Is that why businesses use Internet Explorer?

I spent $35 to get crossover office so I can run Word on Linux with not no trouble, and it's not even virtualized. Not to mention if I didn't need/want such a robust word processor open office comes preinstalled, and is fully compatible with word formats.

When I forced all the computers in my office to use Firefox (not long after they put me in IT), I changed the Firefox theme to look like IE on my bosses computer and she still doesn't know the difference. If someone is stupid enough to use IE6 they should fall for that (but good luck finding an IE6 theme for Firefox).

It would make a competent system administrator's job harder, by screwing with things that shouldn't be messed without their knowledge, and possibly cause problems that are very difficult to correct. While an incompetent system administrator will use the tool as one more way to ignore their job.

I know people who'd have an easier time learning Japanese than C++, does that mean we should write computer code in English? The same thing applies to science. Non-technical science isn't science, so when scientists publish something for each other to read, they publish it in their language. There are people who translate it back to English, such as teachers and writers, and those of us who don't have the background to compile science code in our minds need to find the binary version or learn the language of science, not complain we don't understand code.

The data is reviewed by people qualified to review the data; that's what peer reviewed journals are for.

Linux reads Excel files in open office, so .xls is pretty universal; one can also install crossover office or use wine to install office (though I don't know how well that works).

yum, rpm, sh and deb files are all Linux executables (depending what on what distro you use) and are all potentially dangerous. Mac is a much bigger target, but they don't even go after that. It's just easier to go after Windows because Windows provides the largest amount of infectable machines, and it's easier to write malware for it.

It's the top guys personal computers you're talking about, I'm talking about the computers in local campaign offices. They were all windows.

An orbital tether could transmit the energy back to earth, as well as allow us a cost effective way into orbit so we can build the Solar panels, and create space infrastructure.

Microsoft had Obama in their pocket a long time ago, all their campaign computers were running Windows. What do you expect? If his campaign had all Macs, now that's change I can believe in. ;) Unfortunately too many campaign staffers weren't tech savvy enough for them to make Linux the standard.

If other internet add companies want to be competitive they should stop making adds that drive people away from the sites they put adds on. Google's adds are tolerable, while most other adds are obnoxious, that's why google is doing so well.

Hit open blockable items in Adblock Plus right now; you'll see two adds blocked from Google on this page.

Google is built on small unobtrusive adds, if they let someone else put adds on their site it would wreck their business because the adds would be flashy, annoying, and drive viewers away.

except cookies, and malware like other internet advertisers do. So if they're a monopoly and they're keeping smaller outfits with infected banner outs out of the business, they're doing the internet a favour. If every other advertiser wasn't so pushy they drove customers away, they might be get some market share too. Let google have their monopoly until others can figure out what they do that consumers want.