Intentionally? I've only ever "used" it when trying to copy a link to an image.

The option with the most text is always the correct choice. Both for the diagnosis and the solution.

At least until problem 11, which I can't advance to because it tells me I have to solve the previous case even though it's solved.

Thank you for noticing this pattern, I'm working on fix that

I had to fix the id in two digits cases, now you'll be able to advance

Don't give them ideas.

I remember when it was Romneycare.

Relays were standardized.

Other parts were sourced from outside suppliers, which also supplied the same or similar parts to other automakers. Some of them were direct replacements, some were easily modified to work, and some could be robbed for components to refurbish your old part.

The set the limit to 85 in 1999 because people turned the state into a race track.

If you're at the top of the buffer, guG will lowercase the whole thing.

So if you open a file, go to type G to jump to a line, but accidentally hit g, then try to undo it with u out of habit, before hitting G again, you do the same thing.

Yes, you don't make that 4 percent bigger unless you get people who don't use Linux to use Linux.

> Yes, you don't make that 4 percent bigger unless you get people who don't use Linux to use Linux.

And you get people to use Linux by removing features that make Linux attractive in the first place? The mess that is Windows clipboard and cut/paste is what drove me to Linux when I started with it, and I've heard the same from other people too.

"Users of W don't know X" leads to "Let make our system like W" which is a ruse of an argument, that was pointed out already.

I encourage you to read the grandparent of your comment and specifically this quote (from ndiddy):

"I don't know why they're using familiarity as an argument when GNOME has intentionally behaved completely differently from the Windows/Mac desktop for the past 15 years."

They didn't accumulate "problem" users, they drove off everyone else.

Throwing their fans under the bus to try and get new users has been Mozilla's tactic for the last 15 years. Which is why they're down to 2% market share.

Doing it harder isn't going to help them.

From the same Wikipedia page:

"On July 15, 2003, Time Warner (formerly AOL Time Warner) disbanded Netscape. Most of the programmers were laid off, and the Netscape logo was removed from the building."

Peak Netscape was 1996. By 2003, they had already handed development off to Mozilla, and Netscape the browser was just a thin veneer over Mozilla's browser.

By 2007, it was just Mozilla with AOL branding and almost all of it's users were people still using AOL in 2007.

Yes, that's the point.

Back in the naughties, testing a web page with Netscape seemed miraculous because if it rendered correctly with a PC, chances are it would with a Mac, and with Linux.

Microsoft didn't care about standards. If a page rendered incorrectly in other browsers than Windows MSIE they didn't care (even if it was Mac MSIE).

But that difference wasn't enough to save Netscape because, as a web browser, Netscape was a bloated mess.

When Firefox came along, it was popular with web designers, for the same reasons as Netscape was - but its streamlined design catered to regular users.

*noughties