Not exactly:
Vega: 1.5 t (LEO)
Falcon 9: 8.5-9 t (LEO)
Ariane 5: 16-21 t (LEO)
Falcon 9: 3.4 t (GTO)
Ariane 5: 6.2-10.5 t (GTO)
Completely different rocket classes, hence completely different prices.

That link is about the still non-existent Falcon 9 v1.1, that's why I'm very dubious: it's just trash talking, smoke and mirrors. They said the Falcon 1 would have been the first reusable and cheap launch system, it wasn't; then it was the time of Falcon 5, it was never built; then NASA came to the rescue and fully funded Falcon 9, neither this time it was reusable, however they say Falcon 9 v1.1 will be: I'll believe it when I see it.

Just to point out, according to the original sheets the planned launch cost for Falcon 9 was $35-55 m for 8.5-9 t (2007), in 2010 it was already $50-56 m, now it's "under $60 million".

So being generous, i.e. SpaceX 2010 prices vs. PSLV 2012 prices:
Falcon 9 v1.0 | 8.5t-9.0t | $56 million | 6.22-7 million $/t
PSLV | 3.25 t | $17 million | 5.23 million $/t
Russian and Ukrainian launches are still cheaper. I don't know about Chinese launches, but I'd bet their cheaper as well...

What has win9x to do with Windows 2000?

Sources? Because India's PSLV has a flyaway cost of 17 million $ per launch and Russian launch vehicles are even cheaper. SpaceX said they were developing a reusable launch system, but until now they haven't.

Comparing apples to oranges, Ariane 5 is designed for heavier payloads. We could say that Vega (which in turn is designed for light payloads) is much cheaper than Falcon 9 (~41 million $ vs. ~60 million $).

My Sony cd/dvd player dvp-s535d still works and I bought it 12 years ago.

Secunia: "the most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Microsoft Windows 7, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Highly critical". Kudos to MS for making (some of us believe they made) a secure OS.

The article is about the most common vulnerabilities on "pc's with kaspersky software installed": it is not about most secure software. This report just says that many people, who use kaspersky, do not keep updated their java and flash. Secunia rates the unpatched vulnerabilities of Windows 7 as highly critical. It's just that big companies (the most likely customers of kaspersky) don't use W7 as much as Java.

What about Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, South Vietnam (R.I.P.), Singapore?

Are you kidding, trolling or are you just misinformed? Windowmaker dockapps could retrieve weather infos from remotely accessed sources ten years ago at the least, there were/are dozens of email dockapp, there are dockapps that notify when a website updates and there are even web radio dockapps. Perhaps the 2004 patent granted to surfcast is invalid, for sure the 2011 patent granted to MS is invalid and I hope that this litigation could invalidate it (at least a 2004 patent expires before a 2011 patent).

Dunno, I used dockapps on windowmaker well before they granted the patent to Microsoft.

PC gaming is not gaining anything, it's just shrinking less. Console gaming revenues crumbled in the last two years, pc gaming revenues just shrunk. I'm talking about revenues, because that's what matter to companies, especially when they have to choose between developing for the new generation of consoles or for personal computers.

Neither there is scientific evidence that a wall will crumble or that an electric plant will cause an electric shock when engineers deny qualifications to buildings. Neither there is scientific evidence that you will be eaten by a shark if you dive into the sea of Tasmania, though there could be a "SHARKS no swimming" sign nearby. It's a matter of reasonable risks, often codified with technical rules, norms and laws.
There was an earthquake swarm going on for months when they said there weren't risks. In many Italian towns you cannot drive trucks, and oftentimes even cars, to the center of the city because vehicles produced vibrations can damage old buildings (and that's true), yet after months of strong vibrations they just reassured the population without considering a check-up of the many old buildings of the area, nor of the important buildings (e.g. hospitals, offices) that should work 100% in case of disasters.

If I, as an engineer, certify that a plant is safe when it may be not, I can be jailed. I can't see why the same can't apply to this case.

Don't amass millions of quasi-slaves then.

Given the fact that Einstein never defined "quite childish" the Bible like TFA asserts, you may have a point.