You can load your own screen savers on a Nook (on the e-ink ones, at least; I can't speak for the tablets). You just make a new directory in the folder that includes all the built-in screen savers, name the directory what you want your screen saver to be called, and load it with as many images as you like. The Nook will rotate through them.

TFA says "Management is clearly focused on salvaging Nook operations rather than trying to make a go of it with the stores" and "B&N's disastrous focus on making Nook e-Readers is weighing heavily on the chain's operations."

Did they not get the memo today that B&N is discontinuing its whole color tablet line and that future color devices will only be sold as co-branded products manufactured by other companies? You read that right, B&N is no longer going to manufacture any tablets. It's going to continue to produce e-ink devices, but that's it. That whole "cannibalizing itself with branded tablets" angle they're whinging about is a dead end, as of today.

Second, how is the fact that the Nook apps are cross-platform making B&N's stores irrelevant? If the Nook apps didn't exist, wouldn't it just be the Kindle apps that are making B&N stores irrelevant, and B&N would have no slice of the ebook pie whatsoever?

Also, let's maintain a little perspective here. B&N's total revenue from the Nook division in fiscal 2013 was $776 million. Its revenue from its retail division was $4.6 billion. Are we really expected to believe that B&N execs are actually ignoring the retail business in favor of Nook? That just sounds like some absurd, "activist investor" fantasy.

B&N is struggling, sure. But it faces fairly serious market challenges. It had no chance at competing with Amazon in the ebook market without making a serious investment in both hardware and software. Has it made some missteps? It seems so, but to say they'll be impossible to retreat from seems a little premature.

Have you considered that it might be your application crashing or freezing up that is causing the 503 errors? You'd better rule out that possibility before you look elsewhere, because if your company's lousy code is to blame then you'll likely have the same problems wherever you go.

I don't understand. I'm not a parser, but to my eye that means "assign." If you wanted to compare, you would do "if ($foo == 1 + $bar)", no?

Microsoft says the Xbox One can monitor your heartbeat using just the camera.

Performant is not a word.

Google Glass doesn't have lenses. You can attach lenses to act as sunglasses, or if you need prescription lenses, but most people will just wear the frames.

Strictly speaking, couldn't you use closed and restricted web servers to do what you need to do? And I mean, if you're actually considering implementing something using an alpha-quality Java module that was slapped together in a few days, why wouldn't you consider installing a SharePoint server and getting the full functionality of the Office Web Apps on your local network? If all your users needed to do was read documentation, they could get 100 percent fidelity that way.

But you'd like to get yourself mentioned on NetworkWorld.com or Slashdot? So ... you're vain and jealous?

How do you figure that one? The GPL grants users a limited license to the programmer's copyrighted works. That most definitely is a form of intellectual property protection. As for the socialistic part, that's a rather loaded term; still, it seems like you haven't read much from Stallman or the FSF.

Fair enough. To prove your theory, I propose we infect you with pneumonia and then have you swallow a quart of antibiotic soap. You'll be cured, right? Or, the reason you won't be cured is because too many people have been washing their hands with triclosan soap? Is that right? I propose this ludicrous test because you seem willing to move the goalposts at whim. You call it a biocide, I call it a an antimicrobial -- what's your point?

Furthermore, though you quoted a paragraph from some paper, I don't believe you understand a word of it. Prove me wrong. Why don't you assume we all have a tenth grade education and explain it to us? You're the expert.

You're scaring people. The study you cite only suggests that some microbes can develop resistance to antimicrobials. It does not suggest that there is any relationship between antimicrobials and antibiotics, which is what you seem to be suggesting. That's absolutely false.

Maybe, but that's not how it comes. It comes (optionally) with your tetanus booster. As a poster above mentioned, it's called a Tdap (so if you see that term, it's "tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis"). It's not two separate shots, it's one shot.

You've been told you need a tetanus booster every ten years since you were a child. Next time you go in for one, your doctor is likely to recommend a pertussis booster at the same time -- if he doesn't just give you it without telling you.

Actually, on a more serious note, TFA is not talking about antibiotics. The word used is antibacterial, which refers to things that can kill bacteria while not being harmful to humans. For more clarity, a better term would be antimicrobial soaps, because they can also work on a variety of other microbes. But there is no real relationship between these agents and the kinds of antibiotics that come in pills.

Why would you want to succumb to antibiotics? Or, if you had no resistance to them, why would you swallow them?