If they build it they will use it. But do they want to use it? Hydro seems so very easy and simple, but impoundment caused problems in many places. Out west drought has lowered water levels almost to the point where generation must stop. Similar problems in Europe. Pumped storage needs a water source to pump. The engineering has to be done. Somehow nuclear seems to be overlooked too often. SMR, anyone?

I know how 'theoretical max' works. Without defending the utilities and generators, that's when everything they have is operating at maximum capacity. No maintenance, no fuel shortages, etc. different numbers for daylight and darkness where solar is included, calculating wind capacity is, shall we say, an art. You don't have to trust the generators, but their numbers are all ya got. Derate it as you feel necessary.

'load shedding'. 'service prioritization'.

How many ways are there to reduce power consumption in a statement, before turning off servers. Oh, wait, in addition to turning off servers...? Reduce the cloud population, reduce power, but reduce performance. What would the utilities be offering for responding to unsupported demand, even for an unplanned supply outage? I don't read a lot about these options. Even rejecting them.

0) It was once in Florida that commercial users who exceeded an agreed-upon load during certain hours were essentially fined for that, with that fine, increased rates, lasting up to a year. Many shopping malls in particular used onsite generators to run their A/C systems in very hot weather,. which both depleted their ice banks and, coincidentally, caused higher residential demand etc. Worth it to avoid the surcharges. Datacenters may want to invest in onsite generators to be used not just for backup and restoration, but for load shedding.

1) Datacenters may have to investigate negotiating with users for prioritized power use, which seems to me to be incredibly unlikely, but it has to be an option.

Put these both under the heading of resilience. Easier to sell.

You could hardly be further from the point. And no point in telling you. As with many you know history but do not understand it. Don't give it much thought, it's not important enough to get exercised over.

You missed one, and inexcusably. But understandable, because the missing link is a great offense to so many.

And, no, it is not Islam.

Ah. I'm a Windows user from the days when it did not have a version. Played my first computer game, Balance Of Power, back then. Used every version, even ME, supported and maintained my clients machines on everything from Windows 3.1 when I became a tech. Reinstalling 95 and 98 I don't recall as being a big thing, but I was supporting a fairly homogeneous population then. I installed 95 Upgrade Edition and ran it continuously for over 30 days without rebooting. Then the first update broke that, and I learned as many did to reboot occasionally, or more often. I found 98 and 98SE to be improvements. ME we will consign to the manure pile of MS. NT was a greater leap forward then most realize, that kernel is still the basis for Windows, and it is superb despite the naysayers. Vista was a great leap forward also, though it was an interim step towards 7, perhaps the most durable and resilient Windows yet released.

8, 10 this was an era of genuine improvement. 11 also but it suffers undeserved complaints. To this day very few understand that Windows has to, and always had to, tolerate drivers from manufacturers of varying quality and performance, which Apple hardly has to at all. Also Linux has an army of obsessive (often) coders noodling over drivers as well as the benefit of a Unix-like kernel that can tolerate more abuse than commercial software does, and only because it gets so much more attention from a huge volume of coding expertise. But as you know, Linux desktops can be changed, sometimes grammatically, on a whim of the 'owners', the GUI world under X was complex and inscrutable, Wayland is a seismic disruption, and while I think for the better, it took some time to become fully featured and adopted. This event is similar to the 10>11 migration, though perhaps oversimplified this?

But in all this, I encounter disgruntled Windows users with unusual problem histories. Unusual because these are single-digit percentages of users. Not that you experience should be ignored, no. But on the desktop Windows 10 and 11 is working and performing to high levels. In the server room nobody much bothers with anything but Linux, the advantage is huge. The vocal Windows complainers I see are too often making what seems to be a religious argument. I've encountered this since the 90s, and the 'Helpful Internet Community' responding to my Windows questions with "oh, Winblows", get a real OS" in the days of Slackware 1.x. yeah, I did run that, but not as my daily, and 'Windoze' was working. Fortunately they are much less offensive than before. But Windows 10 has run its course. The objections have been answered. Old apps are overdue, mostly, and that's expensive, but your complaint may be with the vendor. And that's software, and that's a problem even with FOSS. Just the cost being in effort.

But, after all that, if it works, use it. If not, go and find the solution.

Ya forgot the /s flag...

There's so much excess bullshit in American that many World Cup fans visiting from away wish they could stay. Forever.

Sure. And, true to form, you didn't offer a reason why you changed from Windows. Your wife's reason seems to be she 'didn't like it'. Choice based on individual and subjective enjoyment, I understand. Rejecting Windows based on security and privacy concerns out to be based on objective analysis, but if to often based on rumor and 'reports' (but I repeat myself).

I've stopped relying on Cory's rants vigilantes. Long time ago.

A simplistic view. '"really" don't like' comes down to, in my experience:

- Rejection of change, Doesn't matter what the change is. Just move the Start Menu from left-justified to centered. That's juvenile.

- No more than rumors of enhanced telemetry becoming a serious privacy concern. Rumors are enough. Add in captures of new data and the screamers will blow it up into disproportionate danger. Ignoring their browser, every web site that clandestinely keeps logs that describe your activities, etc. That's a little juvenile also.

- Any launch bugs or flaws. Claimed as proof of rushed release, danger, and well just keep going on.

- Any security concerns, any. As if not merely Widows, but Linux, BSD, even Apple software suffers a security flaw at leas occasionally, some undiscovered for a decade or more.

- And other juvenile complaints and reactions.

Occasionally, Microsoft has hit a release out of the park. W4W 3.11, NT4.0, Windows 8. Mostly because these were preceded by less than excellent releases, though some were leaps ahead that could not be compared to predecessors. Windows 11 is working. Get over it. Or hide behind some excuse and cling to Windows 10 like an infant to their mommy's leg. Linux isn't winning Windows 10 clingers, nor Windows 11 runaways. And if you're paying attention, it's not even winning security and privacy wonks, since they know it takes some effort to secure Linux and hold on to even the illusion of privacy on the modern Internet.

"Over time, with process improvements,"

And like that, you've spent all three.

A lot of people don't understand that. take the time to work it out, you lose fast.

If fast isn't most important, you can spend cheap. Then you can get good, maybe.

If good wasn't the goal, well, then you choose the desired, and the rest sorts itself out.

See? The equation is proved by your example.

True. Apollo suffered huge costs because of the deadline, forcing development costs more. The NASA equation - good, fast, cheap. Any 2 of the three.

SpaceX is doing very well indeed, and so far as I can tell making no excuses. Don't need to. They are kicking it, and NASA is trying to stay relevant in the launch business.

With a little luck Starlink will satisfy the broadband access mandates the rest of the ISP business has taken money for and not delivered for *decades*.

Of course people hate Elon. He's successful. They don't envy him, they resent his success, while they languish in sub-mediocrity and blame all else for their malaise.

Pus.

Only one example of the species...