Personally I rather liked the 8.1 way, which was kinda similar to how Android does things if you haven't set a preference yet - applications could cause a dialog to appear that showed them the available applications to do X and set one of them as the default.
I'd like Microsoft to change it back to that. Who knows, if we put enough pressure on them, rather than demand they stop beating their wives, they might do it.
I don't think so, browsers have always, until now, been able to set themselves as default, even back during the Netscape wars.
And they're not asserting ownership of your computer. What they've done is created a hamfisted (and biased towards Microsoft - yeah, I don't like it either) interface that replaces third parties modifying your computer with or without your consent. They had a better system in Windows 8.1, and should revert to that, but nonetheless, I don't actually like the idea of a browser being able to set itself up as default. I prefer myself to make that decision. Fortunately, the mainstream browsers have, until now, always at least asked for permission before changing the defaults, but that's not something they should have been allowed to do to begin with.
If we want this changed, we need to be a little less hyperbolic, because the issue here is that the new change isn't user friendly and is biased towards Microsoft, not ludicrous claims that Microsoft is taking control of your PC in some way it wasn't before. If you complain about the latter, expect your ticket to be closed with a "INVALID. Not actually a description of a real problem."
I don't think anything's changed about the degree to which IE or NewIE is part of the OS since Windows 7. What's changed is that browsers can't set themselves to be the default any more - the user has to do it explicitly in the system settings.
Personally, I thought the Windows 8.1 way of doing it was better. But I don't think this is as terrible a change as being suggested.
Feeling a little nostalgic at the moment, but also beginning to sense a serious part of why I feel like a dunce today when it comes to computing when once I felt like a genius.
Quick wall of text on the Nostalgia bit
I bought my iPod long before the iTMS was announced. The thing succeeded because it was easy to use, manage, and it could store your entire music collection (well, most people's entire music collection.) There were other MP3 players with one or two of those features, but not all three. The iPod needed to be a success for Apple to be able to sell the iTMS (the concept that is), to the music industry.
Electric cars I suspect could have the same selling point (well, minus the storage of all music. On the other hand, I don't know, you could put a big SSD in each one I guess) - part of the point is that this tremendously complex confusing device should be a hell of a lot easier to maintain and - until self driving becomes standard - drive.
That appears to be a Slashdot exclusive, I can't see anything online about the Kim Dotcom and Mega parting ways.
You know it's possible to be against both, right?
For example: the thread here is all about how big bad megacorps have been using sophistry to hide dangerous things on their labels.
And why did this come up? Because someone wanted a giant warning that a product may contain GMOs on every product this applies to.
That's a wacko position. Why is it wacko? Well, because it does nothing to help the problem they subsequently claim to want addressed, that labels are often misleading. It actually makes the label more misleading, by highlighting a non-essential fact, giving weight to it, and pretending it's something the buyer should be concerned about, while leaving the the manufacturers to continue to do whatever they want with the ingredient list.
GMOs that do not make significant changes to a product that would leave unusual chemicals in them are not dangerous. Their presence in a food product shouldn't be highlighted as something for a consumer to be concerned about. Doing so does not give the consumer more options, it confuses them and draws attention away from real health issues like sugars and potentially harmful fats.
Well, I think we are getting better at converting DC voltages, which is why HVDC is being used for transmission lines for example.
I suspect the reason is in part portable electronics. We're trying to eke out as much power as possible for multivoltage devices (one voltage for the processor, another for the screen, another for the HDD (portable electronics includes laptops too...) another for the USB bus, etc) from a single (DC it goes without saying) battery. The amount of R&D into the voltage conversion field over the last thirty years must have been extraordinary, yet not sexy enough to warrant much media coverage.
I'm pretty sure Firefox turned around and finished Firefox. *sigh*
Yes, those of us using CP/M on our VT102s can't just pipe everything through more "more" you insensitive clod!
Beta was unfinished, everyone knew that, so the grousing that somehow it was "clearly inferior" or would break Slashdot was completely misplaced. Slashdot made it clear from the start that this was being put out for feedback purposes, not because it was feature complete. They said it wasn't feature complete.