Sorry, I pasted the wrong link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_orbital_launch_systems . The source for the Atlas V cost is a PDF with various data estimated by the FAA. For the PSLV there are multiple sources: http://www.space.com/1777-israel-chooses-indian-pslv-launch-spy-satellite.html , http://techie-buzz.com/science/isro-pslv-launch.html etc.

I'd like to have some reliable sources for that, because SpaceX said that the launch cost for a Falcon 9 was $35-55 million, than they revised it to $50-56 million, than they published the estimated launch cost ($54 million) for the still non-existent Falcon 9 v1.1 and stopped publishing the costs for the actual Falcon 9 v1.0. The only commercial launch so far was CRS-1: it's a Falcon 9 + Dragon mission that NASA paid approx. $133 million ($1.6 billion for 12 launches) and it carried just 15% of the advertised payload and it should be a discounted price (12 launches contract + secondary payload).

By the way, the launch cost for a Atlas V is $125 million, for a Russian Proton M (21 ton payload) $85 million, for an Indian PSLV (3 ton payload) $17 million, for an Ukrainian (3.7 ton) $14 million [1].

No, that's a link to all the open source software included in MacOSX, or are you telling me that Apple developed OpenAL, zlib and SQLite (among many others)? Not to mention that all that APSL software is GPL incompatible, DFSG incompatible and, ironically enough, BSD incompatible. Nice try though.

It's a deterrent: if none takes action they'll go on with these practices with something else (LCD, Plasma, Hard Disks... everything).

Ahem: "For comparison, the other free antivirus software, including Avast, AVG and Panda Cloud did". You know, there is not just the title.

Freiburg != Munich

The sanctions against South Africa had positive effects like devaluing the rand 17 times and so making diamonds much cheaper. Sanctions against Saudi Arabia on the other hand could rise the oil price.

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.