I have an MSDN Universal account and have played with each version of Win 7. I do like it much better than Vista. In fact, I have never used Vista for production work. Win 7 is a nice clean update and I give three cheers to MS for that.

However it is not anything revolutionary. Drag and drop a video? I am sure that WMV will be preferred. As others stated, VLC could do this for a long time now.

The MAJOR thing that pissed me off and made me wipe Win 7 was when I put a DVD (a real one I bought) in to play. The output was just horrible! I thought my monitor was going bad. I fired up VLC and played the same DVD and wow, it looked like it should. I tried it again with Windows Media "player" and a standard resolution DVD looked like crap on my monitor. WTF? Fire up VLC again and it looks great.

I am sorry, but I don't want MS telling me I cannot watch a DVD I freaking bought and forcing me to watch it in crap-quality mode because I don't have a certain connection type to my monitor.

I will stick with Ununtu for everything and use my KVM switch to my WinXP box when I have to do C# stuff from home. The great thing is, is that MS cannot force you to dump WinXP. Just keep using it as long as you can. The admins at the fortune 500 I work for hated Vista and would not upgrade. I Guess a Win7 upgrade may come in a year or so. But as long as VS 2008 works on WinXP I am golden for another few years.

Bah! Forget torrents, too slow and too easy to get busted for uploading. Just use usenet. Try this Binsearch search

Can the 64-bit Fast File System support more than 4TB yet? FFS has been 64-bit for a long time, yet is still stuck at a 32-bit limit of only 4TB with a 2KB frag size.

Why only 2^31 fragment blocks with the 64-bit FFS? XFS is 64-bit and can support 9 exabytes.

If you can't even get a small record company (or small publisher, or SOMEONE with at least a little clout) to support your work, odds are there is a good reason for it.

Yes, because every author or musician should have to give up his copyright to some company, otherwise, you know, it must suck.

odds are there is a good reason for it

Maybe the new author doesn't want to have to give up his copyright just to be published? Maybe because old methods are dying and on-demand publishing will be important in the not-to-distant future?

Why do you think I also reversed it? I stated:

So I would try to switch to KDE from Gnome for a while, but found the same issue where I would have to pull in/use a Gnome/GTK+ based app.

;)

I think a good design with flexibility and extendability is far better than fragmentation/mutation/forking. Take a look at all the largest and most successful OSS projects. How many of them have fragmented and have successful mutations/forks?

Apache?
Python?
OO.org?
Perl?
Linux Kernel?
Etc.?

These all are successful because they have a good base design and are flexible and allow for a lot of extensions to add functionality.

Smaller projects may evolve better by mutations/forks, however for larger efforts, forking just kills things because now you have thinned out the pool of developers with the skills needed by the original large project.

...Linux and OSX which run on several different and totally alien architectures.

Linux and OS X run on x86 just like MS Windows. I doubt Google will be releasing a PPC build for Mac or any of a number of other architectures available on Linux.

I agree with you about IPC not being the easiest cross platform thing to do. However, it is not terribly hard if you follow POSIX and wrap for Win32. As pointed out there are already cross platform IPC libraries like Boost and D-Bus, etc.

Good point. However, I didn't see anything in TFA that said all operating systems were on one drive. Though it also did not say the contrary.

This is NOT a benchmark or any kind. It is a paid-for-MS-Win-7 advert.

Seriously, no real performance tester would grade results as 1,2,3. WTF?

As others pointed out the diff of performance between Vista and Win7 could have been %0.001. or something negligible.

The only thing I can think of is that this was given the olde "wink-wink" from MS to this "reporter".

Great reporting work there Lou!

Seriously. Good point. This was a small site with very few journalspace posters. Heck, you could probably backup and compress the entire DB to fit on a typical thumb drive.

Funny how they tried to shoot a point about the OS and said it could have been a "catastrophic failure". I didn't see mention of the DB system. Does anyone know what DB server was used? I still don't think that would be a point of failure because Oracle, SQL Server, MySQL and PostgreSQL all have VERY simple and reliable ways to backup.

This was simple a situation of journalspace hiring a "dba" that knew crap about being a real DBA. They probably paid some college kid $35K - $40K (with only MS Access experience) to be their "dba". Well, guess what you get!

I am a software dev and if I mentioned just using mirrored drives as our _only_ database backups, I would probably be tarred-and-feathered by our DBA's and for good reason (not that I would do such a stupid thing).

Well, that was actually very well said.

Never read it put that way brother, but, hell yeah. Thank you.

Yeah, getting caught taking a pee is the
same as molesting a girl.

Thanks. That darn decimal point gets me all the time.

I have a legal copy of Office 2003 (which kicks OpenOffice up and down the road so hard it's not funny)

Huh? Have you REALLY used OO.org 3.0+? I am sorry but MS Office 2003 doesn't have anything over OO.org 3 from a normal user standpoint.

In contrast it has many features the MS Office 2003 doe not. The biggest feature for me is being multi-platform. I get the same consistant interface and features going from WinXP to Mac OSX 10.5. The best feature I love is to be able to export my final document to PDF and get a very good output result. I tried some plugins for MS Office 2003 to do the same and the output has just not been what I want.

From your personal experience, what can you say that MS Office 2003 offers over OO.org 3.0+? Or have you not used OO.org enough to offer an intelligent comment?
I too have a legal copy of MS Office 2003, not a biggie there. I have yet to find anything in MS Office 2003 that I personally could not do as well or better in OO.org 3.0+.

Do the math:

($1 / hour) * (24 hours a day) * (365.242199) days in a year = $8,765.81 a year!

WTF?

Sure, no one person will use MS Office at 24 hourse a day all year. However, heavy users will see their bill add up quickly and surpass the cost of the student teacher version.

This is just stupid. How many school kids NEED some MS Office program to pass their class? If they need it to pass the class, then the cost of the software should be included.

I am a software developer, and I have seen very, very few times where MS Office was needed for the enterprise apps I have worked on.

How the heck are our kids being pulled into needing such crap to turn in their homework?

Is there a high school teacher out there that will fail a kid because he/she didn't hand in the assignment in some version of MS Word or something?

Stand up people and don't let corporate influence kill the ability for our American kids to learn.

Damn, it is bad enough that Asians and Indians are starting to kick our butts in math and science.

Before we know it, American schools will be worth nothing more than producing a bunch of mid-level managers with no real skills. :-(