You can still make things narrower (or overlap) to fit side by side, you can't fix height cropping.

If you make things too narrow, they crop or wrap annoyingly. Things like code especially suffer, as if you get narrower than 80 characters it becomes almost unreadable.

Personally, my viewpoint on "you can't fix height cropping" is that in some ways the fact that text scrolls naturally vertically almost makes it better to crop that way. If I had to choose vertical cropping (within reason, e.g. the difference between 4:3 and 16:9) or horizontal cropping, I'd choose vertical in an instant and never regret it.

So you take a measurement that you claim is dumb because it means something different on different monitors, and suggest a replacement that.... is equally dumb and means something equally different on different monitors?

You suggest height probably because you consider height the most important monitor measure (along with many /.'ers). But this isn't the only viewpoint, by far.

I'm willing to accept many ways, but not every way.

For entertainment, wider is significantly better except for splitscreen multiplayer. There's almost always much more important things happening along the horizon line roughly

For work, I'd take a 16:9 display in which I could comfortably put two programs side-by-side over a 4:3 display in which I could not, and I'd do it without hesitation.

Mmmmm, Slashcode. The pinnacle of Internet message board software.

I would guess it's the controlled nature of a transplant.

From TFA:
But Canaveroâ(TM)s proposal is different: By cutting spinal cords with an ultra-sharp knife, and then mechanically connecting the spinal cord from one personâ(TM)s head with another personâ(TM)s body, a more complete (and immediate) connection could be accomplished. As he notes in his paper:

âoeIt is this âoeclean cutâ [which is] the key to spinal cord fusion, in that it allows proximally severed axons to be âfusedâ(TM) with their distal counterparts. This fusion exploits so-called fusogens/sealantsâ¦.[which] are able to immediately reconstitute (fuse/repair) cell membranes damaged by mechanical injury, independent of any known endogenous sealing mechanism.â

What I don't know is why they couldn't do the same thing for spinal cord injury patients, just cutting out the injured part.

I'm not sure why this was modded troll.

If you want to argue that boot viruses are likely to ever be much of a problem, that's fine. If you want to argue that secure boot is the wrong solution, that's also fine. Both would be an interesting discussion.

But saying "it's not currently a problem so MS shouldn't do anything about it"? That's dumb, and what I was trying to call out.

Then you can use the methods other people have said. I didn't say that it works in every case (someone else has complained about the requirement of having a Windows key), but it covers almost all cases.

Also, just in the off chance that you don't know this and be helpful, apparently you can set remote desktop so that it will always forward the Windows key to the remote host. (See the "alternatively, ..." bit here.) Again, not saying this is better or worse; you may or may not like it.

What you should do is remap Caps Lock to act as the Windows key

Blasphemy! Caps lock is meant to be ctrl!

I suppose you could put mod4/super on the ctrl key, then ctrl on caps. Actually, that's probably what I'd do if I had to deal with a 101-key keyboard.

I don't really care what you want to use to type, but I get irked when I see people (not you, just used your comment as a jumping off point) who scoff at the Windows key and (apparently) everything it stands for.

I know it's irrational, but me too. If anything, I find the windows key (mod4 or super if you prefer) more useful on Linux than I do on Windows, because window managers are so configurable. To me, it is great: window manager functions get the Windows key, which means (1) I only need one key to perform window manager functions* and (2) there's basically no chance I'll mess with a program's shortcuts, which isn't the case for ctrl-<whatever> or alt-<whatever> (or even ctrl-alt-<whatever> some of the time). I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if I use the windows key more than I use alt.

* I use a tiling WM, so I may do a lot more keyboard-based window manager actions than is typical.

A Model M-type keyboard isn't for me for a number of reasons, but I really really feel that people who stick with them are making a huge mistake. There are other mechanical keyboards with windows keys if you want one...

I can't believe that no one has mentioned that Win-R brings up the run dialog, like it always has.

But boot virii/malware are not very common anyway.

And of course the way to respond to a potential threat is to do nothing until it's common, then scramble to find a half-assed solution.

They have already been doing it for nearly 2 decades, there are no infrastructure or upkeep costs at this point that would be substantially diminished by removing XP support.

Says someone who hasn't even written software, apparently. Even if nothing else, dropping a configuration removes a bunch of testing costs.

However, it's even more. When Vista was released, Microsoft made a bunch of changes to the driver model -- basically the API that drivers are programmed against -- usually to move stuff from kernel mode to user mode. (This increases system stability.) Vista through 8 (I think) all use this driver model. Supporting XP as well means writing and maintaining XP-specific code for its driver model.

I don't know anywhere near enough about this to say that it costs 2% more or 20% more or 50% more. But to say that "it costs these companies zero dollars" means that you clearly have zero knowledge about what you're talking about.

That's ridiculous, in fact.

I would say that a reasonable measure is (or you could argue is) the time at which it was superseded by a new version. But that's still Jan. 2007, so almost 6 1/2 years ago. Even Windows 7 is almost 4 years since release.

That only counts as one.

Ummm, yeah. Microsoft is going to stop releasing security patches for the OS. If you're still running XP, using older video drivers should be the least of your concerns.