1% of false negatives is good, but how about false positives?
Ridiculous headline title.
And a great example of Betteridge's law of headlines.
Does not match my experience, I have 43 Linux games on Steam (mostly redeemed from Indie Bundles) and they all work fine, even on my Intel HD 4000. A quote from your "prime example",
The game runs under Linux and I bought it, but had I known it's Flash I would not have bought it...
seems to agree with my experience (not that I like flash, not that I like the status of flash on linux, but if it works, it works).
With ubuntu this has never been my experience. Instead it gets ignored and you get bothered every 5 months to a year being asked "does it work on the latest version"?
I've reported plenty of bugs to Launchpad. Sometimes bugs do get ignored, others get fixed immediately. It depends on the nature of the bug - Canonical isn't known for being a major developing force in the Linux kernel area, for example, but I reported a couple of bugs against the HUD feature a few months ago and they indeed got fixed, which involved going back to the design team and then to developers. They have a good workflow set up, but as a distribution with finite developing manpower they can't possibly fix everything. I wish Launchpad had automatic upstreaming for certain packages (especially those in Universe), but for packages in Main I can't complain.
Linux users (and that extends to most Free/Open Source software users) tend to have this annoying sense of entitlement that unnecessarily stresses relations with developers and turns everything into a flamewar. "Why doesn't MY bug get fixed?", ignoring how many OTHER bugs (likely of broader importance) get fixed, "Why don't you do this THIS way?", without bothering to consider that there might be an underlying design principle, or that your preferences represent those of a minority. My favourite is "That's it, I'm moving to Mint/back to Windows". Good riddance. Only in most cases they don't -- empty threats are a valid way of seeking attention, apparently.
Does normal seeking in the scrollbar work again (middle-click) ?
It indeed does.
Whose retard disabled seeking in a bar designed essentially to seek ?!
I don't know who the owner of the retard in question is, sorry.
Doesn't anyone test any more?
Having installed Ubuntu 10.04-12.04 on about 10 different machines I've never seen the problem you mention.
And no, despite years of C/C++ programming, I have absolutely no interest in finding and fixing the problem myself.
You could report a bug though, which would likely get fixed by the time you say you'll upgrade from 10.04.
Is there an obvious "make scroll bars not retarded" option I'm missing?
If only there was a tool to, like, search for stuff...
50% of people...
...are by definition below average intelligence.
True of the median, not of the mean. If you measure intelligence by IQ, which is designed so that the mean is 100 and the standard deviation is 15, it is perfectly possible that over 50% of the population scores above the mean. Or below it.
Nothing can go faster than C. Except Fortran, of course.
...and incorrectly applied in any case; 47 is less than twice 27.
What matters is how many places up or down you move.
...of how many total places there are - it's not the same to move down 20 positions out of 200 than 20 out of 21. Or equivalently, what % of the table you move (provided the table has not changed size due to countries being added/removed).
But this is a very subjective topic and even these more appropriate metrics conform a rather incomplete picture of the situation.
Damn, biologists get all the cool names. Dear physicists at the LHC, when you find a new particle please consider naming it "Pikachu boson", a.k.a. "Pikachon". Don't let biologists win this one.
Are you aware of what is in a Core Solo processor?
I thought the same when I read this piece of news yesterday. Journalists like to fill their sentences with words that sound appropriate to them: "[Newton's Law of] Gravity", "8.1 magnitude [in Richter's scale]"... and often they make mistakes.
Please remember, when you see 'haven' instead of 'heaven,' that English isn't everyone's first language.
Interestingly, the expression for "tax haven" in Spanish is "paraiso fiscal" (tax heaven), which I'm pretty sure was a mistranslation in the first place. Ok, ignore the "interestingly"..