Single sign-on is not the same as using the same user account for everybody...

That looks rather historic. From the sudo changelog:

2004-05-16 18:47 millert

                * CHANGES: There was no 1.6.7p6.

So 1.6.7p5 should be from around 2004.

MySQL dying? SCNR.

Umm, didn't the London Stock Exchange run Solaris or some other commercial unix/unix-like system before switching to Microsoft Windows? Even now they switched (or still plan to switch? I don't know) to a heterogenos environment running both Solaris and Linux.

Because it is hard to do so. You cannot assure that there are no regressions as you can only test very few configurations, then somebody has to spend the resources to do the actual testing, and so on.

A stable (i.e. static) release means that at least no *new* regressions are introduced. Sometimes an exception has to be made (e.g. security updates), but these fixes are often backported to the version supplied in the release to avoid changes in behaviour as much as possible, but sometimes there are still regressions (see the security updates Debian provides, sometimes there are follow-ups due to regressions *not* noticed during testing). How many more regressions would there be when *new* upstream releases are included in the stable release?

Okular (the KDE PDF viewer) also obeys DRM restrictions by default, but at least it can be turned off in the preferences (Setting Configure, General, Obey DRM limitations). I believe this was implemented due to Adobe's requirements. If Apple's PDF viewer does not allow to ignore DRM restrictions, maybe you should just use a different one that allows to do so?

It is sad that you see Freedom of Expression, one of the Human Rights, as a privilege that can be taken away instead of an inalienable right. On the same line of thought goverments take away the *right* (not privilege) not to be tortured (because you are an evil person and so do not deserve any "privileges")...

So this security problem did not exist? Yes, it's a problem in Java, but Java is part of the default MacOSX installation, and Apple only fixed the problems months later.

And how you would go to process the data?

Why the #$%! do programmers believe that operating systems are like movies and you need to release a sequel? There is nothing they can add to any operating system that cannot be done effectively with Windows 3.1 with a good virus scanner. Multitasking? Network support? Memory protection? All of those are ALREADY possible without another operating system being introduced.

The purpose of new operating systems? To sell licenses. To sell books. To keep journalists publishing about their new registry tricks. But lets face it, we have enough operating systems now. If you can't accomplish what you want to do in a relatively short time with the options that are now available, the problem isn't the oeprating system.

About one cube root of them.

But even if Windows was ported to ARM, one of the main selling points does no longer apply: There will not be the giant collection of software for Windows ARM that is available for Windows x86. Linux has an advantage here: when you have access to the source, you (or your favorite distributor) can just compile the same software for ARM. Nobody can do this on Windows.

Sure, there would be software for Windows ARM, but initially there would be less software available compared to a Linux distribution.