LOL indeed! Did you know that when your ancestors were still throwing their shit out the window every morning into the gutter, and took a bath maybe one or two times a year, the Muslim world (much of which is black, incidentally) had sewer systems and the closest thing to modern medicine available at the time? Yeah, I bet you didn't. History seems highly unlikely to be your strong point.
Photovoltaics are incredibly inefficient. I don't know how much energy they're losing in the glass, but it's probably not 70%-80%.
Also, photovoltaics and batteries are expensive. A lens (doesn't have to be a really good lens) and some glass fibers is probably cheaper. That matters a *lot* for the uses they're envisioning.
Not actually true (you don't really know that much about MIC on Windows, do you?) Standard user processes, including non-sandboxed browsers, run at Medium IL. Admin processes, including services, run at High IL. Medium IL is just as incapable of attaching to a High IL process as Low is to Medium.
Vista or greater; Mandatory Integrity Control was introduced with NT 6.0, not 6.1 (better known as Win7). IE7 on Vista was the first browser to use the Low Integrity Level sandbox.
By default, Low IL actually does allow reading much of the file system and registry. It just can't do anything to any of it.
For what it's worth, you can *kind of* get the same benefit on XP by running a browser as a very-low-rights user. That causes no end of problems for some use cases (like downloading files), though.
Too bad there's more than 10 programs I use regularly (I currently have 18 on my taskbar, and there are many others that I'm not using at the moment). You can extend that system to use letters and such, of course, but then you're in a crappy position when you switch to new programs and need to re-learn those mappings.
Besides, search works for a lot more than just programs. You can find Control Panel items (even link directly to ones that would otherwise take multiple clicks, like "prox" for the system proxy settings) and files (which will open in their default associated program) as well. You can also hold Ctrl+Shift when hitting Enter to launch a program as Admin (very handy with, for example, CMD).
Oh, by the way, Win+[number row item] as a chord will open the taskbar icon (active or pinned) corresponding to that number. For example, on my system, Win+4 launches Powershell. Ctrl+Win+4 opens the most recent powershell if you have more than one, or a new one if you don't have any (this also works with the mouse, Ctrl+Click-on-taskbar-icon to open the most recently used instance if you have multiple instances running). Shift+Win+4 opens a new Powershell, even if I already have one open (this also works with the mouse). Ctrl+Shift+Win+4 will launch a new Powershell as Admin (again, works with mouse) whether I have any currently running or not.
Really? Wow, lame. I knew it was open source because it's been ported to Windows RT (requires jailbreak, of course), but taking it closed source is BS. Ah, well, the open version will live on anyhow.
No, you're right about the Surface Pro. It's an x64 (Core i5 to be specific) tablet which runs Windows 8[.1] Pro.
For Microsoft's *intended* use case (where you use the Store to get apps, simultaneously limiting your exposure to malware, having one place you can find the tools you need for your tasks, and giving MS a cut of every "purchase" [in quotes because DRM]), the Surface and Surface Pro do generally run the same applications. There are very few apps available (on the Store) for x86 but not for ARM, because generally speaking, it's either no effort at all (managed code) or a simple drop-down change in Visual Studio followed by a recompile.
VLC is the odd one out here, because it's native code but isn't compiled using Visual Studio (well, except for the UI). GCC can't target Windows RT yet, so at the moment they can't compile VLC for that platform.
"Metro" is (was?) a lot more than just being full-screen. There's integration with the task switcher, support for snapping windows side-by-side, support for notifications, and so on. Making all that stuff work on something that wasn't written from the ground up to be a "Windows Store app" is hard. Chrome does it, but Google has a lot more resources than Mozilla.
Some particular reason you chose to spend money instead of getting the free and open-source Classic Start Menu (from Classic Shell)? Seems kind of silly.
Anyhow, I happen to think you're an idiot if you can't use the same UI (and by far the most productive one) that's been present in Windows since Vista, namely "hit Start (or the Windows key), type a few letters of the program name, hit Enter". It's faster than any mouse-driven interaction and doesn't require manually finding anything in cascading menus *or* scrolling screens of tiles. But that's just, like, my opinion, man...
You are (very) mistaken. WinRT (Windows RunTime) is an API set, a platform for running what Microsoft has (at various times) called "Metro", "Modern", "Immersive", and "Windows Store" apps. While you can make a full-screen touch-friendly UI without using WinRT, you need to use WinRT to integrate with the other "app" stuff that Win8.x does (the new task switcher, the sandboxing, the snapping, the automatic suspension in the background, etc.). To be fair, Firefox probably wasn't really trying to do that (the sandbox part, in particular, would be Really Good for them to have but would be a lot of work) so I expect it was more like what Chrome is doing, where they tack some Win32 UI functions onto their otherwise-traditional browser.
Windows RT, on the other hand, is completely different from WinRT. It can run WinRT apps, but saying they're the same thing would be like saying that Linux and the JVM are the same thing. Well, aside from the fact that those are made by different companies and don't have idiotically similar names... To the best of my knowledge, there was no real effort to port Firefox to Windows RT. I've tried doing that port myself (as a desktop application for jailbroken RT systems, not as a "Metro"/WinRT app) and it would be a tremendous amount of work.
Let's see... Well, the obvious counterpoint to your argument is that PayPal *did* succeed. I happen to hate what it's become (all the abuses of banks, plus a few others, but even less regulation), but back when Musk was starting it up the idea was pretty revolutionary. Even further back, though, there's his startup Zip2, which was sold for over $340 million back in 99.
Since then, his *three* companies (people always forget SolarCity...) all seem to be doing fine. SpaceX has huge contracts, Tesla can't manufacture fast enough to keep up with demand, and SolarCity is one of the top installers of photovoltaic panels in the USA. Sure, they *could* fail, but so could IBM or Google or Coca-Cola. None of them are *likely* to, though. In fact, in the last decade Tesla is just about the only US-based car company that hasn't gone bankrupt...
As for whether the NJ law is aimed at Tesla, you'd have to be a worse nutjob than you claim Musk is to not see it. Let's see, a proposed bill that prohibits a car sales model which happens to be used by exactly one company in the world, right as that company is getting hugely successful? Yeah, there's no evidence at all that this is aimed squarely at Tesla... </SARCASM>
Some people think still using 12-year-old OSes is a good idea.
"And having used Apple's AutoEngineStarterCrank, it's one of the slickest ways to start your car. Sure, early Apple cars required you to turn the crank by hand, but these days you just get out, plug the AutoEngineStartCrank into the front of the car, and it does the work for you!"
As "no crapware", somebody hasn't looked very closely at the Apple drivers... Feature-crippled and riddled with security vulnerabilities compared to the standard ones that Apple often keeps just barely incompatible with their otherwise-standard hardware. Report the latter problem and Apple might fix it in the version of BootCamp for the next OS X release. Unless that's any time soon, in which case you'll have to wait for the version after that. In my more cynical moments, I figure it's because Apple has a vested interest in making Windows appear insecure, so long as it can't easily be traced back to their hardware or software being the problem.
Seriously crappy drivers, mind you (I've found trivial EoP-to-kernel-from standard-user bugs in them), but at least they exist...
The "Metro" version is also free. The non-free apps are scams.
"WinRT" != "Windows RT". This is even discussed in the linked article (yeah, yeah).
Microsoft's branding people should be lined up along a wall, beaten with baseball bats, shot, and then pitched out a fifth-story window onto rusted spikes. OK, maybe that's excessive. There's no need to waste the bullets.
WinRT is an API set, intended for use with "Windows Store apps" (a.k.a. "Metro" or "Modern" apps). It is intended to be sandbox-friendly (for example, having functions to let the user pick a file via a trusted, out-of-process component), battery-friendly (apps are notified when no longer in the foreground, and by default suspend themselves), touch-friendly (you can do the UI in a number of ways, but the standard ways use the "Metro" paradigm with big, swipe-able screens), and responsive (the default behavior is for anything which is likely to block for a while - such as accessing network resources - to be moved of the UI thread). WinRT is usable on x86, x64, and ARM. You can code for it in C++,
Windows RT is an operating system, an edition of Windows 8 (or now of Windows 8.1) compiled for ARM processors. Aside from the target architecture and a feature set somewhere between the normal and Pro x86 editions (it includes some stuff like BitLocker that the normal edition didn't have at least in 8.0, but is otherwise not very Pro-ish), and the removal of a bunch of legacy compatibility stuff, it's very much a straightforward port. The main difference from a user's perspective is that in RT, Windows enforces signature validation on all binaries loaded outside of an app sandbox, preventing third-party "desktop" programs from running. RT 8.0 was "jailbroken" to remove this restriction; it's just a kernel-mode flag that if changed, reverts the OS to basically just another Win8 platform. Windows RT can run Windows Store apps just fine, so long as they're written in an architecture-independent language (JS, or anything on the
VLC is being ported to Windows RT as we speak. The port to the WinRT platform means they just need to re-compile it for RT (ARM). Unfortunately, while this should be simple, VLC doesn't currently compile under MSVC and GCC doesn't know how to target Windows RT. The VLC team is tackling both of these problems; fixing either one will let them proceed with the port. (Personally, I hope they fix the latter one; there's a lot of open-source software we could port to jailbroken RT except that it only compiles under GCC and GCC doesn't know how to target Win32/THUMB-2 yet.)