In addition, I've personally updated the article that I wrote on bitcoin to include some analysis of what it could mean at the end of the news report. I appreciate feedback and constructive criticism.
I'm saddened to hear that my account has been banned from posting new articles, though.
Arelius - I looked into the numbers and it appears you might actually be correct. This was a shared information pool between a couple of news sites and it looks like we all may have reported incorrectly. I would have to look deeper but I'm not not sure which way the facts point right now.
If anything, it might be that overall, this generation's sales is at least matching last gen.
It's not because the software is necessarily "insecure", it's just because new ways of getting around protections are found every day. Plus, look at how much the technology landscape has changed since XP was introduced in 2001.
Honestly, I would also think that most of the applications for ATMs were created before Linux systems gained much popularity. Plus in general Linux isn't used to often commercially, I believe.
I don't either, but not just because the the bugs. The whole focus on tablets and touch screens is a big turn off to most businesses I would think. Even though Microsoft is finally considering switching 8 to more of a classic style, I think it's too late for that.
It's not too late at all. Microsoft has had a number of "skip this version" Windows versions, and the subseqent release has done well. WinXP did well despite WinME, Win7 has done well despite Vista, and Win8.1 or Win9 will probably do well despite Win8.
I have no doubt that Microsoft will do well on future editions despite Windows 8. What I do think is that anything with Windows 8 in it's name is always going to have the touchscreen/tablet stigma attached to it.
I do see your point...MS has had a hit-then-miss trend of OS's over the last few iterations. But my general thought is that 7 is just too good (in general, and as an alternative) to 8.x/9.
I didn't intend to misleading intentionally. The data should be safe with Google as long as they choose not to use it for targeted advertising purposes, which is probably pretty unlikely.
Of course, many medical providers in both the US and UK already use cloud based services to store this data - I think the difference though is that usually the companies they use are geared towards medical data, and therefore don't have their hands in ads as they are paid as contractors by the providers.
I think that this quote is very much true. Take it how you wish to.