simbalion
In Linux, if you're missing something it's a simple matter of "apt-get install something" and it almost always works. The rate of failure for Windows updates and installing proper drivers and software in windows is much higher.
And Linux is far more likely to work out of the box on most hardware. Windows installs never have more drivers available than what ships on the CD/DVD. With Linux Net Installs, as long as your Ethernet is supported, and it probably is supported, the rest of the system will be up-to-date.
I have recently installed Windows 7, Windows 10, and Linux, I've used each for a number of months. Linux was the easiest and friendliest. I've been using Windows for years so I'm not a newbie, it's a terrible operating system.
win10antitrust.us is available on namecheap.com for $0.88.
Today in 2016, Linux is the superior platform for both user-friendliness and stability. It is easier to use and install on a wider variety of hardware. The old belief that Windows is "easier" is deprecated, and it is time to change the conversation to reflect that truth.
Microsoft has _repeatedly_ lost anti-trust lawsuits in the past 16 years for this exact sort of behavior. How is it that they have not learned their lesson?
Windows 10 is failing, and now they've taken actions which will surely incur billions of dollars in fines. I would not be at all surprised if the ruling judge in the inevitable lawsuit punishes them harshly for not learning their lesson the first several times.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation
Whatever executives are responsible for this should be drawn and quartered by the investors.
And hardly anyone is talking about Lenovo's liability. They are just as guilty as Microsoft and they're a much smaller company, will this destroy them?
Tacking on small concessions is how the most evil people in American politics are able to pass insane and crooked laws.
There is some philosophical debate to be had regarding whether your code is deserving of copyright protections. Precisely what parts were duplicated? Just the CSS? Is there a better way to write those parts? If your way was the best way, copyright laws cannot prevent someone else from duplicating that method. This is known as reverse engineering, and is completely legal.
I'm a designer and developer myself so I understand your perspective, but you are not necessarily the righteous ones in a battle of good vs evil. It is definitely a blurry grey area.
Quite frankly, "code borrowing" happens everywhere in development. Most lessons on "How to learn to code" encourage people to explore other's code and adapt it for their own projects as a means to learn. The history of computing supports borrowing and adapting other people's code. You probably aren't aware of these things.
Give it time, you will see that I am right.
Again, facebook is not a social product. Facebook is a portal product with a social feature. They're not competing with Twitter, they're competing with Google and Microsoft. It is apples and oranges.
Second, "the problem with twitter" as commentors have been saying, is that Twitter is a glorified instant messenger, and they have done everything wrong.
They're a giant corporation with too many employees. They have a huge overhead cost for servers and offices and electricity and so on. And their only product is social media, for free.
This is the era of ad-filtering. Substaining a company on advertising is a dead model, it will never work again. It's dying slower in some areas than in others, but rest assured it is dead. Furthermore, nobody using twitter wants to see ads. Users will aggressively persue means to eliminate ads from the "social" experience.
Twitter is the digital equivalent of opening a number of sports arenas and inviting everyone to come in to mingle, without ever charging admission fees. Eventually, the power bill and lease is going to shut them down.
This is a reality check. You cannot make money by giving things away for free. You can make money from free products, but you have to do things to monetize it, for example selling expert support for free software.
Commentors keep comparing Twitter to Facebook. Twitter and Facebook are exactly the same in one way, neither one makes any money from social media. Facebook is profitable because Facebook is not a social media product, it is a portal product that offers social media. Facebook makes money from selling "microtransaction" games, which are a huge ripoff, and using their enormous size to convince business owners that investing in advertising is somehow worthwhile. Again, nobody wants to see ads during their "social" time.
Social Media is not a business. Social media is a chat room with a slightly re-defined UX. You cannot make a profit from social media without charging admission. It is impossible.
In the post-advertising era the only way businesses will be successful is if they produce products or services of actual real-world value to their customers. Parasitic businesses, middle-men, advertisers, they are all going to die. And good riddance. Money should be earned by the creation of value, and nothing else.
The insanity in our government and police departments is completely out of control. If they can't behave the way the people of the country want them to, then we have to get rid of them.
Also consider that Facebook's #1 product, social blogging, is not profitable, and can never ever be profitable. 100% of their profits are made in other businesses which they've connected to their brand name, which is the only reason for their success. For example, microtransaction-scam "video games".
This is a typical article by someone who does not really understand the internet and has not been using it for very long.
If you're website is that unimportant, then you could probably get by with any free hosting services where your page would be yourpage.serviceprovider.tld
Every search engine does sell ads, which seems to be working for them all so far. If that ever stops working, we might see web-search become a public utility funded by tax dollars.
I'm not in agreement with many of the commenters regarding CDNs. I don't believe in a free lunch. Free software is one thing, but CDNs require infrastructure, which incur costs. Somewhere, the people offering those services expect to make those costs back. You'll either pay for it directly, or you'll pay for leeching off someone else's bill in karma. For a very tiny, low-traffic, low-bandwidth website, I think not using a CDN is perfectly reasonable.
Putting bare text on the web is always going to be fast. So what. If he presented a real full-featured website with the bells and whistles that people expect today, and made it operate that fast, he'd have something to show. Instead he presents polished garbage.
It's not being negative to point out the glaring flaws in a person's statements. My assumption is the entire thing is an advertisement for that hosting service.
Anyone with any sense will see this as a good opportunity to give Android a spin.
Those of us who are not suffering that disability should not feel guilty for our capabilities, but we should recognize that we are intellectually superior, because we should be ruling the world from every corner, not them. Sadly, many of them are the ones running governments and giant corporations.
All men may be created equal, but through different educational and parental environments, all men do not arrive at adulthood as equals.
I think DuckDuckGo is an example of how Google's methodology can be refined and improved upon, specifically by not spying on users. It's a subtle improvement, but I find the results I receive are actually superior and more relevant than Google's, plus I don't have to worry about who is watching my traffic.
Raise the point that forcing insecure practices on government operated financial sites might be a case of illegal negligence.
It was not many years ago when strong 8 character passwords were completely suitable. So respectfully I think your statements are false.
One of the reasons the guide recommends Keepass is that it eliminates the need to type in passwords completely. Even in the rare case of poorly designed apps that block pasting, the auto-type capability works around that.
If you use diceware for everything you've got to remember all of those unique passphrases which defeats the whole point of diceware.
Where diceware shines is in creating a master password, which is explained in the guide.