover, what of the skills required to safely and temporarily store radio active waste, which we still cannot deal with effectively in the so-called developed world? Local or distributed sources of power might appear less efficient from a global perspective, however, too often that view is skewed towards not including real, long term costs. Plus Uranium will become increasingly expensive were it used everywhere, as you suggest.

Please recalculate with more care. Also throw in the talent to build and maintain these power stations and clean up afterwards when they are obsolete.

I aborted my run in the former instance, because the measurement saw only a high burst speed that immediate degraded to piddling one, well below the supposed high rate being advertised. Little different this time, register and run with no real point to communicate. I will fore go this opportunity to help buttress spurious statistics in support of the status quo.

For example, Comcast has an initial burst speed in the range of 20 - 16 megabits per second. However, all to soon one passes a modestly set download quantity and the rate drops to its usual mediocre levels. I suspect, based upon my experience running a test, this fictional rate is seen as the base rate offered and published as such.

On one route through my town, we have computerized stop lights. However, I have noticed that with heavy traffic on the main route and build up on the cross streets, once stopped the traffic flow at the next light is effectively halted. Thus, without excessive speed most traffic signals thereafter will be red and effectively kill traffic flow on the main route through town.

I have to drive the route early when traffic is building, but not yet at a maximum density. In order to beat the waiting reds, I drive below (or nearly so) the posted speed limit. Moreover, my final approach to signals I use even lower speeds to have some momentum when the signal changes. Does not always work, but lessens the need to start from first gear at every light. However, sometimes I have no trouble at all flying through most lights unhindered, usually the mornings, but not all days.