Except it is unconstitutional for a state to tax or regulate interstate commerce.
No it isn't. No provision of the Constitution states this.
Imagine if California could put a tariff on Florida Orange juice coming into the state to protect California growers?
That would be bad. But, see, that is unconstitutional -- not as part of a broad prohibition on states regulating interstate commerce, but because States are specifically restricted in imposing import duties by Art. I, Sec. 10.
But a sales tax that applies equally to transactions where the purchaser is in the State isn't an import duty, or a regulation that discriminates against out-of-state business.
No, in other words, the constitution forbids individual states from regulating interstate commerce. This one is pretty clear-cut.
Um, no, it doesn't. The Constitution permits Congress to regulate interstate commerce and, that, combined with the Supremacy Clause, prohibits states from regulating commerce in ways that conflict with the Congress's action. The Constitution also prohibits states from certain specific restrictions on commerce without Congressional approval (for instance, imposing import or export duties beyond what is necessary to fund state inspections.)
Further, if states were prohibited from regulating interstate commerce, and regulation that tips the scale for or against Amazon were such unconstitutional regulations,as Bezos argues, than the special sales tax exemptions that certain states in which Amazon has physical operations have granted Amazon would be unconstitutional. Amazon's argument here is ludicrous on its face, and even the best lawyers money can buy -- and even with the pro-corportate majority on the Supreme Court -- its probably not going anywhere as a legal argument.
Is there anyone out that who is saying "Nuclear Power at Any Cost?".
Pretty much everyone who is advocating that government needs to promote private nuclear power generation, since the main thing that is necessary to get the nuclear industry to do that is to (1) provide massive subsidies, and (2) provide complete immunity from liability in the case of accidents.
Which, basically, means accepting both the cost of the subsidies, and unlimited potential future costs to encourage a for-profit industry.
Which amounts pretty exactly to "Nuclear Power at Any Cost".
A $300 netbook that I can use for $0/month! That's right, ladies and gents, zero dollars per month!
Chromebooks are 11.6" and 12.1" netbooks ranging in retail price from $349-$499, pretty comparable to Windows 11.6" & 12.1" netbooks.
Chromebooks with 3G also come with free 3G (100MB/month) with various options for additional quota; it costs $0/mo to use a Chromebook.
Institutional users (schools and businesses, with different plans available for each) can, instead of purchasing hardware at retail, choose to pay a monthly fee (starting at $20/month/unit for educational institutions) when signing a 3-year service and support contract that includes hardware, premium tech support, and institutional management features not included with retail devices.
The monthly rate plans are not for consumers, and include things that are not available with regular retail purchase.
But how well would it work for students majoring in software engineering or computer science?
It probably could, if the school was set up to use it for that. Obviously, you won't probably be running a compiler on it, but web based dev environments for popular languages exist, and Chrome OS can work as a thin client with both its built-in remoting and Citrix Receiver. So it could work, though the curriculum would have to account for it (but the curriculum always has to account for the particular environment being used for instruction.)
Well considering google is talking free 3G included for $20 a month, not all college students have $500 laying around the house, then extra $X a month for a data plan.
College students can't get the Chromebooks for $20/month.
Schools that are signing a three-year contract for at least 10 units can get the devices, support and services for $20/unit/month.
Students -- and any other non-institutional purchasers -- pay the retail cost of (depending on which of the launch models they choose) $349-$499, (And any of the 3G models, even with regular retail purchase, include 100MB/mo of no-cost 3G with various options for buying additional 3G service.)
The googlebooks are more netbooks than notebooks, and a good netbook is $300 tops.
Checking Newegg right now 11.6"/12.1", new (not refurbished/recertified/etc.) retail netbooks with Windows range from $349-$479.
The launch models of Chromebooks -- also 11.6"/12.1" netbooks -- run from $349 to $499.
Google's announcement combines many things I don't like:
I don't think you understand Google's announcement.
- renting things for a very high monthly payment, which means you could actually buy the thing for only 1 year's worth of rent. Imagine if they did that with appartments. (sorry, couldn't fit in a pizza... oh wait, the car !)
The "rental" options are three-year institutional contracts with a minimum of ten units that include hardware, institutional management software, and premium technical support. They aren't straight hardware rentals, and they don't replace regular retail purchase for consumers.
The 3G models -- whether purchased at retail upfront or acquired through the educational or business monthly rate plan which includes premium technical support, a web-based management/provisioning console for the administrator, and other things that aren't included with regular retail purchase -- include 100MB/month 3G from Verizon (the consumer purchase has this for 2 years from the date you first activate the 3G, I think the institutional ones include it for the full life of the 3 year contract).
it's still a lousy offer.
No, its not.
Net-tops are $200 nowadays
Nettops aren't mobile. Chromebooks are.
and don't require you to be connected to the net to work.
Neither do Chromebook; offline-usable web apps are a key feature of Chrome (both the multiplatform browser and the OS.) While some apps targetting Chrome are going to be traditional, connected-only web apps, that's by no means the only thing Chrome OS supports.
So, for less than 1 year's payment for the google "welfarebook",
Oh, ignorant and offensive in one sentence! Its not a consumer rental program. Its an institutional service and support program with a minimum volume (for both the educational and the business plan) of 10 units. So, the minimum monthly cost is $200/month. Its not a "welfarebook".
you can have a real functioning netbook (or if you want to spend around $350, a real laptop), and use real software, not just "OMG web 2.0" stuff.
Around $350-500 is the price range for Windows-based 11.6"/12.1", HDD-based netbooks. $349 (for the Acer, WiFi-only model) to $499 (for the Samsung model with 3G) is the price range for the 11.6"/12.1", SSD-based Chromebooks. In terms of hardware, Chromebooks are a good deal for the money.
The concern about "real software" is somewhat valid, but the remoting & Citrix Receiver features that are to land in Chrome OS before the Chromebooks launch in June address some of this, as (at least in terms of capacity, though software that leverages it extensively is certainly still to come) does Native Client, More than that, Chrome OS is based largely on the idea of not necessarily doing everything, but doing what most people want to do with less unnecessary distraction and a focus on a clean user experience (an approach that has worked well with a number of Apple consumer products.)
Not only that, but people often muddy the issue by confusing the terms education (attending a class, studying to pass a cert test) with training (hands on, real-world experience).
Inventing distinctions that aren't part of the existing definitions of words, and then blaming other people by "confusing the issue" because they don't use your non-standard distinction between the words is, well, rather bizarre.
While certainly study of abstract theory can be distinguished to an extent from hands-on practice, "education" isn't limited to the former, and "training" isn't limited to the latter. And, really, even ignoring the semantics, the division is somewhat artificial for things like programming (or most active intellectual pursuits.) If you can't apply the theory in practice, you don't actually understand the theory, and if you don't understand the theory, you've got very limited practical scope, as well. Professional education -- or professional training -- involves theory and practical application together.
- wow. Are you trying to sell it to me or are you trying to make me puke, because I am getting nauseous.
Neither, I'm providing a factual description for those reading along that might not be familiar with Unity. I'm not interested in selling Unity to you, nor do I give a good god-damn how you feel about Unity.
so it destroys my normal tree menu, it's not even a menu, just a memory paging algorithm applied for no reason other than to show that the developer knew something about it?
The launcher bar more like a menu than a "memory paging algorithm" (I don't even get what you are trying to get at with your description.) The typical applications menu that you would normally have on most Linux desktops is accessed by right clicking on the Applications icon on the launch bar (you get the categories, which launch open the application window preset to the selected category, rather than a traditional tree menu.)
Not having a traditional tree menu is the thing I think I initially liked least about Unity, because it seems to put apps initially "farther" away from easy access, but with use and the fact that the most-used icons are pushed forward, it actually seems to be slightly better for the most common apps, which I think on-balance is going to be a win in the long term.
and I am telling you it's not better, it is terrible.
Obviously, its not something you like. Which is why its good that Ubuntu made it easy to restore the classic look and feel.
so why is it the default for my desktop?
Because you choose to download and install an operating system which prominently presents it as the default UI.
If you mean "why is it the default for Ubuntu rather than being relegated to a specific spin for smaller and/or touchscreen and/or touch pad devices like the old 'Netbook Remix'?", the answer is because Shuttleworth thinks that its a better UI for mass market use across the board, and that's what Ubuntu Desktop's target is. The approach it took -- before it graduated to be default for Ubuntu Desktop -- to dealing with smaller screens and less precise pointing devices was to provide bigger visual targets for key interactions while more efficiently using UI real estate. That's got obvious benefits for smaller devices and devices using touch screens and touch pads, but the approach makes sense for desktops, as well.
And, for people that don't like it, the Gnome Classic UI is available in Ubuntu without installing anything extra (and several other UI options are available from the standard repositories.)
It starts with, "Microsoft irrevocably promises"... given estoppel ruling, It's not something MS can revoke.
I've already addressed the impact of the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel in GP. If you thin there is a particular ruling on estoppel that provides in impact to that phrasing different than what was described, please cite that ruling.
Maybe I'm alone in this; but I always feel like I'm being *judged* by the human tellers.
They see my accounts, the balances, they look at me, can reasonably estimate my age and in a split second they decide if I'm a good customer or a bad customer (and by extension a good person or a bad one).
Maybe it's silly? I don't know...
Whether or not the teller is doing this, the bank certainly is. No matter whether you go to the window or the ATM.
Logical Fallacy on Sony's part. Post hoc ergo propter hoc [fallacyfiles.org].
Except that Sony doesn't make that connection. They say "X happened", "Y happened", "A admits to doing X", "X made it more difficult for us to protect against Y", "We don't know if A did Y or was in any way knowingly cooperating with those who did."
Other people reinterpreted that into Sony saying "A did Y".
If Anonymous ISN'T behind these attacks and just patsies/dupes (as Sony admits is possible), then they should probably use much of their world renowned internet ability to help track down who ACTUALLY broke into the servers, if for no other reason than to clear their name.
I think its more likely that instead of being patsies/dupes or directly responsible, they were a known presence that was used as convenient cover. Rather than Anon being duped or coopted by the intruders, the intruders took advantage of the distraction from Anon's DDoS to help conceal their heist, the same as someone wanting to rob a brick-and-mortar facility might take advantage of a known disaster to distract the focus of security.
Getting anonymous mad at them might not be the best strategy for beefing up the image of their security, though.
Anonymous wouldn't be even a superficially credible scapegoat if they hadn't already been publicly mad at Sony anyway, even if they deny calling for the particular attack that Sony is trying to blame them for.
Sony is doing what all people in power do: - find a scapegoat.
Correction: Sony is trying to do what all (or, well, a reasonably large fraction, at any rate) people in trouble try to do: find a scapegoat.
Being in power has very little to do with it. A strung out penniless drug addict caught by the cops with a needle full of heroin about to inject himself will try to spin a story of how it isn't his drugs.
Being in power does make it somewhat more likely that you'll have publicly identified enemies that you can pull out as a scapegoat, I suppose.
Yeah well let us know when touch screen monitors are the norm, because right now a touch screen UI doesn't belong on a desktop PC that uses a mouse for input.
Unity isn't a touch screen UI. It's a UI that isn't touch-hostile (or touchpad-hostile, or small-monitor hostile) to the extent that traditional desktop GUIs are, but it mostly avoids hostility to those things by presenting information in a cleaner, more efficient way than traditional desktop GUIs. While there are a few things I think it could really use (including better organization of apps from the "Applications" menu), I think its a much better keyboard, mouse, and big monitor desktop GUI, than most, as well as being more suitable for small screens, touch screens, and touchpads than most desktop GUIs.
Love the clever use of screen space. Especially how the title- and menubar of maximized windows is merged into the top panel - brilliant.
Its great that for maximized windows. I'm less sure its a good idea that the menubar for non-maximized windows also is merged into the top panel (only the menubar for the currently "front" window is displayed, and its displayed in the top panel.) It does save screen real estate (yay), but I don't like having to leave the apps visual space to get to the menu.
OTOH, I find that I tend to use apps that are keyboard heavy and/or have good in app toolbars (including menus on toolbars, like Chrome's wrench menu), so its rarely a big deal. I actually didn't realize how little I use traditional menubars in the apps I use most often until I started using Unity and realizing how little the lack of the menubar where I am used to it bothered me.
Erm, no. That thing is the launch pad, it launches the applications (or so it seems to me, I pushed on an icon - it started an application window.) Minimize the window and it disappears. Some are implying that by clicking on the launch pad icon that started the application first time again, it will reopen the minimized window.
Run any app that doesn't have a permanent launch bar icon and you'll see a new launch icon in the bar, and when you minimize that app, that new icon will stay there. The new icon will also have an arrow on the left, just like every icon for a running app, whether minimized or not. That arrow indicates that its a running app. No arrow means that the app is not running, but can be launched from the icon.
IMO, its an elegant combination of functions that makes a few changes to traditional desktop GUI to present information better. Obviously, the original motivation was limited real estate netbook screens and limited precision touch and touchpad interfaces, but honestly I think its (despite some wrinkles that still need to be addressed) a better basic approach than the UIs it replaces.
Anyway, from point of view of a developer, this GUI is a POS. No way I am going to use something that takes a chunk of my screen like that, gets rid of the battery power/network status icons (and whatever else I want to see on the launch bar
Um, the battery power and network status icons are on the top bar, not gotten rid of.
I honestly do not have patience to figure out where the application window goes once I attempt to minimize it.
It goes into the application icon on the launch bar, just like on most other GUIs. The only different thing is that, if its an application you have a permanent launcher icon for, that's the same icon you'd use to launch if it weren't already open. (But its clear whether the app is open or not, because if it is open, even minimized, theres an arrow pointing to it from the left of the icon; if its open and non-responsive, there is a double line to the right of the icon -- a sideways pause icon -- and if its the currently active window, there's an arrow pointing to it from the right of the icon in addition to the arrow on the left.)
That crazy search window that pops up only when I want to see the normal menu with the usual items in them - the entire idea of a menu tree is gone?
That "crazy search menu" is a menu tree that also has a keyboard input area. So, no, the idea of a menu tree is not gone, just evolved.
I would not recommend this to newbies. The first question they will ask is "Where is the menu of all my programs"?
I think even newbies will find the launcher that starts out open by default pretty easily. (Sure, it doesn't have all the programs on the first level, but then neither does the Windows Start menu.)
The problem is that the UI designers are changing focus from desktops and laptops to touch screen devices and such when the majority of users are still using a mouse and keyboard setup to navigate.
No, the problems are: 1. people always hate change, even if the change is better for people who aren't already set in the old way. 2. The new systems are somewhat immature.
Unity works quite well with a mouse and keyboard and a 20" monitor; there some things I think it could do better, to be sure, but the basic concept and most of the implementation are pretty good. And, its not like Ubuntu 11.04 doesn't include the classic interface.
No matter how outdated the mouse/keyboard setup might be, it's still the most prevalent means of computer UI navigation available, and many of us are still very comfortable with that setup
And most UIs for mainstream OSs still are designed to support it, even as they are also adapted to support alternative input mechanisms on which those systems might be used.
Well, you could read the legally binding community promise [microsoft.com]...
Or you can realize that, at least in U.S. law, that's what's called a "gratuitous license" and is, therefore, revocable at will, even if it says otherwise.
The fact that the remedies Microsoft is able to claim for violations of its rights after it revokes the permissions might be limited to the extent a court decides is necessary to avoid injustice in the case of people who reasonably relied on the promise before it was revoked under the doctrine of promissory estoppel is very far from a solid guarantee.
The reason MS falsely claimed that Google wasn't certified was to deflect attention away from their own lack.
Untrue. FISMA certification in advance was not a requirement, and so was irrelevant to the contract at issue. MS raised the issue about Google to distract attention from the fact that Google's substantive claims about the contract being improperly given to Microsoft without allowing competing bids was correct.
Slashdot Mirror
No it isn't. No provision of the Constitution states this.
That would be bad. But, see, that is unconstitutional -- not as part of a broad prohibition on states regulating interstate commerce, but because States are specifically restricted in imposing import duties by Art. I, Sec. 10.
But a sales tax that applies equally to transactions where the purchaser is in the State isn't an import duty, or a regulation that discriminates against out-of-state business.
Um, no, it doesn't. The Constitution permits Congress to regulate interstate commerce and, that, combined with the Supremacy Clause, prohibits states from regulating commerce in ways that conflict with the Congress's action. The Constitution also prohibits states from certain specific restrictions on commerce without Congressional approval (for instance, imposing import or export duties beyond what is necessary to fund state inspections.)
Further, if states were prohibited from regulating interstate commerce, and regulation that tips the scale for or against Amazon were such unconstitutional regulations,as Bezos argues, than the special sales tax exemptions that certain states in which Amazon has physical operations have granted Amazon would be unconstitutional. Amazon's argument here is ludicrous on its face, and even the best lawyers money can buy -- and even with the pro-corportate majority on the Supreme Court -- its probably not going anywhere as a legal argument.
Pretty much everyone who is advocating that government needs to promote private nuclear power generation, since the main thing that is necessary to get the nuclear industry to do that is to (1) provide massive subsidies, and (2) provide complete immunity from liability in the case of accidents.
Which, basically, means accepting both the cost of the subsidies, and unlimited potential future costs to encourage a for-profit industry.
Which amounts pretty exactly to "Nuclear Power at Any Cost".
Chromebooks are 11.6" and 12.1" netbooks ranging in retail price from $349-$499, pretty comparable to Windows 11.6" & 12.1" netbooks.
Chromebooks with 3G also come with free 3G (100MB/month) with various options for additional quota; it costs $0/mo to use a Chromebook.
Institutional users (schools and businesses, with different plans available for each) can, instead of purchasing hardware at retail, choose to pay a monthly fee (starting at $20/month/unit for educational institutions) when signing a 3-year service and support contract that includes hardware, premium tech support, and institutional management features not included with retail devices.
The monthly rate plans are not for consumers, and include things that are not available with regular retail purchase.
It probably could, if the school was set up to use it for that. Obviously, you won't probably be running a compiler on it, but web based dev environments for popular languages exist, and Chrome OS can work as a thin client with both its built-in remoting and Citrix Receiver. So it could work, though the curriculum would have to account for it (but the curriculum always has to account for the particular environment being used for instruction.)
College students can't get the Chromebooks for $20/month.
Schools that are signing a three-year contract for at least 10 units can get the devices, support and services for $20/unit/month.
Students -- and any other non-institutional purchasers -- pay the retail cost of (depending on which of the launch models they choose) $349-$499, (And any of the 3G models, even with regular retail purchase, include 100MB/mo of no-cost 3G with various options for buying additional 3G service.)
Checking Newegg right now 11.6"/12.1", new (not refurbished/recertified/etc.) retail netbooks with Windows range from $349-$479.
The launch models of Chromebooks -- also 11.6"/12.1" netbooks -- run from $349 to $499.
I don't think you understand Google's announcement.
The "rental" options are three-year institutional contracts with a minimum of ten units that include hardware, institutional management software, and premium technical support. They aren't straight hardware rentals, and they don't replace regular retail purchase for consumers.
The 3G models -- whether purchased at retail upfront or acquired through the educational or business monthly rate plan which includes premium technical support, a web-based management/provisioning console for the administrator, and other things that aren't included with regular retail purchase -- include 100MB/month 3G from Verizon (the consumer purchase has this for 2 years from the date you first activate the 3G, I think the institutional ones include it for the full life of the 3 year contract).
No, its not.
Nettops aren't mobile. Chromebooks are.
Neither do Chromebook; offline-usable web apps are a key feature of Chrome (both the multiplatform browser and the OS.) While some apps targetting Chrome are going to be traditional, connected-only web apps, that's by no means the only thing Chrome OS supports.
Oh, ignorant and offensive in one sentence! Its not a consumer rental program. Its an institutional service and support program with a minimum volume (for both the educational and the business plan) of 10 units. So, the minimum monthly cost is $200/month. Its not a "welfarebook".
Around $350-500 is the price range for Windows-based 11.6"/12.1", HDD-based netbooks.
$349 (for the Acer, WiFi-only model) to $499 (for the Samsung model with 3G) is the price range for the 11.6"/12.1", SSD-based Chromebooks. In terms of hardware, Chromebooks are a good deal for the money.
The concern about "real software" is somewhat valid, but the remoting & Citrix Receiver features that are to land in Chrome OS before the Chromebooks launch in June address some of this, as (at least in terms of capacity, though software that leverages it extensively is certainly still to come) does Native Client, More than that, Chrome OS is based largely on the idea of not necessarily doing everything, but doing what most people want to do with less unnecessary distraction and a focus on a clean user experience (an approach that has worked well with a number of Apple consumer products.)
Inventing distinctions that aren't part of the existing definitions of words, and then blaming other people by "confusing the issue" because they don't use your non-standard distinction between the words is, well, rather bizarre.
While certainly study of abstract theory can be distinguished to an extent from hands-on practice, "education" isn't limited to the former, and "training" isn't limited to the latter. And, really, even ignoring the semantics, the division is somewhat artificial for things like programming (or most active intellectual pursuits.) If you can't apply the theory in practice, you don't actually understand the theory, and if you don't understand the theory, you've got very limited practical scope, as well. Professional education -- or professional training -- involves theory and practical application together.
Neither, I'm providing a factual description for those reading along that might not be familiar with Unity. I'm not interested in selling Unity to you, nor do I give a good god-damn how you feel about Unity.
The launcher bar more like a menu than a "memory paging algorithm" (I don't even get what you are trying to get at with your description.) The typical applications menu that you would normally have on most Linux desktops is accessed by right clicking on the Applications icon on the launch bar (you get the categories, which launch open the application window preset to the selected category, rather than a traditional tree menu.)
Not having a traditional tree menu is the thing I think I initially liked least about Unity, because it seems to put apps initially "farther" away from easy access, but with use and the fact that the most-used icons are pushed forward, it actually seems to be slightly better for the most common apps, which I think on-balance is going to be a win in the long term.
Obviously, its not something you like. Which is why its good that Ubuntu made it easy to restore the classic look and feel.
Because you choose to download and install an operating system which prominently presents it as the default UI.
If you mean "why is it the default for Ubuntu rather than being relegated to a specific spin for smaller and/or touchscreen and/or touch pad devices like the old 'Netbook Remix'?", the answer is because Shuttleworth thinks that its a better UI for mass market use across the board, and that's what Ubuntu Desktop's target is. The approach it took -- before it graduated to be default for Ubuntu Desktop -- to dealing with smaller screens and less precise pointing devices was to provide bigger visual targets for key interactions while more efficiently using UI real estate. That's got obvious benefits for smaller devices and devices using touch screens and touch pads, but the approach makes sense for desktops, as well.
And, for people that don't like it, the Gnome Classic UI is available in Ubuntu without installing anything extra (and several other UI options are available from the standard repositories.)
I've already addressed the impact of the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel in GP. If you thin there is a particular ruling on estoppel that provides in impact to that phrasing different than what was described, please cite that ruling.
Whether or not the teller is doing this, the bank certainly is. No matter whether you go to the window or the ATM.
Except that Sony doesn't make that connection. They say "X happened", "Y happened", "A admits to doing X", "X made it more difficult for us to protect against Y", "We don't know if A did Y or was in any way knowingly cooperating with those who did."
Other people reinterpreted that into Sony saying "A did Y".
I think its more likely that instead of being patsies/dupes or directly responsible, they were a known presence that was used as convenient cover. Rather than Anon being duped or coopted by the intruders, the intruders took advantage of the distraction from Anon's DDoS to help conceal their heist, the same as someone wanting to rob a brick-and-mortar facility might take advantage of a known disaster to distract the focus of security.
Anonymous wouldn't be even a superficially credible scapegoat if they hadn't already been publicly mad at Sony anyway, even if they deny calling for the particular attack that Sony is trying to blame them for.
Correction: Sony is trying to do what all (or, well, a reasonably large fraction, at any rate) people in trouble try to do: find a scapegoat.
Being in power has very little to do with it. A strung out penniless drug addict caught by the cops with a needle full of heroin about to inject himself will try to spin a story of how it isn't his drugs.
Being in power does make it somewhat more likely that you'll have publicly identified enemies that you can pull out as a scapegoat, I suppose.
Unity isn't a touch screen UI. It's a UI that isn't touch-hostile (or touchpad-hostile, or small-monitor hostile) to the extent that traditional desktop GUIs are, but it mostly avoids hostility to those things by presenting information in a cleaner, more efficient way than traditional desktop GUIs. While there are a few things I think it could really use (including better organization of apps from the "Applications" menu), I think its a much better keyboard, mouse, and big monitor desktop GUI, than most, as well as being more suitable for small screens, touch screens, and touchpads than most desktop GUIs.
Its great that for maximized windows. I'm less sure its a good idea that the menubar for non-maximized windows also is merged into the top panel (only the menubar for the currently "front" window is displayed, and its displayed in the top panel.) It does save screen real estate (yay), but I don't like having to leave the apps visual space to get to the menu.
OTOH, I find that I tend to use apps that are keyboard heavy and/or have good in app toolbars (including menus on toolbars, like Chrome's wrench menu), so its rarely a big deal. I actually didn't realize how little I use traditional menubars in the apps I use most often until I started using Unity and realizing how little the lack of the menubar where I am used to it bothered me.
Run any app that doesn't have a permanent launch bar icon and you'll see a new launch icon in the bar, and when you minimize that app, that new icon will stay there. The new icon will also have an arrow on the left, just like every icon for a running app, whether minimized or not. That arrow indicates that its a running app. No arrow means that the app is not running, but can be launched from the icon.
IMO, its an elegant combination of functions that makes a few changes to traditional desktop GUI to present information better. Obviously, the original motivation was limited real estate netbook screens and limited precision touch and touchpad interfaces, but honestly I think its (despite some wrinkles that still need to be addressed) a better basic approach than the UIs it replaces.
It does take some getting used to, though.
Um, the battery power and network status icons are on the top bar, not gotten rid of.
It goes into the application icon on the launch bar, just like on most other GUIs. The only different thing is that, if its an application you have a permanent launcher icon for, that's the same icon you'd use to launch if it weren't already open. (But its clear whether the app is open or not, because if it is open, even minimized, theres an arrow pointing to it from the left of the icon; if its open and non-responsive, there is a double line to the right of the icon -- a sideways pause icon -- and if its the currently active window, there's an arrow pointing to it from the right of the icon in addition to the arrow on the left.)
That "crazy search menu" is a menu tree that also has a keyboard input area. So, no, the idea of a menu tree is not gone, just evolved.
I think even newbies will find the launcher that starts out open by default pretty easily. (Sure, it doesn't have all the programs on the first level, but then neither does the Windows Start menu.)
No, the problems are:
1. people always hate change, even if the change is better for people who aren't already set in the old way.
2. The new systems are somewhat immature.
Unity works quite well with a mouse and keyboard and a 20" monitor; there some things I think it could do better, to be sure, but the basic concept and most of the implementation are pretty good. And, its not like Ubuntu 11.04 doesn't include the classic interface.
And most UIs for mainstream OSs still are designed to support it, even as they are also adapted to support alternative input mechanisms on which those systems might be used.
Or you can realize that, at least in U.S. law, that's what's called a "gratuitous license" and is, therefore, revocable at will, even if it says otherwise.
The fact that the remedies Microsoft is able to claim for violations of its rights after it revokes the permissions might be limited to the extent a court decides is necessary to avoid injustice in the case of people who reasonably relied on the promise before it was revoked under the doctrine of promissory estoppel is very far from a solid guarantee.
The reason MS falsely claimed that Google wasn't certified was to deflect attention away from their own lack.
Untrue. FISMA certification in advance was not a requirement, and so was irrelevant to the contract at issue. MS raised the issue about Google to distract attention from the fact that Google's substantive claims about the contract being improperly given to Microsoft without allowing competing bids was correct.