What is simpler?

1) Fix a security hole by back porting a security fix

2) Re evaluate a completely new release

This is not a problem. And it doesn't take much to do #1... sure you have to find the right person to do it but it is far from impossible and expensive.... so no I am completely oblivious to corporations that just want to use something for free and then come a complain and whine that something isn't supported anymore... now if they had payed money for it then that's a completely different thing... doesn't RHEL6 support FF3.6 in any case? So there are options for these corporations that are utterly cheapass lazy and incompetent... however having said that... these enterprises will not survive for long so they should in no shape way or form dictate how a browser should be. If Microsoft and IE are fine with that thats their own big big problem. Stale stagnancy as with IE6 and nothing but problems and issues with that kind of an approach. Ok gotta stop before I blow a fuse.

Isn't that already on the endangered species list?

So why doesn't the cheapass and lazy corporations support it themselves. The code is there for them to continue to use it as they want.

NOT! I thought I had seen the worst moves in the industry first hand but this one takes the cake... in a big big way.

I started when I was 11 and thankfully was a bit more open minded regarding courses but also lived in an education climate where we had mandatory curriculum.

My advice is that you need to learn humility and that is best done through the humanities because lets face it the computer is just a hyper mirror of your own super ego.

So how about jumping on something that is really a challenge like "Child rearing 101." Good luck and have fun you might actually learn something substantial.

You know its bloated when even

ls -la /usr/bin/vim
2819728 /usr/bin/vim

+5MB for the system libs.

Sure just 0.5MB when it is running...

I remember like it was yesterday that I complained vehemently that the text editor used up more than 17k.

"We are all bloated now"

Or they sacked them because the breach was done years ago and the higher ups saw that their sec team was completely incompetent.

Regardless of why and how I firmly believe that the breach was wide open well before it got publicly known.

I think he meant monopoly money. :-D

When I first looked at iTunesDJ it contained a lot of stuff that I explicitly didn't want and had no time to investigate... remote stuff and all that. Now that I have looked deeper per your advice and turned off basically ALL functionality it works almost as the Rhythmbox queue (it doesn't continue previous playlist when DJ is finished) ... however this functionality shouldn't have been this convoluted to get to... sure I need only do this once so its not a biggie. Ok so rather than sucking donkey rocks iTunes just plain sucks donkey now. Thanks!

Having gone from Rhythmbox to iTunes earlier this year I can wholeheartedly say that iTunes sucks donkey rocks in comparison. For instance, Where the hell is a simple play queue? Nothing more severe than ad-hoc play queue... no temporary playlists please. There are more small grating and annoying things... oh yeah not being able to fully read the id3 tags and it ends up selecting the one that is botched and not the full and correct one like Rhythmbox.

Sure I am speaking from a POV where I most likely will not buy new music because I have plenty of good music to listen to already and have no time to spend finding something that is AAA across the board so that it doesn't waste my time.

BTW: iTunes does use a form of SQL'sh datastore but it is stored in XML format... there are even perl scripts for it. And really why should we care how it stores its data?

online... it wasn't that good in online mode so I am not surprised that they are ditching it. Having something that works well has a lot of maintenance and running costs and is generally a money drain on the game. Having low numbers of players will make the economics even more poignant to that fact.

And to everyone thinking that you want to run a server at home... no really you don't... seriously you do not have time for it unless you actually get payed for it.

Well it is more symbiotic than that when it is a business deal. IMHO it is always a mutual investment-buy rather than any selling.

Now we can not say "Nobody got fired for buying Microsoft" let it spread like wildfire... let all top execs that are Microsoft Horny get laid off.

Games. No joystick and other input handling, no feedback and such. Now if the browsers would have this functionality possible as standard then I would say Microsoft would have a valid concern painting the devil on the wall that they think WebGL is. However without those crucial components its more likely not a valid concern... I argue that their own supposed IE9 3D accelerated rendered pages for 2D panes is already doing something they are now stating is inherently insecure... Microsoft is really now just saying "this shi*t is no way of doing it." In any event it is my honest opinion that Microsoft should not quip anything regarding this nor anyother security whatsoever because it really shows how out of touch they ultimately are.

Not really. In a capitalistic environment only the ones that have enough money to have proper security will flourish. So its good with these security breaches because it will cull the cruft. I wouldn't be surprised if lulzsec already has complete ownage of everything relevant on the net. And with that I hope they'll ramp up the disclosure so the rest of us know how bad it really is. My estimate so far is that it is worse than we can imagine.