Regardless of whether or not most developers are upset about Safari's performance, most users would very strongly welcome a faster web browser. I'm pretty sure speed, stability, and ease of use are the main reasons Chrome is such a popular browser on the desktop. The thing is, it is not really that much faster than other browsers. However, even that small difference feels like a big difference and wins over many users. I'm sure many developers are aware of this. You can't get away from the fact that only allowing one browser rendering engine has some strong disadvantages and is one of if not the biggest disadvantage of using iOS.
Everything about git is about managing a useful history. Otherwise it would be a history of every keystroke or at least every file write. Instead you write some code until you feel you have enough to make a useful commit (you will have to come up with your own idea of what represents a useful commit), commit all those changes together as a single commit (thereby losing history), and come up with a useful description of all those changes. Managing an already created commit is just a further extension of this idea. You can use what you learned from from your experience of coding, testing, and committing to change your commit history to be even more useful. Of course things can go wrong if you are changing the history of a branch that others have cloned or branched off of.
This is one of the best "how to boost you Vim productivity" articles I have ever seen. It really gets to the heart of the types of customizations that a lot of people don't consider that make a massive difference.
The only thing that makes sense to me is they are using these as a vessel to push people to use Bing and to buy Office, but now you can buy Office on more and more platforms and Bing is OS agnostic. I'm just not seeing a thought out plan here.
I don't understand why they even need their own web browser. Why not just ship Windows with Chrome. They could preset the settings to have bing as your home page. Or maybe that is illegal? What advantage to they gain by having their own browser? If there would be legal difficulties they could try to strike a deal with Firefox or Opera. On the same note I don't understand what Microsoft is trying to do recently. I mean eventually Windows is supposed to be free and everyone can get all the updates. .NET is becoming more open source. Visual Studio is becoming cross platform and this works on the free version. I like all these things, but I don't understand how they benefit Microsoft? The only explanation I have heard is that they are trying to "stay relevant", but what good is that relevance if they are giving Windows, .NET, and Visual Studio away for free? Am I missing something?
This article is completely worthless because it is all about looking at studies about drinking coffee. If you really want to get educated about health, you need to learn the details of taking care of your entire person, how all your body parts are interdependent and affect each other, and what different habits actually do. Instead of looking at whether or not long term it lowers or raises your risk of certain problems, it would be better task these questions: What is coffee? What are the immediate affects of drinking it on different body organs and functions? What is the purpose of those organs and is that purpose disrupted? How does it affect digestion? It is well known among those that actually know stuff about health, that taking care of your digestive process and things that affect your bowel movements is where the root of most disease and healing begins. So how does coffee affect this? According to the book "Tissue Cleansing Through Bowel Management", coffee will kill the good bacteria necessary for this faster than anything else. If that is true, it makes a strong case toward coffee being bad for you. Of course not all coffee is created equal. Some coffee is naturally less acidic than others. A lot of coffee is polluted with high levels of heavy metals. But if coffee is generally bad for digestion, and digestion is one of the main keys to healthy living, why do so many studies show long term benefits from drinking it? Here is where I don't like studies for this kind of thing. Most people come nowhere near living in harmony with what is now known about healthy living, myself included. So these studies are mostly about the affects of coffee on people who otherwise do not live a healthy lifestyle. Also, who funded, setup, monitored, and published the results? Who gamed the system by deciding who be included in the study and what type of coffee they would use? Who was paid off to change the numbers? There is no way to know. And yes, I drink coffee, at least for now. But I am on a constant journey of always improving my health in some way. Some day, I may stop drinking coffee altogether.
Just so you know, Zecco and TradeKing have merged, so now people just use the TradeKing website. They are still one of the cheapest online trading services. Their website and customer service are great.
I'm not seeing your point about targeting a younger audience. A great investor can come from a combination of being self taught and from experience. The earlier you start the better better chance you have to make mistakes, learn from them, and get good at it. When you are young, you probably don't have much money to loose anyway. Not investing until you are older, and have a substantial savings is when lots of money really gets lost or else they are completely depended on financial advisers, but still not knowing which of them to really trust.
The "education" provided in college that extends beyond being good in a particular field is not the right place to get that type of education. It amounts to brainwashing and is extremely dangerous. Also, that side of the education is not the primary reason most people go to college and it is not what is typically advertised or thought of as its purpose. I really wish college was more focused on just accomplishing its purpose. As it is now, they are forcing everyone to learn their ideas of wisdom. This is the equivalent of promoting and teaching a specific religion along with your career training.
I still hate websites tailored for mobile devices. I can't believe Google is encouraging companies to do this and penalizing those that do not. Almost every single website that I go to that I notice is different on mobile is different is ways that frustrate me to no end. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single website where I prefer the mobile version on a mobile device over the full version on a mobile device. I'm not saying they don't exist, just that they are extremely rare.
"Brown wrote in her 65-page ruling." 65 pages! They need some good programmers to help them refactor that to be shorter, more expressive, more readable, and changeable using the DRY principal and such.