Are you suggesting that a fire is not natural?

. . . and the other 70%?

I'm aware of all this. My point was that the chips became obsolete before their time through socket changes, and might still be in use today if it weren't for that.

Actually, I was thinking of it the other way around . . . I have plenty of good Socket 478 CPUs kicking around, but I can't really buy any motherboards to stick them in. Maintaining the same socket type (and backwards compatability) means that I can keep using those perfectly good CPUs.

For many people (parents?), the parental controls implemented by the app store are part of the reason they chose to buy an Apple product for their child to use instead of a competitor's. If an app such as a web browser doesn't utilize those, it makes sense that it ought to have some sort of restriction in place. There may be plenty of things Apple does to their customers that warrant the vitriol that gets spewed at them. This, however, is not one of them.

Why is he upset about this? It happens all the time.

I think you answered your own question.

The worst part is, I'm sure I will star hearing from Windows people how fantastic the new "innovation" is...

Of course they will! It was their idea!(copyright 2009 Microsoft Corp.)

The materials are what help to pump up the cost.

I recently built a small box for locking up a bottle of wine and two envelopes and the binding for our guestbook out of birdseye maple as part of my wedding ceremony. The wood was quite expensive, and my el-cheapo table saw and router were just barely up to the task of working with it. I can only imagine what it would cost to buy enough walnut and maple to build this table . . . not to mention that your neighbor's ryobi table saw is gonna burn itself up trying to cut walnut.

Sure, you can build something like this . . but you're gonna pay out the nose to get set up with the same materials (and the tools to work with them). For what it is, this probably isn't all that bad of a price. They could probably do it a lot cheaper by building it out of MDF and veneer, but that wouldn't be "heirloom quality", would it?

The search would have to be government run and funded. It costs big money to run a search engine thats why cooperations like yahoo, google, MS run them. Lets also not forget how google really got big, and that is because of its image ads free home page.

Another useful Python learning environment is RUR-PLE: http://rur-ple.sourceforge.net/en/rur.htm

> I'd actually like for Windows to start having a
> repository of software that it can install stuff,

Oh, like Debian.

> without admin permissions.

Actually, I think there should be a specific permission, "install software from approved repositories", which the sysadmin can grant to any user he chooses. (For home users who stick withe OEM setup, the OEM would be the sysadmin, so they could set it up so that the out-of-the-box user account has this permission if they think that's appropriate.)

> Yeah, I know everyone just winced and thought 'monopoly power',

It wouldn't have to be handled that way.

> but it should be an entirely free system to add new repositories.
> Simply a requirement that you be an actual identifiable person or company,

No, that would be bad, because Microsoft would be in the position to decide who's a real person or company, which immediately raises the spectre of the monopoly abuse scenario.

The correct solution is that the system administrator is responsible for deciding which repositories are approved and which are not. Anyone (well, anyone with an internet-connected server and adequate bandwidth) can run a repository, but users won't be installing software from it unless the sysadmin puts the repository on the approved list. Again, if it's an OEM setup, the OEM is the de facto sysadmin (unless the user starts making administrative changes, at which point they take on the sysadmin role themselves).

Microsoft themselves should run at *least* three different repositories: one for just Windows stuff, one for other (gratis) Microsoft software, and one for third-party (gratis) software that they approve and host. These should be offered at install time so that all the sysadmin has to do to approve them is turn on the corresponding checkboxes. (The first one, the Windows repository, should be checked by default.)

So if the sysadmin checks the box for "Microsoft - other free software", then some user finds out they need the Powerpoint Viewer, if the sysadmin gave them the install-from-repositories bit, they can install it without bugging the sysadmin.

The sysadmin should be able to open up the package manager, hit an "add repository" button (which might prompt for an admin password, depending on what kind of account you're logged into when you do this), paste in a URL, click OK, and voila, from now on any user with the install-from-repositories privilege should be able to install any of the software hosted on that repository. So then if OSDN decides to host a repository of open-source software, and if the sysadmin for a given computer adds it, then any user with the install-from-repositories bit set can cause any of the open-source software on the OSDN repository to be installed on the local computer.

For the interface, I'm thinking something similar to Synaptic, but perhaps with a nicer browse interface (larger entries that actually show a description of the package's contents right there in the list). Oh, and the list of packages would be simpler than Debian's, to wit, a particular piece of software would be one package, not twelve, because Windows users don't want to have to figure out which package(s) to select to install the console version of Emacs or the gtk version or the xaw3d version and whether to also include the elisp sources and so on. (Picking between XEmacs and Gnu Emacs is choice enough for Windows users. If they wanted lots of detailed options they'd switch to an OS that has more configurability. In a pinch, advanced users can still go outside the package system and download a more specialized installer or even compile their own.)

Obviously, the software on such repositories would have to come in some kind of standard package format, rather than arbitrary executable self-extracting install wizards as is the current custom. But that's not a big problem. The standard package format *could* include an executable phase, as some of the current package formats for other OS distributions do, as long as it's all standardized so that the package manager can do both install and uninstall fully automatically.

ELAINE: We've been thrown off course just a tad.
PASSENGER: What's that mean?
ELAINE: In space terms, about 70 million miles.
The Passengers appear interested and sensible, nod their heads.
ELAINE: The bumps you feel are car-sized asteroids smashing into the hull.
The hood of a car smashes through the cabin wall. The Passengers still appear interested and sensible.
ELAINE: Also, we're heading right for the sun and can't seem to change course.
The Passengers still appear interested and sensible. They all put on sunglasses.
PASSENGER: Are you telling us everything?
ELAINE: Not exactly. We're also out of coffee.
The Passengers errupt in total panic.

Well, that link isn't working for me, but I'm going to assume that it supports half of your statement, regarding costs. Reality isn't picking the parts you like and then making up the rest.

. . . and have the life span of a third-world country.

Ahhh, no . . . This seems to indicate that you've got a case of proportionitis. I'm writing you a prescription to Reality . . . make sure you take the whole thing, ok?

Thanks for the link. That was also the first I've ever seen of the crow making its own tools (in the "related videos" links). Really interesting stuff.