There is a checkbox in System Prefs to turn it off. Or if you control click on the app and select open it will launch (and white list for future launches).

It is really so people don't double click an app that has an icon that looks like a MP3. Or maybe they won't launch what looks like PhotoShop, but isn't. If it gets enough adoption from 3rd parties I can see it being a huge help to the average user. If it gets low adoption it'll be more useful for folks that really know what is going on.

I think C's originators (or at least the still living one) changed his mind about some of them. From looking at the go language which targets the same programming niche some of these things have been addressed.

The semicolons are implied in most places now (as a side effect it enforces a brace style many people dislike, but happens to be my preference -- so even though I'm happy with C's semicolons this is a borderline positive change for me).

Declaration syntax has been made "more sane", which isn't surprising, and by the time K&R wrote the C book they had already started regretting it (one of the assignments was to parse C declarations into "english", look at what the authors wrote about it).

Go revamped switch (and a lot of the control flow operators).

Some of those changes might just be because computers have gotten a wee bit faster in the last 25 years or so, what constituted a great tradeoff on a computer with a 64K (split I+D) address space and maybe 512K max RAM a clock cycles measured in a few Mhz (oh, and these were multi user computers) is a wee bit different from what makes a good tradeoff now. (semicolons I think wind up here)

Some are likely to be a change they would still have made on the original system. (most of the control flow changes wind up here, likely variable decl too)

Sure, I admit there are similarities. Both are giant greedy companies. Both gobble up competitors, and when they are prevented form that they both launch competing products. I view Google's "Don't be Evil" lip service as about as transparent and self serving as the 1990's and 2000's era MS open source lip service.

On the other hand Google's own products are fairly decent. MS's are largely crap. Most times when MS buys a company the "adopted" products go rapidly to crap. Google's "adopted" products tend to trundle along for a while. MS was a creditable platform vender and most of the assaults on other companies were against those that built on top of MS's own infrastructure. Google has only made one Android related purchase that I can recall. Maybe that is an area ripe for future abuse, but for the moment they have not had their own "it ain't done 'till Word Perfect won't run" moment.

If Google is the new MS, then at least the trains run on time. (most days) It ain't much, but at least it is something.

CA is a mighty big place, and I haven't traveled all that much of it. However I do happen to have phones on ATT's 3G network that can act as hotspots, and USB networking devices for VZW and Sprint. I don't have T-Moble because the coverage map looked like it wasn't really useful. I also have an RV, and have left "major city areas" quite a bit. I don't currently have any 4G networking gear (unless you count all the 3G stuff the ITU reclassified, in which case I have 4G but no LTE).

In my experience there is a lot of coastline that has no service from anyone. There are some inland areas where hills or mountains block signal from everyone. Some places I can get ATT but not VZW. Some places I can get VZW and not ATT. Around the coast it was pretty even. In land VZW seems to have a little bit of an edge, but not a lot. Many places I could get VZW and/or ATT but not Sprint. I can't recall any places I could get Sprint but neither ATT or VZW, but looking at coverage maps there might be such places, I've just never attempted to get signal there. However there is no substitute for actually testing in your location. Everyone has said VZW has the best coverage for years, but for years my house had no VZW service, while it did have spotty ATT service (recently VZW started serving the area, and also around the same time ATT's service picked up a lot as well)

Most places where I could get ATT and VZW 3G the ATT was faster. Sometimes it was even faster if the device showed "fewer bars".

The "reasonable best option" I would see is to get one device on ATT and one on VZW, and ignore the rest. My VZW device came form http://www.millenicom.com/ I don't know if they still sell them or not. They use to have a $50/month plan for 10G. It looked like a no-contract plan, but the way it was set up when you stop paying the monthly fee they want the device back or hit you with a big disconnect fee (and they charge for the device up front), however even so it was still a bit cheaper then other VZW data devices, just not by as much as it first looked. Things may have changed since then, so look around, but make sure you give them a peek. My ATT device is an iPhone (was a 3GS, then a 4, now a 4S...my wife and I take turns getting a new one each year). Another option is the new iPad, they have large up front costs, but a month by month plan (no fee to cancel, no fee to restart). From what I have read on the net only the VZW one currently supports hotspot sharing, ATT still hasn't gotten their ducks in a row there. Depending on what you want to do with the internet you might be just fine only having access on the iPad anyway though.

I have no data for Nevada. Last time I was in Arizona I didn't have a VZW device, but ATT seemed fine pretty much everywhere.

Don't sue youtube. That would be under the ToS. Sue the party that claims to have reviewed the audio and decided you are infringing their copyright. That sounds like a lie that damages your reputation. In other words libel (or slander, I forget which is the written form).

I'm not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV, but this seems like the kind of thing you could take to small claims court for say $1000 or so and win.

Of corse you would be better off with a lawyer, but I don't see how you could sue for enough to actually pay the lawyer. If you have access to a free half hour consult or something you could ask a real lawyer, they might have a different opinion.

I expect that this new developer will underestimate the work load, miss deadlines, go over budget, not document anything and possibly even quit before the project ends.

I was the new guy once. I underestimated the workload, but "the new guy" tends to have a fair bit of free time, and a willingness to use it for work. So that didn't hurt anyone (except myself). I didn't have any budget, so I didn't go over it (unless you count hardware, and I stayed under budget there). I didn't miss many deadlines, fewer then many senior engineers. I didn't quit during any major projects. However I sure didn't document squat. I made vast complex systems and left behind only a sketch of how to operate it, and nothing on how the internal bits were lashed together.

To whomever became my maintenance engineer after I left, I'm sure sorry. Hope you lived.

I believe that allowing a senior developer to learn new skills on the clock or even be sent to company paid training is a big moral booster and makes the guys job more interesting too.

I bet it would be. The only place I worked at that did even a little of that basically just sent us to a few classes (or hired some really interesting folks to come teach), but that was less then a week a year. It was more morale building then useful to the company. For example you can't teach software guys much of use about VHDL in a week. Sure it can be interesting to them, but not very useful to the company.

Actually I'm wrong, come to think of it, the place I'm at currently has a "mostly once a week" hour long "class" on something, maybe a new technology, or maybe some API that has been around for a while that someone thinks more people ought to know about. It is nice, but for almost every topic it is really only enough to give you an idea that if you hit a problem with a specific shape that you should go look into the FOO API, or the BAR language, and do some real research in how to apply it. Seriously, how much OpenCL (for example) do you think anyone can teach or learn in an hour?

Every place I've worked has really just expected the senior folks to learn new things on their own time (with maybe a few pointers). Largely we did.

the new grad knew a hot emerging technology that a client wanted.

Did the senior engineer know the technology? Sure the technology may not have existed when they were hired, but for a senior engineer to deserve the title they learn or invent new technologies. If the senior engineer did know the technology, or could pick it up before the new hire becomes productive (i.e. learns company procedures and enough politics to operate effectively), then the new hire isn't worth the extra cash. If the senior engineer doesn't know the new technology and can't pick it up fast enough, then the new guy deserves more. At least until the senior engineer catches up.

NOTE: I don't mean to imply a senior engineer knows all new technologies, nor that they can alway guess what might be important to their company. Just that they can and do keep up to date on things, and sure sometimes a new library or language they missed or dismissed as "no better then this other thing I already know" becomes more important then they had guessed, but they ought to be able to pick it up. For example prior to the iPhone becoming popular it might have been reasonable to not know any Obj-C. Someone coming out of collage might know Obj-C, but a senior engineer with knowledge of C and any sort of smalltalk style OO language should be able to pick up Obj-C really fast. Likely fast enough that they are able to make real programs while the new guy is still learning the ins and outs of the bug tracking system, and who to listen to and who to ignore in meetings.

My personal pet theory is yes it really does matter. For a long time doubling every 18 months was the arbitrary goal, and Intel could say "if we don't hit X by Y then AMD will overtake us because they double every 18 months", and AMD could say "If we don't hit X by Y then Intel will smash us because they double every 18 months". So each poured whatever they needed into R&D to make it more or less happen. Sometimes one got more ahead then the other and got to roll in the hay for a while (or be unable to fill all the market demand).

If Moore's law wasn't sitting their prodding them to double or die every 18 months my guess is they would have sat there and gone "Will they REALLY invest $12.6 billion dollars on a new fab? That seems stupid, I bet they will try to get by with a 10% bump from a new microarchicture, so we should aim for 15%". We would have seen a LOT more severely lopsided product matchups, but overall I'm guessing slower growth.

Not that it matters so much now since they don't seem to be able to keep up with doubling processing capability (unless your problem set is very parallel...and even so Amdahl's Law will get them sooner or later -- add as many CPUs as you like, at some point there is a non-parallel part of your problem space and that part's performance will dominate, even with an infinite number of CPUs).

So then why do they not just have a line-in jack?

A dock connector gets you line level output which needs less fiddling to get acceptable results from. I'll also bet there are far more people with a iPod dock connector on their iPod/iPhone then there are folks that walk around with a 3.5mm male-male cable.

However I think a 3.5mm line-in would be a good thing to have in addition to a dock connector.

The threat meter is arguably much more "necessary". I need to know, in real time, during the fight, if I'm about to pull aggro.

The default UI can be told to make a sound and flash the edges of the screen when you get "close" to pulling aggro (90% or so I think). Not at all perfect, but will do in a pinch. The tank is more in need of an addon, as nothing tells them when someone else is getting close (as far as I know).

So instead of clicking on a player's name in the raid frame and then hitting 1 for a flash heal or 2 for a shield

I use to use grid+clique for that, but with a minor change you don't need addons:

Macro: /cast [@mouseover] flash heal

Macro: /cast [@mouseover] shield

Put flash on the 1, the shield on 2. Mouse over whoever needs that flash and press 1. No "click then press". It works nicely (you can also even set it up to use target or self if there is no mouseover).

I've discarded clique. I still use grid as it can be configured to display a LOT more information in a small space then the built in unit frames, and just as importantly it can be configured NOT to display information you don't care about.

To cite an example, Anub'Arak phase 3

Stock raid unit frames group by party (5 players) within the raid, put one healer per party and have them heal their group. Doable with stock unit frames. (You could also "cheat" and put groups of five in the same vent channel and have them yell out to their healer, that'll work for a whole lot of things)

I prefer grid, configured to stick a big center icon on for the debuf, but that is a preference, not a requirement.

I'm sure that you can raid "fine" at a low level with a vanilla client, and perhaps even certain high-level roles can be done with the stock interface. But in general, you absolutely need the conveniences that raiding mods provide for high-level raiding.

Sure tanks and healers have a harder time in raids without mods then dps, but you can raid ICC without mods as any of the roles.

Well, I'm not sure I believe any of that, but I can see a reason automakers might be down of diesels if they had the chance... a diesel engine tends to last way longer then gas engines, and it is to the advantage of car companies.

That said, conspiracy theories are fun to think about, but the real reasons behind stuff tend to be more complex and less fun to BS about.

The argument that you can take 30 books on an electronic reader just doesn't wash with me. This reading is for enjoyment, and I would rather savor my joy one book at a time. If I am not reading it, it is because the story has lost my interest and I no longer want that book with me no matter what the source.

Ok, how about some related arguments:

• In a space/weight limited situation (like living in an RV) you might not be able to have more then a half dozen paper books, or at the very least you would have to decide what else not to own.
• A regular house still has limited space. In an apartment it could be hard to have more then one or two bookcases. The basement of my house had about 10 or so.

That won't apply so much if you only ever read the same half dozen books, or if you never reread books. (personally the last trip I took it was nice to have a fair number of books to choose from but only have to budget space for them...however for me it the bigger value is always having a book with me, bank lines, restaurants and such -- I have read more books per month since starting on ebooks, and I've been a big reader all my life)

Just my preference though

Thats cool. Some folks like paperbacks and some like hardbacks. I happen to like ebooks.