...Microsoft seems to think they need to release a new OS to stay competitive....
I think it is more that Microsoft thinks they need to release a new OS to keep the revenue flowing towards Redmond. Remember the Microsoft Upgrade Treadmill of yore? That business strategy is so engrained in Microsoft that they do not know any other way of convincing consumers to buy Microsoft products.
Microsoft is still living in the past world where Microsoft controlled computing. First and foremost, Microsoft needs to learn how to compete in the marketplace by convincing consumers that Microsoft products are worth buying.
I'd argue that using windows is easier for most people than it is using Linux....
Why is Microsoft afraid of allowing the marketplace to decide?
2) it did not take into account the costs associated with the malware distributed by the various ad platforms.
... runs windows 8 just fine....
That was not the point of my message. I was not commenting upon how well the hardware runs a bad OS. But I do give you props for the attempted diversion of the topic. (a typical Microsoft astroturfing tactic)
Windows 8[.1] was the point of my message.
If your family loves Windows 8[.1], great.
However, the marketspace has overwhelmingly decided that Windows 8[.1] is junk.
Why would anyone think that governments would show the least bit of hesitation to brick smartphones under similar circumstances?
... Instead of working on stupidity like Australis, which pretty much all Firefox users hate, they could fix the memory leaks and improve the performance. A restoration of the old UI, which was really efficient and easy to use, could very well make this new browser a winner again....
Pale Moon will continue to use the well-known fully customizable user interface, and will not be following Mozilla's move to the "Australis" user interface (by a number of people dubbed "FireChrome" because of its likeness with Google's Chrome browser interface) introduced in Firefox 29.
With the advent of Australis, an even clearer choice was made to not follow the Mozilla Corporation's direction in their attempts to create a "one size fits all" user interface from mobile phone to HD desktop. There is no such thing, and to attempt it is folly, in my opinion. For Pale Moon, there is also no reason to attempt "brand unity over operating system unity" (meaning an attempt to make the browser look the same regardless of operating system it is used on), and Pale Moon rather aims for "operating system unity over brand unity" (meaning an as high level of visual operating system integration as possible to provide a familiar, well-intergrated user interface).
on thing slashdotters have never learned to pick up on is PR.
This whole article is PR by Microsoft to spread the message that "IE is much improved". By encapsulating the message in a seeming criticism, people are lulled into joining the discussion.
On the contrary, PR postings are usually quickly noticed as such.
But this one is so blatant that I went along with the premise so that I cold give my opinions....
Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer with Windows, and tied it closely into the heart of Windows in order to get around the anti-trust legalities that Microsoft was facing.
Now Microsoft is paying for the error of those trust-avoiding legal tactics because internet Explorer is tied so deeply inside Windows that I have to reboot my computer when the Internet Explorer application is updated.