The problem is a vie this article and the concept is that negativity grabs our attention because we're wired to detect and process threats...

That means instead of neg attention grabbing us then us reading the article with an open interested intellectual mind, we are drawn to read the article and look for and perceive its information as threatening. To disarm it.

That ends up wasting everyone's time.

In general we should expect fully open systems like this to lag highly capitalized operations somewhat. And we should all, generally, use this as a reference point for improvements using our unique skills.

And that happens somewhat, except for the fact we're approach the article with our mind in the wrong state thanks to the "threateningly" headline.

So great observations on your part!

Well, it now allows me to use the same Office version (2013) that I have to produce and share documents with, so I am far from disappointed!

> ... disappoint you...

These are headlines that have a definite negative slant.

They aren't something to foster discussion, but something that tugs on the emotions of the reader.

That's a sure fire tactic for pissing people off.

But also definite true one. Wine has always been short of the promise it made (except for specific, select, apps), and the laptop is bad on any metric that matters except the "I can update it to make it have a less bad processor when that becomes available for it".