A relatively short life, in modern terms, but one full of activity. Rest in peace, Steve.

I agree, rushes and cheese are perfectly legitimate strategies. Supremely annoying, but legitimate. :-)

Well, to be fair there's a lot more to SC2 than just build-orders. :-) Build orders are mainly concerned with the "macro" aspect of SC2 gameplay, which is base management and economy, and they're also relevant only in the opening. Everything past the 7 or 8-minute mark is beyond build orders. Good micro (unit-level manipulation of movement and actions), harassment of workers, and timed expansions all kick in after that point, and those become the difference between winning a game and losing a game.

Also, there is an element of "good practices" in SC2. Rushes, especially "all-in" rushes (referred to by TFA) are generally considered bad practice. Beating your opponent every time is cool, but this is usually indicative of a game imbalance that Blizzard will probably patch at some point down the line, at which point you'll rapidly fall in the leagues as you lose to high-level players clued in on countering that or who simply have the good practices to beat it (like early scouting, etc.).

The other (more important) factor is that a gamer specializing in an all-in rush deteriorates his/her gameplay, because he won't have the variety to compensate for a failure of that rush. A rush usually means a sacrifice of something or the other (the tight game-mechanics of an SC2 opening means there's always an opportunity cost; to get that extra army, your economy suffers, or to get those extra resource-collectors, your army will be smaller). All-in rushes, and rushes in general sacrifice some thing or the other which a good opponent can exploit if he/she manages to push back the rush. Someone over-playing one tactic will lack the skills to compensate for its failure, so varying one's game by mastering different build-orders and plays is the better way to do this (if slower).

This fork includes enchantments to many of the built-in apps [...]

Enchantments? iOS doesn't have that. Android rules.

This is a stupid, flamebait, troll's topic. "iOS and OS X will merge, THEREFORE... all apps will be solely distributed by Apple in a walled garden."

Where's the logical connection there? How do you get from one to another? Why not conclude that since iOS and OS X will merge, the app distribution model will completely open up like on OS X? Mac OS X doesn't even have an activation key, for goodness sake. Apple is the patron of many an open source project, including WebKit which is the most prolific rendering engine on mobile devices. No, no, the geek outrage on /. is reserved for the App Store.

If anything, Apple has shown itself to be responsive to the market. From opening up the SDK, to multitasking, to a host of other issues, they wear their ignorance on their sleeve and they have shown themselves to be responsive, and when the market speaks, Apple will, I believe, listen.

If it doesn't, it will fade away into obscurity like many tech companies before it. Sheesh.

This topic (and most of the ensuing Apple-hating group think on slashdot) is sheer bullshit. I got karma to burn, make my day.

I agree with you on that but it's during these times that Muslims least want to be identified as such. Muslims watch the same news you do and we have a pretty good idea what's going through the average person's mind. And it's not your fault either, that's the admission: if I was not a Muslim I'd be pretty mad at Muslims too (in fact even as a Muslim I'm fairly annoyed).

And so the moderates are kind of, I feel from personal experience, in limbo. Now is the worst possible time I can imagine to have to admit being even remotely associated with people I deeply disagree with and, in fact, have very little in common with.

It's really a weird spot to be in. They're a half a world away, I disagree with them (and honestly kind of dislike them), but somehow I need to dissociate myself from them.

It's an unenviable position to be in for any reasonable person, Muslim or not. All reasonable dialogue is drowned out by shouts of exclusion from both sides. The best time to talk is usually after the full-throated yelling has ended, and is best demonstrated by actions rather than words.

These things really set back that long term, grassroots dialogue back. Depressing.

And even if I am offended (which I reserve the right to be), I don't think any of this should be happening (i.e., censorship). There has been defamatory material on the prophet for centuries, and in fact were around even during his time. This is nothing new; anyone as prominent as him had to have grown pretty thick skin to get anything done.

His followers 14 centuries on, however, can't seem to follow in his footsteps even half as much as they claim they do.

Every time something like this comes up, I try to dig a hole and disappear best I can. Yet another dysfunctional government like Bangladesh or Pakistan come up with a way to do their magical rabble-rousing and distract from the real issues at hand: economic development, education, and healthcare. All of which they are failing *miserably* at.

This is all *political*. Almost all Muslims (both in the "West" and in the "East") have no beef with anyone or anything, and just want to go ahead living their lives. These idiots in government, who can't even ensure their citizens get basic utilities like garbage collection and electricity, are spending their energy on some drawings, which is perverse on multiple levels.

The minority here is basically speaking for the majority. And honestly... the majority (like me) are looking to dig their own holes as well. We don't want to stick our heads out because we don't want the confrontation. This isn't something we particularly care about. I honest to goodness don't want to argue about the merits and demerits of my faith with some of the slashdotters on here, who are convinced that Muslims "don't belong."

But someone's gotta say it. Most of us are not like this. Most of us just want to get on with our lives. Please don't let the vocal minority dominate the debate. This is political distraction tactics and has little or nothing to do with free speech, Facebook, or the prophet.

Oh, really?! I was waiting for Snow Leopard so I could make the jump from Tiger in one go, and then it sounded like you couldn't do that!

Are you sure this is possible? Because their marketing certainly seems to strongly *suggest* that it's not. They're saying, and I quote:

Snow Leopard Upgrade Requirements

Snow Leopard requires an Intel-based Mac. Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard users, buy the upgrade. Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger users, buy the Mac Box Set.

Find out which upgrade is right for you.

Mac OS X v10.5 (Leopard): Upgrade your Mac by purchasing Mac OS X Snow Leopard.

Mac OS X v10.4 (Tiger): Upgrade by purchasing the Mac Box Set, which includes Snow Leopard, iLife â(TM)09, and iWork â(TM)09.

I'm thinking, "what would Apple do," and it might be possible they'll block upgrades from v10.4, so I might have to back up all my data, clear my hard-drive and do a clean install.

What's your take on that?

And I'm not doing this just because I'm cheap, but because I already purchased iWork '09, and I don't want to pay for it again.

Mod parent up.

This survey means absolutely nothing. It was taken before Microsoft announced a release date, and that means it's no longer relevant.

Considering that, the number is quite strong.

Windows 7 has a lot of mindshare as "Microsoft [finally] gets it right."

I don't mind burning some karma here, but you gotta call it like you see it.