The Debian project, upstream mother of countless Linux distributions, has released Debian 10, also known as “Buster”. And yes, that’s a reference to the character from Toy Story. All Debian releases are named after Toy Story characters.
+
Debian has a well-deserved reputation as a rock solid distro for those who don’t want the latest and greatest, preferring instead the stability that comes from sticking with what works. Naturally Debian gets security updates, bug fixes and maintenance releases like any distro, but don’t expect major updates to applications or desktop environments.
+
Right now, as with every release, Debian is pretty close to up-to-date with what the rest of the Linux world is doing. But Buster will be supported for five years and Debian 11 won’t arrive for at least two years (Buster comes 26 months after Debian 9). As time goes on, Buster will look increasingly outdated.
+
But wait, isn’t Ubuntu based on Debian and it’s not out of date? Ubuntu pulls its Debian base from what Debian calls the Testing Channel. Debian Linux consists of three major development branches: Stable, Testing and Unstable. Work on new versions progresses through each, starting life in Unstable and eventually ending up in Stable. Ubuntu plucks its base from Testing, which, from Debian’s point of view is only about half-baked. Like I said, Debian is conservative.
+
At the same time, in decades of using it, I have never had Debian break on me. I am still running several Debian 8 servers and they continue to chug along with very little input from me. They’re set to automatically update to pull in security and bug fixes and they just work.
+
In a desktop though, that kind of stability can be a mixed bag. Sure, your system is unlikely to break, but you’re also unlikely to get the latest version of applications, which means you may find yourself waiting on new features in GIMP or Darktable long after every other distro has rolled them out.
+
I used to hope that Flatpaks – an application packaging method that separates app from underlying system – would mitigate this somewhat, allowing Debian fans to run stable systems but still get the latest versions of key applications. In practice I have not been able to make this work for me, though I may give it another try now that Debian 10 is here.
+
What’s New
+
Debian is always a tough distro to get excited about because, while there’s a ton of new things in this release, most of them long ago arrived in nearly every other distro. Debian releases look like the distro is playing catch-up with the rest of the Linux world and in some ways that’s exactly what’s happening.
+
This time around though it feels like there’s more to it than that. Most of the major updates in this release involve security in one way or another, making Buster feel a bit like Debian hardened.
+
A good example of this is one of the headlining features of Debian 10, support for Secure Boot. Debian 10 can now, in most cases, install without a hitch on UEFI-enabled laptops. Lack of Secure Boot support has long been a stumbling block for anyone wanting to use Debian with all the features of modern machines and now that that’s out the way, Debian feels like a much more viable choice for larger institutions with existing security policies.
+
That’s also true of the move to enabled AppArmor by default. AppArmor is a framework for managing application access. You create policies that restrict which apps can access which documents. It’s particularly useful on servers where it can be used, for example, to make sure that a flaw in a PHP file can’t be used to access anything outside of a web root. While Debian has long supported AppArmor and offered it in the repos, Buster is the first release to ship with it enabled by default.
+
The third security-related update in this release is the ability to sandbox the Apt package manager. This one is a bit complicated and not enabled by default. Instructions to enable it can be found in the Debian release documents. Once you turn it on, you can restrict the list of allowed system calls, and send anything not allowed to SIGSYS.
+
Those three updates alone make Debian 10 worth the update, especially on a server where frequent attacks make something like AppArmor a must-have.
+
There are some other changes that will affect server users though, and not necessarily in a good way, especially the move from iptables to to nftables for managing your firewall. While nftables is in many respects better than iptables – the syntax for creating rules is simpler, it’s faster, and it offers live tracing – it is still different, and will require sysadmins to adjust their workflow and possibly re-write any scripts they have.
+
The other change that strikes me as potentially problematic for some is the move to automatic upgrades to point releases when you enable Debian’s unattended-upgrades package. In the past unattended-upgrades defaulted to installing only upgrades that came from the security suite. With Buster that’s expanded to include upgrading to the latest stable point release.
+
Now part of the stability of Debian comes from infrequent changes, but the other part of its stability comes from its very extensive testing process. Debian releases sometimes spend longer in a frozen state, just testing package updates, than Ubuntu spends on an entire release. That means stable point releases are unlikely to produce problems. Still, if you used unattended-upgrades to keep your systems up-to-date with security fixes in the past be aware that you’ll need to tweak your configuration if you want the same behavior going forward. See the file NEWS.Debian in unattended-upgrades for more details.
+
Also notable in this release is support for driverless printing via any AirPrint-enabled printer (most printers made within the last few years are AirPrint ready). This feature comes courtesy of the upgrade to CUPS 2.2.10.
+
One final note, Buster has finally accomplished the merging of /usr which Debian has been working on for a long time. That means that on a fresh install of Buster the directories /bin, /sbin, and /lib are now aliased to /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, and /usr/lib respectively.
+
What you get in Debian 10
+
Aside from the project-level changes, Debian 10’s release notes are relatively prosaic, as you would expect. Debian’s goal of stability and the ability to work just about anywhere – Debian supports more chip architectures than most people have probably heard of – do not lend themselves to bleeding edge kernels or the latest and greatest graphics driver updates.
+
Debian 10 ships with Linux Kernel 4.19.0-4, which is the latest LTS kernel release. It arrived back in 2018 and will be supported through 2020 (Debian 10 itself will be supported through 2024). The 4.19 series kernel brings a number of new things to Debian, notably initial support for Intel Icelake graphics, much improved power management, better support for Intel’s Low Power Subsystem, better touch screen support, and quite a bit more. You can see everything that’s new over at the linux kernel mailing list announcement.
+
I’ve noticed running Debian 10 in my laptop that battery life is at least an hour better than Debian 9 on the same machine. Whether is due to kernel level improvements, or other improvements in the stack is difficult to say for sure, but either way, I highly recommend upgrading if you’re running Debian 9 on a laptop.
+
Part of Debian’s original appeal was its comprehesive package availability. If it wasn’t in the Debian repos, it probably wasn’t a Linux app. In today’s world that’s less true, but Debian still offers some of the largest repos around with a grand total to 57,703 packages. Of that number 13,370 are new packages added for this release. As part of Buster’s release some 35,532 packages were upgraded.
+
Among the major upgrades are all the desktop environments (more on those below). Debian 10 ships with GNOME 3.30, KDE Plasma 5.14, Cinnamon 3.8, LXDE 0.99.2, LXQt 0.14, MATE 1.20, and Xfce 4.12. Yes, you read that right, the just-barely-ready-for-prime-time LXQt has an official ISO for Debian 10.
+
Software you use to get work done has also been updated to the latest available releases like LibreOffice 6.1, Firefox, GIMP 2.10.8 and more. Programmers and developers will be happy to know that Debian 10, while not completely Python 2-free, is moving in that direction and has very good support for Python 3, offering Python 3.7.2 out of the box. Python 2 support will end in 2020 and like many other distros Debian is encouraging developers to migrate their applications head of Python 2’s end-of-life date.
Another under-the-hood change in this release is the use of the Calameres installer for Debian-Live images. If you install Debian from the Live CD, you’ll see the distro-agnostic Calameres installer instead of the good old Debian nstaller. The Debian installer has quite a few more features, and it’s still what you’ll get if you use a net install or DVD installer, but the Calameres installer is unquestionably more newbie-friendly. It’s also refreshing to see a distro that doesn’t feel the need to roll its own installer, instead using an existing, relatively mature open source application.
+
+
+[image="debian10-installer.jpg" caption='Installing Debian 10 with the Calameres installer.']
+
+
If you needed proof that Wayland has really arrived, Debian 10 is here to provide it. The GNOME desktop in Debian to uses Wayland by default. When a distro as slow to adopt new technology as Debian makes something the default, it’s a safe bet that whatever it is, it’s ready for prime time. Stick a fork in X.org, because as far as GNOME is concerned it’s dead. That said, the X.org display server is also still installed by default and available for those who’d like to use it.
+
I have had no issues running GNOME under Wayland on Debian 10. This release brings GNOME 3.30, which is most notable for its speed boost. Developers from both Red Hat and Canonical put some time into fixing memory leaks and trying to make GNOME Shell faster and less resource hungry. The result is indeed a slightly speedier GNOME, though it is still not a fast or lightweight desktop by any stretch of the imagination.
+
GNOME is also not what you want if you’re a Debian user. It is the default desktop, as it has been for most of Debian’s history, insofar as there is a default in Debian’s sprawling array of installation methods, but these days it’s not the best choice.
+
GNOME Shell updates frequently, making major changes with nearly every release. And those releases arrive pretty regularly, nearly every six months. In the time since Debian 10 froze around GNOME 3.30 earlier this year, there’s already been one new GNOME release and another will arrive in September. Will they eventually make their way into Buster’s repositories? Maybe. Probably even, but it’ll be a while. In my experience, GNOME highlights one of the drawback of Debian stable, it’s, well, too stable.
+
In many respects this is my favorite part of Debian. It doesn’t change. It updates what needs to be updated and everything else can wait.
+
If you’d like to tap that stability though, and set up a system that you don’t have to think about at all for the next five years if you don’t want to, I would suggest that the ideal desktop would mirror the distro’s own conservative approach the development. Look for something with infrequent updates and when those updates come, nothing much ought to change. Bugs should be fixed, minor updates pushed out, but for the most part your system should be the same after your update as it was before.
+
There are several desktops that fit this description to varying degrees, but my favorite desktop of Debian is Xfce.
+
+[image="debian10-xfce.jpg" caption='The Xfce desktop is better suited to Debian's update cycle']
+
+
Like Debian, Xfce usually goes more than a year without a major update, often two years. When updates do arrive they’re the kind you want, tons of bug fixes, speed improvements, and little tweaks rather than huge interface overhauls. Ironically, that may not be true this round, as Xfce 4.14 just arrived and makes a fairly major update to GTK 3 components. Still, while you might have to wait a little while for 4.14 to get to Debian 10, rest assured that there won’t be nearly as many Xfce updates coming as what you’ll get from GNOME or even KDE.
+
I installed Debian using the net installer, which has a nice graphical installer, though I still opt for the text-based installer. Old habits die hard and something about the text-based installer just feels more Debian to me. Once the base system was running I added Xfce, which is currently at version 4.12.
+
Debian’s Xfce is rather plain, not customized in any way. It makes a stable desktop that stays out of your way though. I had no problems whatsoever with Xfce on Debian and while the update to 4.14 looks like a nice one, especially the potential speed boost, not much is going to change in terms of looks or functionality. It will arrive when Debian is ready. If that bothers you, Debian is not the distro for you.
+
I was also curious about Wayland in Debian 10 though, so I ran the Sway tiling window manager for a while. I still have clipboard sharing issues under Wayland though. I could not get copy-and-paste working between Wayland and XWayland apps (Vim and a browser for instance), which is deal breaker for me. That said, the rest of my Wayland experience with Sway on Debian 10 was flawless.
+
Conclusion
+
I’ve been using Debian 10 for three months now (yes, before it was officially released via a testing channel) and, as you would expect, it is a super solid release. This is remarkable only because I did not have the same experience at all on Debian 9. My initial foray into Debian 9 was fraught with problems and I went scurrying back to Debian 8 in a hurry. I tried again after a year and had better luck, but this time around I’ve had no problems at all on either the desktop or server (it’s worth noting here though, before you upgrade, back up any PostgreSQL data, Debian 10 moves from PostgreSQL 9.6 to 11, a significant migration for any live servers).
+
While I plan to wait for at least one point release before I test updating any production servers, Debian 10 looks to be a great release. I full expect to be running Debian 10 servers well into the mid 2020s.
+
On the desktop side I still prefer Arch Linux to Debian on my main machine. This might sound like diametrically opposed distros to compare – Debian is focused on stability and changes at a glacial pace, while Arch is a rolling release with updates on a daily basis – but in my experience these have both been the most stable, reliable distos I’ve used. The chief difference is that one updates all the time to achieve that stability while other updates hardly at all. Different approaches leading to the same result.
+
In the end I stick with Arch on my daily use machine, primarily because I like having the latest releases of photo and video editing software, which is hard to do on Debian. I once thought that Flatpaks, which bundle their own dependencies independent of the system, would solve this problem, but in practice I’ve had far more problems with Flatpaks on Debian than AUR apps on Arch.
+
That said, every machine I don’t touch on a daily basis, including all my servers, run Debian and will soon be running Debian 10.
diff --git a/ars-technica/debian10-review.txt b/ars-technica/debian10-review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fc49217
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/debian10-review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+The Debian project, upstream mother of [countless Linux distributions](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/DebianFamilyTree1210.svg), has released Debian 10, also known as "Buster". And yes, that's a reference to the character from *Toy Story*. All Debian releases are named after Toy Story characters.
+
+Debian has a well-deserved reputation as a rock solid distro for those who don't want the latest and greatest, preferring instead the stability that comes from sticking with what works. Naturally Debian gets security updates, bug fixes and maintenance releases like any distro, but don't expect major updates to applications or desktop environments.
+
+Right now, as with every release, Debian is pretty close to up-to-date with what the rest of the Linux world is doing. But Buster will be supported for five years and Debian 11 won't arrive for at least two years (Buster comes 26 months after Debian 9). As time goes on, Buster will look increasingly outdated.
+
+But wait, isn't Ubuntu based on Debian and it's not out of date? Ubuntu pulls its Debian base from what Debian calls the Testing Channel. Debian Linux consists of three major development branches: Stable, Testing and Unstable. Work on new versions progresses through each, starting life in Unstable and eventually ending up in Stable. Ubuntu plucks its base from Testing, which, from Debian's point of view is only about half-baked. Like I said, Debian is conservative.
+
+At the same time, in decades of using it, I have never had Debian break on me. I am still running several Debian 8 servers and they continue to chug along with very little input from me. They're set to automatically update to pull in security and bug fixes and they just work.
+
+In a desktop though, that kind of stability can be a mixed bag. Sure, your system is unlikely to break, but you're also unlikely to get the latest version of applications, which means you may find yourself waiting on new features in GIMP or Darktable long after every other distro has rolled them out.
+
+I used to hope that Flatpaks -- an application packaging method that separates app from underlying system -- would mitigate this somewhat, allowing Debian fans to run stable systems but still get the latest versions of key applications. In practice I have not been able to make this work for me, though I may give it another try now that Debian 10 is here.
+
+## What's New
+
+Debian is always a tough distro to get excited about because, while there's a ton of new things in this release, most of them long ago arrived in nearly every other distro. Debian releases look like the distro is playing catch-up with the rest of the Linux world and in some ways that's exactly what's happening.
+
+This time around though it feels like there's more to it than that. Most of the major updates in this release involve security in one way or another, making Buster feel a bit like Debian hardened.
+
+A good example of this is one of the headlining features of Debian 10, support for Secure Boot. Debian 10 can now, in most cases, install without a hitch on UEFI-enabled laptops. Lack of Secure Boot support has long been a stumbling block for anyone wanting to use Debian with all the features of modern machines and now that that's out the way, Debian feels like a much more viable choice for larger institutions with existing security policies.
+
+That's also true of the move to enabled AppArmor by default. AppArmor is a framework for managing application access. You create policies that restrict which apps can access which documents. It's particularly useful on servers where it can be used, for example, to make sure that a flaw in a PHP file can't be used to access anything outside of a web root. While Debian has long supported AppArmor and offered it in the repos, Buster is the first release to ship with it enabled by default.
+
+The third security-related update in this release is the ability to sandbox the Apt package manager. This one is a bit complicated and not enabled by default. Instructions to enable it can be found in [the Debian release documents](https://www.debian.org/releases/buster/amd64/release-notes/ch-whats-new.en.html#apt-sandboxing). Once you turn it on, you can restrict the list of allowed system calls, and send anything not allowed to SIGSYS.
+
+Those three updates alone make Debian 10 worth the update, especially on a server where frequent attacks make something like AppArmor a must-have.
+
+There are some other changes that will affect server users though, and not necessarily in a good way, especially the move from iptables to to nftables for managing your firewall. While nftables is in many respects better than iptables -- the syntax for creating rules is simpler, it's faster, and it offers live tracing -- it is still different, and will require sysadmins to adjust their workflow and possibly re-write any scripts they have.
+
+The other change that strikes me as potentially problematic for some is the move to automatic upgrades to point releases when you enable Debian's unattended-upgrades package. In the past unattended-upgrades defaulted to installing only upgrades that came from the security suite. With Buster that's expanded to include upgrading to the latest stable point release.
+
+Now part of the stability of Debian comes from infrequent changes, but the other part of its stability comes from its very extensive testing process. Debian releases sometimes spend longer in a frozen state, just testing package updates, than Ubuntu spends on an entire release. That means stable point releases are unlikely to produce problems. Still, if you used unattended-upgrades to keep your systems up-to-date with security fixes in the past be aware that you'll need to tweak your configuration if you want the same behavior going forward. See the file NEWS.Debian in unattended-upgrades for more details.
+
+Also notable in this release is support for driverless printing via any AirPrint-enabled printer (most printers made within the last few years are AirPrint ready). This feature comes courtesy of the upgrade to CUPS 2.2.10.
+
+One final note, Buster has finally accomplished the merging of /usr which Debian has been working on for a long time. That means that on a fresh install of Buster the directories /bin, /sbin, and /lib are now aliased to `/usr/bin`, `/usr/sbin`, and `/usr/lib` respectively.
+
+## What you get in Debian 10
+
+Aside from the project-level changes, Debian 10's release notes are relatively prosaic, as you would expect. Debian's goal of stability and the ability to work just about anywhere -- Debian supports more chip architectures than most people have probably heard of -- do not lend themselves to bleeding edge kernels or the latest and greatest graphics driver updates.
+
+Debian 10 ships with Linux Kernel 4.19.0-4, which is the latest LTS kernel release. It arrived back in 2018 and will be supported through 2020 (Debian 10 itself will be supported through 2024). The 4.19 series kernel brings a number of new things to Debian, notably initial support for Intel Icelake graphics, much improved power management, better support for Intel's Low Power Subsystem, better touch screen support, and quite a bit more. You can see everything that's new over at the [linux kernel mailing list announcement](https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/22/184).
+
+I've noticed running Debian 10 in my laptop that battery life is at least an hour better than Debian 9 on the same machine. Whether is due to kernel level improvements, or other improvements in the stack is difficult to say for sure, but either way, I highly recommend upgrading if you're running Debian 9 on a laptop.
+
+Part of Debian's original appeal was its comprehesive package availability. If it wasn't in the Debian repos, it probably wasn't a Linux app. In today's world that's less true, but Debian still offers some of the largest repos around with a grand total to 57,703 packages. Of that number 13,370 are new packages added for this release. As part of Buster's release some 35,532 packages were upgraded.
+
+Among the major upgrades are all the desktop environments (more on those below). Debian 10 ships with GNOME 3.30, KDE Plasma 5.14, Cinnamon 3.8, LXDE 0.99.2, LXQt 0.14, MATE 1.20, and Xfce 4.12. Yes, you read that right, the just-barely-ready-for-prime-time LXQt has an official ISO for Debian 10.
+
+Software you use to get work done has also been updated to the latest available releases like LibreOffice 6.1, Firefox, GIMP 2.10.8 and more. Programmers and developers will be happy to know that Debian 10, while not completely Python 2-free, is moving in that direction and has very good support for Python 3, offering Python 3.7.2 out of the box. Python 2 support will end in 2020 and like many other distros Debian is encouraging developers to migrate their applications head of Python 2's end-of-life date.
+
+Another under-the-hood change in this release is the use of the Calameres installer for Debian-Live images. If you install Debian from the Live CD, you'll see the distro-agnostic Calameres installer instead of the good old Debian nstaller. The Debian installer has quite a few more features, and it's still what you'll get if you use a net install or DVD installer, but the Calameres installer is unquestionably more newbie-friendly. It's also refreshing to see a distro that *doesn't* feel the need to roll its own installer, instead using an existing, relatively mature open source application.
+
+## Desktops
+
+If you needed proof that Wayland has really arrived, Debian 10 is here to provide it. The GNOME desktop in Debian to uses Wayland by default. When a distro as slow to adopt new technology as Debian makes something the default, it's a safe bet that whatever it is, it's ready for prime time. Stick a fork in X.org, because as far as GNOME is concerned it's dead. That said, the X.org display server is also still installed by default and available for those who'd like to use it.
+
+I have had no issues running GNOME under Wayland on Debian 10. This release brings GNOME 3.30, which is most notable for its speed boost. Developers from both Red Hat and Canonical put some time into fixing memory leaks and trying to make GNOME Shell faster and less resource hungry. The result is indeed a slightly speedier GNOME, though it is still not a fast or lightweight desktop by any stretch of the imagination.
+
+GNOME is also not what you want if you're a Debian user. It is the default desktop, as it has been for most of Debian's history, insofar as there is a default in Debian's sprawling array of installation methods, but these days it's not the best choice.
+
+GNOME Shell updates frequently, making major changes with nearly every release. And those releases arrive pretty regularly, nearly every six months. In the time since Debian 10 froze around GNOME 3.30 earlier this year, there's already been one new GNOME release and another will arrive in September. Will they eventually make their way into Buster's repositories? Maybe. Probably even, but it'll be a while. In my experience, GNOME highlights one of the drawback of Debian stable, it's, well, too stable.
+
+In many respects this is my favorite part of Debian. It doesn't change. It updates what needs to be updated and everything else can wait.
+
+If you'd like to tap that stability though, and set up a system that you don't have to think about at all for the next five years if you don't want to, I would suggest that the ideal desktop would mirror the distro's own conservative approach the development. Look for something with infrequent updates and when those updates come, nothing much ought to change. Bugs should be fixed, minor updates pushed out, but for the most part your system should be the same after your update as it was before.
+
+There are several desktops that fit this description to varying degrees, but my favorite desktop of Debian is Xfce.
+
+Like Debian, Xfce usually goes more than a year without a major update, often two years. When updates do arrive they're the kind you want, tons of bug fixes, speed improvements, and little tweaks rather than huge interface overhauls. Ironically, that may not be true this round, as Xfce 4.14 just arrived and makes a fairly major update to GTK 3 components. Still, while you might have to wait a little while for 4.14 to get to Debian 10, rest assured that there won't be nearly as many Xfce updates coming as what you'll get from GNOME or even KDE.
+
+I installed Debian using the net installer, which has a nice graphical installer, though I still opt for the text-based installer. Old habits die hard and something about the text-based installer just feels more Debian to me. Once the base system was running I added Xfce, which is currently at version 4.12.
+
+Debian's Xfce is rather plain, not customized in any way. It makes a stable desktop that stays out of your way though. I had no problems whatsoever with Xfce on Debian and while the update to 4.14 looks like a nice one, especially the potential speed boost, not much is going to change in terms of looks or functionality. It will arrive when Debian is ready. If that bothers you, Debian is not the distro for you.
+
+I was also curious about Wayland in Debian 10 though, so I ran the Sway tiling window manager for a while. I still have clipboard sharing issues under Wayland though. I could not get copy-and-paste working between Wayland and XWayland apps (Vim and a browser for instance), which is deal breaker for me. That said, the rest of my Wayland experience with Sway on Debian 10 was flawless.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+I've been using Debian 10 for three months now (yes, before it was officially released via a testing channel) and, as you would expect, it is a super solid release. This is remarkable only because I did not have the same experience at all on Debian 9. My initial foray into Debian 9 was fraught with problems and I went scurrying back to Debian 8 in a hurry. I tried again after a year and had better luck, but this time around I've had no problems at all on either the desktop or server (it's worth noting here though, before you upgrade, back up any PostgreSQL data, Debian 10 moves from PostgreSQL 9.6 to 11, a significant migration for any live servers).
+
+While I plan to wait for at least one point release before I test updating any production servers, Debian 10 looks to be a great release. I full expect to be running Debian 10 servers well into the mid 2020s.
+
+On the desktop side I still prefer Arch Linux to Debian on my main machine. This might sound like diametrically opposed distros to compare -- Debian is focused on stability and changes at a glacial pace, while Arch is a rolling release with updates on a daily basis -- but in my experience these have both been the most stable, reliable distos I've used. The chief difference is that one updates all the time to achieve that stability while other updates hardly at all. Different approaches leading to the same result.
+
+In the end I stick with Arch on my daily use machine, primarily because I like having the latest releases of photo and video editing software, which is hard to do on Debian. I once thought that Flatpaks, which bundle their own dependencies independent of the system, would solve this problem, but in practice I've had far more problems with Flatpaks on Debian than AUR apps on Arch.
+
+That said, every machine I don't touch on a daily basis, including all my servers, run Debian and will soon be running Debian 10.
diff --git a/ars-technica/dell-xps13-review-2019.html b/ars-technica/dell-xps13-review-2019.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f2e4b88
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/dell-xps13-review-2019.html
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+
Dell’s XPS 13 Developer Edition, the company’s flagship Ubuntu-based machine, was recently refreshed and I was able to take one for a spin. This is the fourth round of XPS 13s I’ve tested and the closest to Linux-computing nirvana.
+
Dell’s XPS line is not the cheapest Linux option, nor is it the most configurable or user-upgradable. If any of those factors are a big part of your criteria, then this is not the laptop for you. Instead the XPS makes an excellent choice for anyone who wants hardware support from the manufacturer. Dell stands behind Linux on these machines in a way that, in my experience, few other computer makers do.
+
Still, many Linux users have a strong DIY streak and will turn up their noses at the XPS 13. After all, in a day and age when just about every laptop I test seems to run Linux fairly well right out of the box, do you need official support? If you know what you’re doing and don’t mind troubleshooting your own problems then the answer is probably not.
+
Still, if you want a computer that runs smoothly and for which you can pick up the phone and get help should you need it, the Dell XPS 13 is one the best options out there in my view. It doesn’t hurt that the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition is an great-looking, solidly-built piece of hardware. If you want your Linux rig to “just work” and be a powerful, minimalist package that weighs a mere 2.7lbs, the XPS 13 Developer Edition fits the bill.
+
Where it gets confusing is which Dell XPS 13 to consider. To judge by the number of machines and models available, Dell’s Project Sputnik, the company’s long-running effort to bring Ubuntu-based hardware to the masses, has been an unqualified success. Not only are there more models and configurations than ever, Dell keeps churning out hardware updates, usually on pace with the Windows models.
+
That’s no small feat considering that hardware has to undergo a completely different set of compatibility tests from the Windows machines. To be fair, some features have lagged behind in the Linux models, the fingerprint reader is a good example. The Windows version of the XPS 13 released in early 2019 features a fingerprint reader on the power button. The same feature has not been available in the Linux edition until now.
+
While I was testing the late 2019 Developer Edition update, Dell announced yet another update. The new 2020 version (the 10th-gen XPS 13 Developer Edition for those of you keeping track), gets Ice Lake processors with Gen11 graphics, and a new, larger screen. This latest Developer Edition will also be available with up to 32 GB of RAM, up from 16 GB in the model I tested. And, better late than never, support for the fingerprint reader coming. It won’t be available at launch, but Dell says support will arrive soon after.
+
I had a chance to play with this hardware recently at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas where, Linux fans will be happy to know, it had a prominent spot on the display, right next to the Windows version. The 2020 Developer Edition won’t be for sale on Dell’s site until mid-February 2020.
+
As it has in the past, Dell will continue to sell the previous release as well, so you need to know your model numbers. The late 2019 release is the 9370, and the coming 2020 version is the tk9380.
+
What’s New: 2019 Versions
+
The XPS 13 line has stuck with largely the same design since it launched. The bezel seems to always diminish by some nearly immeasurable amount, but otherwise the hardware has looked about the same for years now.
+
The 2019 model is no exception to this trend, side-by-side it’s impossible to tell apart from the 2018 model I own, save for one little detail: no more nose cam.
+
As Ars noted last year when the Windows model was released, the webcam is no longer at the base of the screen staring straight up your nose. Instead the webcam is where it belongs, at the top of the screen.
+
The iteration of the XPS 13 line I’ve been testing (the fifth I’ve used over the year) features Intel’s Comet Lake 6-core i7-10710U processor. It’s a marginal step up from the previous version, but outside benchmarks I haven’t really noticed a huge speed increase. What I have noticed is that this version runs consistently cooler than my 2018 version (both running Ubuntu 18.04).
+
So what of those two extra cores? It may not sound like much, but if you push your processor, whether editing video, gaming, or compiling software, you’re going to want six cores. I happened to be editing a video while reviewing this laptop and, using Lightworks, what took 38 minutes to export on my 2018 XPS 13, took a mere 19 minutes on the Comet Lake chip.
+
The model Dell sent for testing had the max 16GB of RAM, and a 1TB solid state drive. As configured the test machine would set you back $1799. The lowest model, which has the 1080p display, an i5 chip, 128GB SSD and only 8GB of RAM, can be had for $975.
+
The build quality hasn’t changed, the XPS 13 remains a solidly built machine. The construction is excellent and the underlying aluminum frame provides a stiffness that makes it feel solid even though it’s so light. The finish holds up quite well too. My 2018 model has bounced around in my bag, slid across many a table, and scraped over tile counters in the kitchen, all without leaving many marks. I expect the same will be true of the latest model.
+
Though I’ve been using one for years now, the XPS 13’s InfinityEdge display still amazes me. No, it’s not OLED, but it manages to pack a 13-inch screen into a body that otherwise looks and feels more like an 11-inch laptop. Dell has always sent me the version with the 4K IPS touch panel. You can get the XPS 13 with a 1920x1080 screen, and it will get better battery life (more on that in a minute), but I think the higher res display is worth the extra money.
+
Previously there were quite a few pain points with HiDPI screens in Ubuntu, but that’s largely a thing of the past. The grub menu and boot screens are still impossibly small, and every now an then there’s an app that doesn’t scale properly – Zoom, I’m looking at you here – but by and large the combination of work done by the GNOME project, Ubuntu, and Dell have sorted out these issues.
+
I do find the brightest setting to be overwhelming when working indoors (the XPS 13 maxes out at 472 nits brightness), though it does mitigate the glare somewhat if you’re working outside. Honestly though, this is a screen you want to keep indoors – it’s very high gloss and glare is an issue outside. I tend to keep the screen at 70 percent brightness, which helps with battery life and is still plenty bright.
+
What’s Newer: XPS 13 2020 Edition
+
Around the time I sat down to write this review, Dell announced an update to the XPS 13 Developer Edition. The 2020 version features 10th generation Intel Core 10nm mobile processors along with a new, larger display.
+
The new screen. is one of those “of course” changes. Once you see it, you’ll wonder why it wasn’t that way from the beginning. Gone is the Dell logo that used the grace the wider bottom bezel. Instead you get more screen real estate with a new 16:10 aspect ratio (up from 16:9 on the 2019 and prior models).
+
It’s a small gain, but at this screen size, frankly, anything is welcome. For that alone, I would pick the 2020 model over the 2019 version (model 9370). The dimensions of the XPS 13 have been tweaked slightly as well. I couldn’t tell much difference holding it, but the keyboard keys are noticeably bigger. They’re also somewhat springier than previous versions (no it’s not the same as the 2-in-1 model the internet loves to hate on).
+
Performance Upgrades
+
I can’t speak the performance of the 2020 model since my hands-on time was limited, but the 2019 version’s 6-core Comet Lake i7 chip brings some speed improvements. Another bit of welcome news is the option to get 32 GB of RAM. Really, can you have too much RAM?
+
The other area of improvement is with battery life. Dell claims some crazy numbers for XPS battery life. The battery in the 1080p version of the XPS 13 purportedly lasts 18 hours. The 4K display is apparently a massive battery drain because I did not get anywhere near that number in testing mine. Playing back a 1080p video full screen on the loop, the 2019 model managed just over 9 hours. That’s very good, especially for Linux, but it’s nowhere near the claimed max life.
+
There are plenty of things you can do to squeeze some more life out of the battery though. Under my normal work load – terminal running tmux with vim, mpd, and mutt, a web browser (qutebrowser), and Slack – with the screen at 70 percent, and bluetooth off, I managed several hours more. So long as it was fully charged in the morning, I never worry about running the battery low in the course of a workday.
+
If you’re compiling software, editing video, or otherwise pushing the CPU, your battery life will decline. In these use cases, it may be worth considering the 1080p model, though personally I’d rather carry a cord and have the 4K screen.
+
Another change worth noting is support for WiFi 6. Yes, WiFi has version numbers now. What’s being called WiFi 6 is actually 802.11ax and is already shipping in many routers. Unfortunately I didn’t have one to test with, but in testing I’ve done seperately I’ve seen about 20-30 percent speed boosts over 802.11ac. If you have or plan to upgrade your router in the near future either of the new models will see the benefit.
+
What’s Not New: Ubuntu 18.04
+
If you want official support for Ubuntu, you’re always going to be looking at LTS releases. For the XPS 13s shipping now and in the near future that means Ubuntu 18.04 will be the default operating system.
+
While 18.04 is a solid release, recent updates, particularly 19.10, which arrived in October 2019, bring some huge performance improvements that would make these updated hardware profiles even better.
+
I looked at Ubuntu 19.10 for Ars Technica last year, but some of the highlights include much snappier GNOME desktop, experimental support for ZFS, and more default applications shipped as self-contained Snap packages.
+
Shortly after the 2020 XPS 13 is available, Ubuntu 20.04 will arrive, Canonical’s next LTS release. Everything that made 19.10 such a welcome update will be in 20.04, so there is that to look forward to. And quite frankly Dell’s hardware upgrades to the XPS 13 might well pale next to the software upgrade that 20.04 will bring. If previous Ubuntu/Dell upgrade cycles are anything to go by, look for 20.04 to come to the XPS line in late Summer of 2020.
+
I am impatient. As I always do with new XPS machines, I attempted to bring my 2019 XPS 13 up to Ubuntu 19.10. Unfortunately, for the first time I can recall when upgrading an XPS 13, I failed. Or rather I hit enough roadblocks that I gave up.
+
Somehow in the move from 18.04 to 19.04 the drivers for the Wifi card disappeared, and while the drivers for Ethernet showed up and claimed to work I could never actually connect to download any updates. I could download the drivers to another machine, copied them over, and then installed them, but honestly, it shouldn’t been that hard. I’d have a hard time suggesting anyone else attempt doing that.
+
Dell’s selling point on the XPS 13 Developer Edition is that it “just works” and to achieve that Dell does not support anything other than Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
+
I would suggest that, if you want that simplicity and guarantee, you stick with 18.04 until the official upgrades arrive. If you are prepared to resolve “just doesn’t work” scenarios, then you could try making the jump to 19.10. If you do, my suggestion would be to do a clean install rather than trying to upgrade through Ubuntu Software.
+
I should note that I installed both Fedora 32 and Arch Linux without issue. And one thing I definitely think is worth pointing out is how trivially easy it is to re-install the original system thanks to Dell’s recovery tools. The ability to recover so easily does make the XPS 13 a good system to experiment on.
+
Should You Upgrade or Wait for the 2020 model?
+
At this point I would wait two weeks for the 2020 model to arrive. Whether or not you want the slightly larger screen and new keyboard, the 2019 model is likely to drop slightly in price when the new one hits the market.
+
Unfortunately, the price of this model may not drop much and if you have the extra cash, I’d suggest going for the new screen. It doesn’t sound like much, but it surprised me. If you’re used to working on a 16:9 screen, it really does give you a noticeable bump in headroom.
+
Whichever model you decide to get you’re going to have a lot more configuration options than you used to. Dell has been expanding its Ubuntu-based offerings with every release and currently, the site offers no less than 18 different models and configurations for the XPS 13 Developer Edition. There’s a lot more opportunity to customize and tailor the hardware to your needs than there used to be.
diff --git a/ars-technica/dell-xps13-review-2019.txt b/ars-technica/dell-xps13-review-2019.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d4b44cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/dell-xps13-review-2019.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+Dell's XPS 13 Developer Edition, the company's flagship Ubuntu-based machine, was recently refreshed and I was able to take one for a spin. This is the fourth round of XPS 13s I've tested and the closest to Linux-computing nirvana.
+
+Dell's XPS line is not the cheapest Linux option, nor is it the most configurable or user-upgradable. If any of those factors are a big part of your criteria, then this is not the laptop for you. Instead the XPS makes an excellent choice for anyone who wants hardware support from the manufacturer. Dell stands behind Linux on these machines in a way that, in my experience, few other computer makers do.
+
+Still, many Linux users have a strong DIY streak and will turn up their noses at the XPS 13. After all, in a day and age when just about every laptop I test seems to run Linux fairly well right out of the box, do you need official support? If you know what you're doing and don't mind troubleshooting your own problems then the answer is probably not.
+
+Still, if you want a computer that runs smoothly and for which you can pick up the phone and get help should you need it, the Dell XPS 13 is one the best options out there in my view. It doesn't hurt that the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition is an great-looking, solidly-built piece of hardware. If you want your Linux rig to "just work" *and* be a powerful, minimalist package that weighs a mere 2.7lbs, the XPS 13 Developer Edition fits the bill.
+
+Where it gets confusing is *which* Dell XPS 13 to consider. To judge by the number of machines and models available, Dell's Project Sputnik, the company's long-running effort to bring Ubuntu-based hardware to the masses, has been an unqualified success. Not only are there more models and configurations than ever, Dell keeps churning out hardware updates, usually on pace with the Windows models.
+
+That's no small feat considering that hardware has to undergo a completely different set of compatibility tests from the Windows machines. To be fair, some features have lagged behind in the Linux models, the fingerprint reader is a good example. The Windows version of the XPS 13 released in early 2019 features a fingerprint reader on the power button. The same feature has not been available in the Linux edition until now.
+
+While I was testing the late 2019 Developer Edition update, Dell announced yet another update. The new 2020 version (the 10th-gen XPS 13 Developer Edition for those of you keeping track), gets Ice Lake processors with Gen11 graphics, and a new, larger screen. This latest Developer Edition will also be available with up to 32 GB of RAM, up from 16 GB in the model I tested. And, better late than never, support for the fingerprint reader coming. It won't be available at launch, but Dell says support will arrive soon after.
+
+I had a chance to play with this hardware recently at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas where, Linux fans will be happy to know, it had a prominent spot on the display, right next to the Windows version. The 2020 Developer Edition won't be for sale on Dell's site until mid-February 2020.
+
+As it has in the past, Dell will continue to sell the previous release as well, so you need to know your model numbers. The late 2019 release is the 9370, and the coming 2020 version is the tk9380.
+
+### What's New: 2019 Versions
+
+The XPS 13 line has stuck with largely the same design since it launched. The bezel seems to always diminish by some nearly immeasurable amount, but otherwise the hardware has looked about the same for years now.
+
+The 2019 model is no exception to this trend, side-by-side it's impossible to tell apart from the 2018 model I own, save for one little detail: no more nose cam.
+
+As Ars noted last year when the [Windows model](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/dell-finally-nixes-the-up-nose-webcam-in-the-new-dell-xps-13/) was released, the webcam is no longer at the base of the screen staring straight up your nose. Instead the webcam is where it belongs, at the top of the screen.
+
+The iteration of the XPS 13 line I've been testing (the fifth I've used over the year) features Intel's Comet Lake 6-core i7-10710U processor. It's a marginal step up from the previous version, but outside benchmarks I haven't really noticed a huge speed increase. What I have noticed is that this version runs consistently cooler than my 2018 version (both running Ubuntu 18.04).
+
+So what of those two extra cores? It may not sound like much, but if you push your processor, whether editing video, gaming, or compiling software, you're going to want six cores. I happened to be editing a video while reviewing this laptop and, using Lightworks, what took 38 minutes to export on my 2018 XPS 13, took a mere 19 minutes on the Comet Lake chip.
+
+The model Dell sent for testing had the max 16GB of RAM, and a 1TB solid state drive. As configured the test machine would set you back $1799. The lowest model, which has the 1080p display, an i5 chip, 128GB SSD and only 8GB of RAM, can be had for $975.
+
+The build quality hasn't changed, the XPS 13 remains a solidly built machine. The construction is excellent and the underlying aluminum frame provides a stiffness that makes it feel solid even though it's so light. The finish holds up quite well too. My 2018 model has bounced around in my bag, slid across many a table, and scraped over tile counters in the kitchen, all without leaving many marks. I expect the same will be true of the latest model.
+
+Though I've been using one for years now, the XPS 13's InfinityEdge display still amazes me. No, it's not OLED, but it manages to pack a 13-inch screen into a body that otherwise looks and feels more like an 11-inch laptop. Dell has always sent me the version with the 4K IPS touch panel. You can get the XPS 13 with a 1920x1080 screen, and it will get better battery life (more on that in a minute), but I think the higher res display is worth the extra money.
+
+Previously there were quite a few pain points with HiDPI screens in Ubuntu, but that's largely a thing of the past. The grub menu and boot screens are still impossibly small, and every now an then there's an app that doesn't scale properly -- Zoom, I'm looking at you here -- but by and large the combination of work done by the GNOME project, Ubuntu, and Dell have sorted out these issues.
+
+I do find the brightest setting to be overwhelming when working indoors (the XPS 13 maxes out at 472 nits brightness), though it does mitigate the glare somewhat if you're working outside. Honestly though, this is a screen you want to keep indoors -- it's very high gloss and glare is an issue outside. I tend to keep the screen at 70 percent brightness, which helps with battery life and is still plenty bright.
+
+### What's Newer: XPS 13 2020 Edition
+
+Around the time I sat down to write this review, Dell announced an update to the XPS 13 Developer Edition. The 2020 version features 10th generation Intel Core 10nm mobile processors along with a new, larger display.
+
+[The new screen](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/01/dell-updates-xps-13-laptop-with-1610-aspect-ratio-screen-ir-camera/). is one of those "of course" changes. Once you see it, you'll wonder why it wasn't that way from the beginning. Gone is the Dell logo that used the grace the wider bottom bezel. Instead you get more screen real estate with a new 16:10 aspect ratio (up from 16:9 on the 2019 and prior models).
+
+It's a small gain, but at this screen size, frankly, anything is welcome. For that alone, I would pick the 2020 model over the 2019 version (model 9370). The dimensions of the XPS 13 have been tweaked slightly as well. I couldn't tell much difference holding it, but the keyboard keys are noticeably bigger. They're also somewhat springier than previous versions (no it's not the same as the 2-in-1 model the internet loves to hate on).
+
+### Performance Upgrades
+
+I can't speak the performance of the 2020 model since my hands-on time was limited, but the 2019 version's 6-core Comet Lake i7 chip brings some speed improvements. Another bit of welcome news is the option to get 32 GB of RAM. Really, can you have too much RAM?
+
+The other area of improvement is with battery life. Dell claims some crazy numbers for XPS battery life. The battery in the 1080p version of the XPS 13 purportedly lasts 18 hours. The 4K display is apparently a massive battery drain because I did not get anywhere near that number in testing mine. Playing back a 1080p video full screen on the loop, the 2019 model managed just over 9 hours. That's very good, especially for Linux, but it's nowhere near the claimed max life.
+
+There are plenty of things you can do to squeeze some more life out of the battery though. Under my normal work load -- terminal running tmux with vim, mpd, and mutt, a web browser (qutebrowser), and Slack -- with the screen at 70 percent, and bluetooth off, I managed several hours more. So long as it was fully charged in the morning, I never worry about running the battery low in the course of a workday.
+
+If you're compiling software, editing video, or otherwise pushing the CPU, your battery life will decline. In these use cases, it may be worth considering the 1080p model, though personally I'd rather carry a cord and have the 4K screen.
+
+Another change worth noting is support for WiFi 6. Yes, WiFi has version numbers now. What's being called WiFi 6 is actually 802.11ax and is already shipping in many routers. Unfortunately I didn't have one to test with, but in testing I've done seperately I've seen about 20-30 percent speed boosts over 802.11ac. If you have or plan to upgrade your router in the near future either of the new models will see the benefit.
+
+### What's Not New: Ubuntu 18.04
+
+If you want official support for Ubuntu, you're always going to be looking at LTS releases. For the XPS 13s shipping now and in the near future that means Ubuntu 18.04 will be the default operating system.
+
+While 18.04 is a [solid release](https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/05/ubuntu-18-04-the-return-of-a-familiar-interface-marks-the-best-ubuntu-in-years/), recent updates, particularly 19.10, which arrived in October 2019, bring some huge performance improvements that would make these updated hardware profiles even better.
+
+I looked at Ubuntu [19.10 for Ars Technica last year](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/11/ubuntu-19-10-quite-simply-the-best-ubuntu-canonical-has-ever-released/), but some of the highlights include much snappier GNOME desktop, experimental support for ZFS, and more default applications shipped as self-contained Snap packages.
+
+Shortly after the 2020 XPS 13 is available, Ubuntu 20.04 will arrive, Canonical's next LTS release. Everything that made 19.10 such a welcome update will be in 20.04, so there is that to look forward to. And quite frankly Dell's hardware upgrades to the XPS 13 might well pale next to the software upgrade that 20.04 will bring. If previous Ubuntu/Dell upgrade cycles are anything to go by, look for 20.04 to come to the XPS line in late Summer of 2020.
+
+I am impatient. As I always do with new XPS machines, I attempted to bring my 2019 XPS 13 up to Ubuntu 19.10. Unfortunately, for the first time I can recall when upgrading an XPS 13, I failed. Or rather I hit enough roadblocks that I gave up.
+
+Somehow in the move from 18.04 to 19.04 the drivers for the Wifi card disappeared, and while the drivers for Ethernet showed up and claimed to work I could never actually connect to download any updates. I could download the drivers to another machine, copied them over, and then installed them, but honestly, it shouldn't been that hard. I'd have a hard time suggesting anyone else attempt doing that.
+
+Dell's selling point on the XPS 13 Developer Edition is that it "just works" and to achieve that Dell does not support anything other than Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.
+
+I would suggest that, if you want that simplicity and guarantee, you stick with 18.04 until the official upgrades arrive. If you are prepared to resolve "just doesn't work" scenarios, then you could try making the jump to 19.10. If you do, my suggestion would be to do a clean install rather than trying to upgrade through Ubuntu Software.
+
+I should note that I installed both Fedora 32 and Arch Linux without issue. And one thing I definitely think is worth pointing out is how trivially easy it is to re-install the original system thanks to Dell's recovery tools. The ability to recover so easily does make the XPS 13 a good system to experiment on.
+
+### Should You Upgrade or Wait for the 2020 model?
+
+At this point I would wait two weeks for the 2020 model to arrive. Whether or not you want the slightly larger screen and new keyboard, the 2019 model is likely to drop slightly in price when the new one hits the market.
+
+Unfortunately, the price of this model may not drop much and if you have the extra cash, I'd suggest going for the new screen. It doesn't sound like much, but it surprised me. If you're used to working on a 16:9 screen, it really does give you a noticeable bump in headroom.
+
+Whichever model you decide to get you're going to have a lot more configuration options than you used to. Dell has been expanding its Ubuntu-based offerings with every release and currently, the site offers no less than 18 different models and configurations for the XPS 13 Developer Edition. There's a lot more opportunity to customize and tailor the hardware to your needs than there used to be.
diff --git a/ars-technica/invoices/2014-06-29_ars-invoice-02.rtf b/ars-technica/invoices/2014-06-29_ars-invoice-02.rtf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..07197ec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/invoices/2014-06-29_ars-invoice-02.rtf
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\cocoartf1265\cocoasubrtf200
+{\fonttbl\f0\fswiss\fcharset0 ArialMT;\f1\froman\fcharset0 TimesNewRomanPSMT;}
+{\colortbl;\red255\green255\blue255;}
+{\info
+{\keywords }}\vieww12240\viewh15840\viewkind1
+\deftab720
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qr
+
+\f0\b\fs24 \cf0 Scott Gilbertson\
+412 Holman Ave\
+Athens, GA 30601\
+706 438 4297\
+luxagraf@gmail.com
+\f1\b0
+\f0\b \
+6/30/14
+\f1\b0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+\cf0 \
+\
+
+\f0 Ars Technica
+\f1 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural
+\cf0 \
+\
+\
+\
+
+\f0 Invoice Number:
+\b 002
+\f1\b0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qc
+\cf0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural
+\cf0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+
+\f0 \cf0 Article:
+\b Mint 17 is the perfect place for Linux-ers to wait out Ubuntu uncertainty\
+
+\b0 Word count:
+\b 3196\
+
+\b0 Rate of Pay:
+\b $.30/word
+\b0 \
+Total:
+\b $1281.60\
+\
+\
+\
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\sa283\pardirnatural
+\cf0 Total for Invoice: $958.80
+\f1\b0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural
+
+\f0 \cf0 Bank: SchoolsFirstFCU
+\f1 \
+
+\f0 Address:
+\f1 P.O. Box 11547\
+Santa Ana, CA 92711-1547 \
+\
+\
+
+\f0 Account Name: Checking\
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+\cf0 Bank account number:0172510703
+\f1
+\f0 \
+Bank routing number: 322282001
+\f1
+\f0 \
+
+\f1 \
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/ars-technica/invoices/paid/2014-05-02_ars-invoice-01.rtf b/ars-technica/invoices/paid/2014-05-02_ars-invoice-01.rtf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d3e8f36
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/invoices/paid/2014-05-02_ars-invoice-01.rtf
@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\cocoartf1265\cocoasubrtf190
+{\fonttbl\f0\fswiss\fcharset0 ArialMT;\f1\froman\fcharset0 TimesNewRomanPSMT;}
+{\colortbl;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue0;}
+{\info
+{\title }
+{\subject }
+{\author }
+{\*\company }
+{\keywords }}\vieww12240\viewh15840\viewkind1
+\deftab720
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qr
+
+\f0\b\fs24 \cf2 Scott Gilbertson\
+412 Holman Ave\
+Athens, GA 30601\
+706 438 4297\
+luxagraf@gmail.com
+\f1\b0
+\f0\b \
+5/02/14
+\f1\b0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+\cf2 \
+\
+
+\f0 Ars Technica
+\f1 \cf0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural
+\cf0 \
+\
+\cf2 \
+\
+
+\f0 Invoice Number:
+\b 001
+\f1\b0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qc
+\cf2 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural
+\cf2 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+
+\f0 \cf2 Article:
+\b Ubuntu 14.04 review: Missing the boat on big changes\
+
+\b0 Word count:
+\b 4272\
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+
+\b0 \cf0 Rate of Pay:
+\b $.30/word
+\b0 \cf2 \
+Total:
+\b $1281.60\
+\
+\
+\
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\sa283\pardirnatural
+\cf2 Total for Invoice: $1281.60
+\f1\b0 \
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural
+
+\f0 \cf2 Bank: SchoolsFirstFCU
+\f1 \
+
+\f0 Address:
+\f1 P.O. Box 11547\
+Santa Ana, CA 92711-1547 \
+\
+\
+
+\f0 Account Name: Checking\
+\pard\tx709\tx1418\tx2127\tx2836\tx3545\tx4254\tx4963\tx5672\tx6381\tx7090\tx7799\tx8508\tx9217\pardeftab720\sl300\pardirnatural\qj
+\cf2 Bank account number:0172510703
+\f1
+\f0 \
+Bank routing number: 322282001
+\f1
+\f0 \
+
+\f1 \
+}
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/allaregreen.html b/ars-technica/published/allaregreen.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9942738
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/allaregreen.html
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+
Nicholas Rubin, a 16-year-old programmer from Seattle, has created a browser add-on that makes it incredibly easy to see the influence of money in U.S. politics.
+
Rubin calls the add-on Greenhouse and it does something so brilliantly simple that once you use it you'll wonder why news sites didn't think of this themselves.
+
You can install Greenhouse for Firefox, Chrome and Safari over at allaregreen.us.
+
Greenhouse pulls in campaign contribution data for every Senator and Representative, including the total amount of money received, as well as a breakdown by industry and size of donation. It then combines this with a parser that finds the names of Senators and Representatives in the current page and highlights them. Hover your mouse over the highlighted names and it displays their top campaign contributors.
+
Greenhouse adds another layer to the news, showing you the story behind the story. In politics, as in many other things, if you want to know the why behind the what, you need to follow the money. Somewhat depressingly, in politics it seems that it's money all the way down.
+
For example, suppose you read this story in the New York Times, in which three Senators take G.M. to task for failing to recall millions of small cars. What do the three have in common? Just that their top campaign donors are lawyers and law firms.
+
Or try Greenhouse on this story on House Republicans who think the Affordable Health Care Act is an illegal overreach by President Barack Obama. Greenhouse will highlight six names in that story. All but one get the majority of their campaign funds from a combination of two groups -- health professionals and the pharmaceutical industry.
+
+[image="screenshot01.png" caption="Greenhouse in action. Opposed to Health Are reform? Check. Primarily funded by Healthcare Industry? Check."]
+
+
Cynical yet? No? There's plenty more examples; follow the [@allaregreen](https://twitter.com/allaregreen) Twitter account for your daily dose of money in U.S. politics. As allaregreen.us puts it, playing of the color encoding of U.S. politics: "Some are red. Some are blue. All are green."
+
There is one ray of hope in Greenhouse's data. Near the top of the panel it displays you'll see the percentage of contributions under $200. In other words, the percentage of contributions from people like you and me. There's also a small badge indicating the member's position on campaign finance reform.
+
For his part Rubin says building and using the add-on hasn't made him cynical. "Actually, I think Greenhouse is making me hopeful," Rubin said when I asked about cynicism in U.S. politics. "I've received such great feedback from people around the world... people want transparency like this and Greenhouse may actually play a role in the solution."
+
Among the early users offering positive feedback is Harvard Law professor and author of Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress — and a Plan to Stop It, Lawrence Lessig, who calls Greenhouse "easily the coolest plugin that I use".
+
Indeed Greenhouse does something most attempts at transparency do not -- it gives context to data. Transparency in government is good, few would argue otherwise, but as Lessig wrote recently on his blog, "merely making data available isn't enough to deal with an underlying corruption problem."
+
Open government data tends to be very big data with little context to it. For example, all the data Greenhouse uses comes from opensecrets.org, which has had that data available for years. Chances are though, you've never bothered to dig through opensecrets.org and follow the money. By taking that data and injecting it into the context of the news, Rubin has managed to turn raw information into useful knowledge.
+
Did I mention Rubin is just 16?
+
The idea for Greenhouse came from a presentation Rubin gave back in 7th grade when a teacher assigned him to the topic of Corporate Personhood and campaign finance. Rubin came away from that experience thinking that more people should know about how corporations run U.S. politics. But, "the information about sources of funding ... wasn't simple and easily accessible when people needed it." Later when Rubin started to teach himself to code he decided to try to combine the two interests and Greenhouse was born.
+
Rubin plans to keep expanding Greenhouse. He's looking to build a sort of reverse Greenhouse -- a tool that would, for example, highlight all mentions of Google on a webpage and show which campaigns the company contributes to -- as well as a tool for other countries, though the latter will depend on whether or not the data is actually available. He also hopes to build Greenhouse into an interactive community rather than simply a browser add-on.
+
If you want to participate or just follow along, grab the add-on and follow @allaregreen on Twitter.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/allaregreen.us.txt b/ars-technica/published/allaregreen.us.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b316db
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/allaregreen.us.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+Nicholas Rubin, a 16-year-old programmer from Seattle, has created a browser add-on that makes it incredibly easy to see the influence of money in U.S. politics.
+
+Rubin calls the add-on Greenhouse and it does something so brilliantly simple that once you use it you'll wonder why news sites didn't think of this themselves.
+
+You can install Greenhouse for Firefox, Chrome and Safari over at [allaregreen.us](http://allaregreen.us/).
+
+Greenhouse pulls in campaign contribution data for every Senator and Representative, including the total amount of money received, as well as a breakdown by industry and size of donation. It then combines this with a parser that finds the names of Senators and Representatives in the current page and highlights them. Hover your mouse over the highlighted names and it displays their top campaign contributors.
+
+Greenhouse adds another layer to the news, showing you the story behind the story. In politics, as in many other things, if you want to know the why behind the what, you need to follow the money. Somewhat depressingly, in politics it seems that it's money all the way down.
+
+For example, suppose you read [this story](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/18/business/senate-hearing-on-general-motors.html) in the New York Times, in which three Senators take G.M. to task for failing to recall millions of small cars. What do the three have in common? Just that their top campaign donors are lawyers and law firms.
+
+Or try Greenhouse on this story on House Republicans who think the Affordable Health Care Act is an [illegal overreach](http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/house-republicans-obamacare-lawsuit-108957.html) by President Barack Obama. Greenhouse will highlight six names in that story. All but one get the majority of their campaign funds from a combination of two groups -- health professionals and the pharmaceutical industry.
+
+[image="screenshot01.png" caption="Greenhouse in action. Opposed to Health Are reform? Check. Primarily funded by Healthcare Industry? Check."]
+
+Cynical yet? No? There's plenty more examples; follow the [@allaregreen](https://twitter.com/allaregreen) Twitter account for your daily dose of money in U.S. politics. As allaregreen.us puts it, playing of the color encoding of U.S. politics: "Some are red. Some are blue. All are green."
+
+There is one ray of hope in Greenhouse's data. Near the top of the panel it displays you'll see the percentage of contributions under $200. In other words, the percentage of contributions from people like you and me. There's also a small badge indicating the member's position on campaign finance reform.
+
+For his part Rubin says building and using the add-on hasn't made him cynical. "Actually, I think Greenhouse is making me hopeful," Rubin said when I asked about cynicism in U.S. politics. "I've received such great feedback from people around the world... people want transparency like this and Greenhouse may actually play a role in the solution."
+
+Among the early users offering positive feedback is Harvard Law professor and author of Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress — and a Plan to Stop It, Lawrence Lessig, who [calls Greenhouse](http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/88073919937/incredibly-cool-politic-code-get-it) "easily the coolest plugin that I use".
+
+Indeed Greenhouse does something most attempts at transparency do not -- it gives context to data. Transparency in government is good, few would argue otherwise, but as Lessig [wrote recently on his blog](http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/93500567957/escapethe1990s), "merely making data available isn't enough to deal with an underlying corruption problem."
+
+Open government data tends to be very big data with little context to it. For example, all the data Greenhouse uses comes from [opensecrets.org](http://www.opensecrets.org/), which has had that data available for years. Chances are though, you've never bothered to dig through opensecrets.org and follow the money. By taking that data and injecting it into the context of the news, Rubin has managed to turn raw information into useful knowledge.
+
+Did I mention Rubin is just 16?
+
+The idea for Greenhouse came from a presentation Rubin gave back in 7th grade when a teacher assigned him to the topic of [Corporate Personhood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#Corporations_as_persons_in_the_United_States) and campaign finance. Rubin came away from that experience thinking that more people should know about how corporations run U.S. politics. But, "the information about sources of funding ... wasn't simple and easily accessible when people needed it." Later when Rubin started to teach himself to code he decided to try to combine the two interests and Greenhouse was born.
+
+Rubin plans to keep expanding Greenhouse. He's looking to build a sort of reverse Greenhouse -- a tool that would, for example, highlight all mentions of Google on a webpage and show which campaigns the company contributes to -- as well as a tool for other countries, though the latter will depend on whether or not the data is actually available. He also hopes to build Greenhouse into an interactive community rather than simply a browser add-on.
+
+If you want to participate or just follow along, grab the add-on and follow @allaregreen on Twitter.
+
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/allaregreennotes.txt b/ars-technica/published/allaregreennotes.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c5c3fe4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/allaregreennotes.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+
+
+Greenhouse
+
+
+
+It sounds cynical, but if you want to understand why politicians make the decisions they make and vote the way they vote you just need to follow the money.
+
+For every story there is a story behind that story.
+
+
+Robert Anton Wilson often used a playful idea of seeing the "fnords", that is seeing the story behind the story.
+
+
+In other words Greenhouse isn't doing anything thousands of other people couldn't have done. But they didn't. Nicholas Rubin did.
+
+Rubin has received a lot of attention from the press in part because he's just 16 years old, but that catchy factoid sometimes hides just how fantastically useful Greenhouse is regardless of who built it and how old they might be. It's fantastically useful if you want to see the threads behind the news, to follow the money as it were.
+
+
+
+
+
+1. how did you come up with the idea for Greenhouse?
+
+Corporate personhood and
+
+(if he talks about corporate personhood, mention that most people don't know that, can he expand a bit on that idea)
+
+1a) ask about relationship to Lessig.
+
+2. One of the things I found interesting about Greenhouse is that on one hand staring this data in face can make you cynical about politics, how did you feel about that? Has it been depressing to discover the sort of almost 1 to 1 equation that seems to exist between money and the way politicians vote on issues?
+
+2a) at the top there you have a little ray of hope -- AKA, the contributions from ordinary people
+like you and I. Was that there from the beginning? and do you see those numbers
+as a kind of solution? (can follow up with Lessigs Grant and Franklin proposal
+
+3. In reading some of the past coverage of greenhouse I noticed that you had a lot of people from all sides of the political spectrum -- pretty unusual to have Tea Party supports say nice things said about at the same time anti-Tea PArty supporters are saying the same thing. It's a bit like uncovering the money might unite some pretty dissparate ideologies around a common goal -- have you found that to be true,
+that money is the common enemy of pretty much everyone seeking political reform?
+
+3a) what's the most egregious example you know of -- who is the most paid for politician in america?
+
+4. What are your goals for greenhouse?
+
+5. i noticed that cory doctorow suggested a sort of reverse tool, where any time the name of a company or individual who makes massive donations comes up it shows the politicians who benefit from that money. Is there data out there for that sort of thing?
+
+6. Can you share any plans for the future of greenhouse?
+
+Lessig said recently on his blog that "
+Opensecrets.org can tell you. Next time you read an article about how you local representatives voted, head over to opensecrets.org and check to see if the vote happens to -- coincidentally I'm sure -- to benefit the your representative's top donors in any way. Congrats, you've followed the money to the why behind the what.
+
+
+
+In this case the "green" in Greenhouse refers to money, as in campaign contributions and how they influence the U.S. political system. The download page gives away the answer in its slogan -- "some are red, some are blue, all are green".
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/amp.html b/ars-technica/published/amp.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..884a190
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/amp.html
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+
There's a story going around in these days that the web is too slow, especially over mobile networks. It's a pretty good story. It's a perpetual story. The web, while certainly improved from the days of 14.4k modems, has never been as fast as we want it to be, which is to say the web has never been instant.
+
Curiously though, rather than focusing on possible cures like increasing network speeds, finding ways to decrease network latency or even speed up web browsers, the latest version of the "web-is-too-slow" story turns the blame on the web itself. And perhaps more pointedly, the people who make it.
+
Certainly there is some truth to the slow web story. The average web page has been increasing in size at a fantastic rate. In January of 2012 the average page tracked by HTTPArchive transferred 1239kb and made 86 requests. Fast forward to September 2015 and the numbers are 2162kb of data and 103 requests. Overall size doesn't directly correlate to page load time, but it is a pretty good indicator that the web is slow and things are actually getting worse, not better.
+
While the web is slow and getting slower, native mobile applications are getting faster. Mobile devices get more powerful with every release cycle and applications take advantage of that. Apps get faster, the web gets slower.
+
This, so the story goes, is why Facebook must invent Facebook Instant Articles, why Apple News must come to exist and why Google must now go and create Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP). Users have come to expect that everything should be as fast as native apps so Facebook, Apple and Google need to make sure the web feels the same way.
+
Google is late to the game, but its new Accelerated Mobile Pages project has the same goals as Facebook and Apple's efforts -- make the web feel like a native application on mobile devices. It's worth noting that all three companies seem utterly unconcerned with speeding up the web on the desktop.
+
All of these efforts -- Instant Articles, Apple News and AMP -- are to help speed up our experience of the web on mobile devices by stripping out all that junk that messy web developers and publishers have included in their websites. All those ads, all those images, all those interactive graphics, all those comment sections, all those extras that take too long to load.
+
Instead, Facebook Instant Articles, Apple News and now AMP will present stripped down pages that load quickly even over the paltry 3G speeds still found in much of the United States.
+
In the case of AMP there are apparently two things playing the role of villains in the "web is too slow" story: JavaScript and advertisements that use JavaScript.
+
It sounds like a pretty good story. It has good guys (Google) and bad guys (everyone not using Google Ads) and it's true to most of our experiences. Who isn't sick of intrusive ads and terrible JavaScript libraries begging for us to sign up for some terrible newsletter?
+
But this story has some fundamental problems. For example, Google owns the largest ad server network on the web, if ads are the problem, why doesn't Google get to work speeding up the ads? More on that in a bit.
+
But first, AMP.
+
What is AMP?
+
To understand AMP first you need to understand Facebook's Instant Articles. Instant Articles uses RSS and standard HTML tags to create an optimized, slightly stripped down version of an article. Facebook then allows for some extra rich-content like auto-playing video or audio clips. Despite this Facebook claims Instant Articles are up to 10 times faster than their siblings on the open web. Some of that speed gain comes from stripping things out, some likely comes from aggressive caching.
+
But the key is that Instant Articles are only available via Facebook's mobile apps and only to established publishers who sign a deal with Facebook. That means reading articles from Facebook's Instant Article partners like National Geographic, BBC, Buzzfeed and others is a faster, richer multimedia experience than those same articles when they appear on the publisher's site.
+
Apple News appears to work roughly the same way, taking RSS feeds from publishers and then optimizing the content for delivery within Apple's application.
+
All this app-based content delivery cuts out the web. That's a problem for the web and by extension, Google, which leads us to Google's Accelerated Mobile Pages project.
+
Oddly though, unlike Facebook Articles and Apple News, AMP eschews standards like RSS and HTML in favor of its own little modified subset of HTML. AMP HTML looks a lot like HTML without the bells and whistles. In fact, if you head over to the AMP project announcement you'll see an AMP page rendered in your browser. It looks like any other page on the web.
+
AMP markup uses a basic set of tags from HTML. An extremely limited set of tags. Form tags? Nope. Audio or video tags? Nope. Embed? Certainly not. Script tags? Nope. There's a very short list of the HTML tags in allowed in AMP documents available over on the project page. There's also no JavaScript allowed. Those ads and tracking scripts will never be part of AMP documents (don't worry, Google will still be tracking you).
+
AMP defines several of its own tags, things like amp-youtube, amp-ad or amp-pixel. The extra tags are part of what's known as web components, which is not now, but likely will eventually be a web standard (or possibly ActiveX part 2, only the future knows for sure).
+
So far AMP probably sounds like a pretty good idea to most readers. Faster pages, no tracking scripts, no JavaScript at all so no overlay ads about signing up for newsletters or downloading apps no one needs.
+
But then there are some problematic design choices in AMP. The more you look at AMP the less it looks like a good idea.
+
Let's start with some of the poor technical decisions in the current incarnation of AMP. Or at least they're poor decisions if you like the open web and the current HTML standards.
+
AMP re-invents the wheel for images using a custom component amp-img instead of HTML's img tag (not only does Google ignore RSS, JSON and RDF, it ignores HTML). AMP doesn't stop there. It does the same things with amp-audio and amp-video rather than the HTML standard audio and video. AMP developers argue that this allows AMP to only serve images when required, which isn't possible with the HTML img tag. That, however, is a limitation of web browsers, not HTML itself. AMP also very clearly has treated accessibility as an after thought, or more likely, not a thought at all. You lose more than just HTML tags with AMP.
+
In other words AMP is technically half baked at best. The good news is that AMP developers are listening. One of the worst things about AMP's initial code was the decision to disable pinch and zoom on articles. Thankfully Google has reversed course and eliminated the tag that prevented pinch and zoom.
+
There are also dozens of other open issues calling out some of the mostegregiousdecisions in AMP's technical design. There are already open issues surrounding nearly every technical shortcoming mentioned in this article.
+
But the markup that is AMP is really only one part of the picture. After all, as pointed out above, if all they really wanted to do is strip out all the enhancements and just present the content of a page there are quite a few already existing ways to do that, including RSS, JSON and RDF. In fact, Google used to have an RSS reader that did just this. So why AMP?
+
Speeding things up for users is a nice side benefit, but the point of AMP, like Facebook Articles, is to lock in users to a particular site/format/service. In this case the users aren't you and I reading, it's the publishers putting the content on the web.
+
It's the Ads Stupid
+
The goal of Facebook Instant Articles is to keep you on Facebook. No need to explore the larger web when it's all right there in Facebook, especially when it loads so much faster in the Facebook app than it does in a browser on the web.
+
AMP exists because Google recognized what a threat Facebook Instant Articles is to Google's ability to serve ads.
+
This is why it's called Accelerated Mobile Pages. Sorry desktop users, Google already knows how to get ads to you.
+
If you watch the AMP demo, which shows how AMP might work when it's integrated into search results next year, you'll notice that the viewer effectively never leaves Google. The AMP pages are laid over the Google search page much the way outside webpages are loaded in native applications on most mobile platforms. The experience from the user's point of view is just like the experience of a mobile app.
+
Google needs the web to be on par with the speeds in mobile apps. Google has been trying for some time to speed up the web, but as the stats at the start of this piece indicate, it hasn't really worked.
+
To its credit the company has some of the smartest engineers around working on just this problem. Google has made one of the fastest web browsers around (if not the fastest) and in doing so has pushed other vendors to speed up their browsers as well. Since Chrome debuted web browsers have become faster and better at an astonishing rate. Score one for Google.
+
It's also been touting the benefits of mobile-friendly pages, first by labeling them as such in search results on mobile devices and then later by ranking mobile friendly pages above not-so-friendly ones when other factors are the same. It's also been quick to adopt speed improving new HTML standards like the responsive images effort, which was first supported by Chrome. Score another one or two for Google.
+
The company has also been championing speed through its various page speed tools and has even gone so far as to include speed as a factor in search engine rankings. And yet, look at those page size charts again. Pages keep getting bigger, networks speeds do not. So the web keeps slowing down. Score one for nobody.
+
In other words Google has tried just about everything within its considerable power as a search monopoly to get web developers and publishers large and small to speed up their pages.
+
It just isn't working.
+
Content Blockers 'comin'
+
Google is hardly alone in wanting the web to be fast. You and I want that too. And when web pages slow down we go looking for a way to speed them up again.
+
One increasingly popular reaction to slow web pages are content blockers, typically in the form of browser add-ons that stop pages from loading anything but the primary content of the page. Content blockers have been around for over a decade now (No Script first appeared for Firefox in 2005), but their use has always been limited. That changed with Apple's iOS 9, which for the first time has put content blocking tools in the hands of millions.
+
It's worth noting that the existence of content blockers is not entirely the result of slow websites, much of the appeal also lies in blocking intrusive ads and stopping the intrusive tracking which often comes with those ads.
+
But it's those two things, advertisements and trackers -- which typically mean loading at least a few, and in the most egregious examples dozens, of third-party scripts -- that form no small part of why even some of the web's most popular sites are, frankly, dog slow.
+
And dog slow sites are a problem for Google. If a site takes too long to load users leave and never see those Google ads. But dog slow sites are even more of a problem if sites are only dog slow in the web browser -- where Google has free reign -- and not in native apps like Facebook and Apple News, where Google has limited, if any access at all. Given a choice between fast walled gardens and slow open web Google is worried that most of us will chose fast walled garden.
+
Combine all the eyeballs using iOS with content blockers, reading the web via Facebook Instant Articles and Apple News and you suddenly have a whole lot of eyeballs that will never see any Google ads. That's a problem for Google, one that AMP is designed to fix.
+
AMP: Static Pages that Require Google's JavaScript
+
The most basic thing you can do on the web is create a flat HTML file that sits on a server and contains some basic tags. This type of page will always be lightning fast. It's also insanely simple. This is literally all you need to do to put information on the web. There's no need for JavaScript, no need even for CSS.
+
This is more or less what AMP wants you to create (AMP doesn't care if your pages are actually static or -- more likely -- generated from a database, the point is what's rendered is static).
+
But then AMP wants to turn around and require that pages include a third-party script in order to load. AMP deliberately sets the opacity of the entire page to 0 until the script loads and only then is the page revealed.
+
As developer Justin Avery asks, "surely the document itself is going to be faster than loading a library to try and make it load faster." Pinboard.in creator Maciej Cegłowski did just that, putting together a demo page that duplicates the AMP-based AMP homepage, but without that JavaScript. Over a 3G connection Cegłowski's page fills the viewport in 1.9 seconds. The AMP homepage takes 9.2 seconds.
+
JavaScript slows down page load times, even when that JavaScript is part of Google's plan to speed up the web.
+
Ironically, for something that is ostensibly trying to encourage better behavior from developers and publishers, this means that pages using progressive enhancement, keeping scripts to a minimum and aggressively caching content -- in other words sites following best practices and trying to do things right -- will potentially be slower in AMP.
+
In the end, developers and publishers who have been following best practices for web development and don't rely on dozens of tracking networks and ads have little to gain from AMP.
+
Unfortunately, the publishers building their sites like that right now are few and far between. Most publishers have much to gain from generating AMP pages -- at least in terms of speed. Google says that AMP can improve page speed index scores by between 15-85%. That huge range is likely a direct result of how many third-party scripts are being loaded on some sites.
+
The dependency on JavaScript has another detrimental effect, AMP documents depend on JavaScript, which is to say that if their (albeit small) script fails to load for some reason -- you're going through a tunnel on a train, only have a flaky one bar connection at the beach or any other myriad familiar mobile web scenarios -- the AMP page is completely blank.
+
When an AMP page fails, it fails spectacularly. Google knows better than this. Even Gmail still offers a pure HTML-based fallback version of itself.
+
AMP for Publishers
+
Why require a bit of JavaScript to load what amounts to one of the simplest possible pages on the web? Well, the developers would argue (correctly) that it's needed to parse, among other things, those amp-img, amp-youtube and other non-standard elements.
+
It also creates a kind of lock-in. Not nearly the sort of lock-in that publishers get into with Facebook Instant Articles, AMP is after all available for everyone, not just big name publishers who sign a deal with Google.
+
In this deal, all big media has to do is give up their ad networks. And their interactive maps. And their data visualizations. And their comment systems. And their community of readers.
+
So why would publishers want to use AMP? Google, while its influence has dipped a tad across industries (as Facebook and Twitter continue to drive more traffic), is still a powerful driver of traffic. When Google promises more eyeballs on their stories, big media listens.
+
Unlike Facebook Instant Articles though, this deal isn't just for big media, your WordPress blog can get in on the stripped down action as well.
+
Given that WordPress powers roughly 24 percent of all sites on the web, having an easy way to generate AMP documents from WordPress means a huge boost in adoption for AMP. It's certainly possible to build fast websites using WordPress, but it's also easy to do the opposite. WordPress plugins often have dramatic and negative impact on load times. It isn't uncommon to see a WordPress site loading not just one, but often several external JavaScript libraries because the user installed 3 plugins that each used a different library.
+
AMP neatly solves that problem by stripping everything out.
+
Why would anyone want to do this? Well, most probably wouldn't want to do just this. That is, AMP isn't trying to get rid of the web as we know it, it just wants to create a parallel one.
+
Publishers will not stop generating regular pages, they will simply also generate AMP files, usually, judging by the early adopter examples, by appending /amp to the end of the URL.
+
The AMP page and canonical page would reference each other through standard HTML tags. User agents could then pick and choose between them, that is, Google's web crawler might grab the AMP page, but desktop Firefox might hit the AMP page and redirect to the canonical URL.
+
On one hand what this amounts to is that, after years of telling the web to stop making m. mobile-specific websites, Google is telling the web to make /amp-specific mobile pages. Potato, potato.
+
On the other hand this nudges publishers toward an idea that's big in the IndieWeb movement: Publish (on your) Own Site, Syndicate Elsewhere, or POSSE for short.
+
The idea is own the canonical copy of your content on your own site, but then send that content everywhere you can. Or rather, everywhere you want to reach your readers. Facebook Instant Article? Sure, hook up the RSS feed. Apple News? Send the feed over there too. AMP? Sure, generate an AMP page. No need to stop there either, tap the new Medium API and half a dozen others as well.
+
Reading is a fragmented experience. Some people will love reading on the web, some via RSS in their favorite reader, some in Facebook Instant Articles, some via AMP pages on Twitter, some via Lynx in their terminal running on a restored TRS-80. The beauty of the POSSE approach is that you can reach them all from a single, canonical source.
+
AMP and the Open Web
+
AMP is not going to help the open web. With luck though, it won't hurt it either, which isn't true of either of its forerunners.
+
If you want to be optimistic, you could look at AMP as the carrot that Google has been looking for in its effort to speed up the web.
+
As noted web developer (and AMP optimist) Jeremy Keith writes in a piece on AMP, "my hope is that the current will flow in both directions. As well as publishers creating AMP versions of their pages in order to appease Google, perhaps they will start to ask 'Why can't our regular pages be this fast?' By showing that there is life beyond big bloated invasive web pages, perhaps the AMP project will work as a demo of what the whole web could be."
+
Not everyone is that optimistic about AMP though. Developer and Author Tim Kadlec writes, "[AMP] doesn't feel like something helping the open web so much as it feels like something bringing a little bit of the walled garden mentality of native development onto the web... Using a very specific tool to build a tailored version of my page in order to 'reach everyone' doesn't fit any definition of the 'open web' that I've ever heard."
+
Indeed AMP is very much Google's moderately walled garden response to Facebook's impenetrable fortress of a garden.
+
There's one other important aspect to AMP that helps speed up their pages -- Google will cache your pages on its CDN for free.
+
As developer and creator of RSS, Dave Winer says in a post on AMP, "AMP is caching... You can use their caching if you conform to certain rules. If you don't you can use your own caching. I can't imagine there's a lot of difference unless Google weighs search results based on whether you use their code."
+
And therein lies the biggest potential problem with AMP. If Google decides to abuse its position as the default search provider for the web and prioritize AMP pages above others then AMP becomes a threat to the open web.
+
So far Google has said that AMP pages will not get any priority over regular pages in search results. But that could change. It's hard to imagine why that wouldn't change. Why would Google have faster pages at its disposal and not prioritize them over slower pages? After all speed is already a factor in rankings and AMP does make pages faster.
+
Of course it's hard to tell what AMP will do in the long run. Google throws out new projects all the time, sometimes seemingly at random. Some, like GMail, redefine the world's experience of something previously taken for granted. Other projects go the way of Wave. Remember Google Author? That was the last time Google set out to "help" the publishing industry.
+
For the web's sake let's hope Google sticks with AMP long enough to convince publishers that the real future is speeding up their own pages and embracing a POSSE-style approach. As Cegłowski writes on his AMP satire page, "it is 2015, and websites should be small and fast enough to render on mobile devices rapidly using minimal resources... Requiring a readable version of these sites is a great idea. Let's take it one step further and make it the only version."
+
Let's just make sure that fast, readable version is one that lives at a URL on the open web.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/amp.txt b/ars-technica/published/amp.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..efe2ea5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/amp.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
+There's a story going around today that the Web is too slow, especially over mobile networks. It's a pretty good story—and it's a perpetual story. The Web, while certainly improved from the days of 14.4k modems, has never been as fast as we want it to be, which is to say that the Web has never been instantaneous.
+
+Curiously, though, rather than focusing on possible cures like increasing network speeds, finding ways to decrease network latency or even speeding up Web browsers, the latest version of the "Web is too slow" story pins the blame on the Web itself. And, perhaps more pointedly, on the people who make it.
+
+Certainly the story has some truth to it. The average Web page has increased in size at a terrific rate. In January 2012, the average page tracked by HTTPArchive transferred 1,239kB and made 86 requests. Fast forward to September 2015 and the average page loads 2,162kB of data and makes 103 requests. These numbers don't directly correlate to longer page load-and-render times, of course, especially if download speeds are increasing too, but they are one indicator of how quickly Web pages are bulking up.
+
+Native mobile applications, on the other hand, are getting faster. Mobile devices get more powerful with every release cycle, and native apps take better advantage of that power. Apps get faster, the Web gets slower. This, so the story goes, is why Facebook must invent Facebook Instant Articles, why Apple News must be built, and why Google must now create Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP). Google is late to the game, but AMP has the same goal as Facebook's and Apple's efforts—making the Web feel like a native application on mobile devices. (It's worth noting that all three solutions focus exclusively on mobile content.)
+
+For AMP, two things in particular stand in the way of a lean, mean browsing experience: JavaScript... and advertisements that use JavaScript. The AMP story is compelling. It has good guys (Google) and bad guys (everyone not using Google Ads), and it's true to most of our experiences. But the story also has some fundamental problems. For example, Google owns the largest ad server network on the Web. If ads are such a problem, why doesn't Google get to work speeding up the ads?
+
+More on that in bit. But first, AMP.
+
What is AMP?
+To understand AMP first you need to understand Facebook's Instant Articles. Instant Articles uses RSS and standard HTML tags to create an optimized, slightly stripped down version of an article. Facebook then allows for some extra rich-content like auto-playing video or audio clips. Despite this Facebook claims Instant Articles are up to 10 times faster than their siblings on the open web. Some of that speed gain comes from stripping things out, some likely comes from aggressive caching.
+
+But the key is that Instant Articles are only available via Facebook's mobile apps and only to established publishers who sign a deal with Facebook. That means reading articles from Facebook's Instant Article partners like National Geographic, BBC, Buzzfeed and others is a faster, richer multimedia experience than those same articles when they appear on the publisher's site.
+
+Apple News appears to work roughly the same way, taking RSS feeds from publishers and then optimizing the content for delivery within Apple's application.
+
+All this app-based content delivery cuts out the web. That's a problem for the web and by extension, Google, which leads us to Google's Accelerated Mobile Pages project.
+
+Oddly though, unlike Facebook Articles and Apple News, AMP eschews standards like RSS and HTML in favor of its own little modified subset of HTML. AMP HTML looks a lot like HTML without the bells and whistles. In fact, if you head over to the AMP project announcement you'll see an AMP page rendered in your browser. It looks like any other page on the web.
+
+AMP markup uses a basic set of tags from HTML. An extremely limited set of tags. Form tags? Nope. Audio or video tags? Nope. Embed? Certainly not. Script tags? Nope. There's a very short list of the HTML tags in allowed in AMP documents available over on the project page. There's also no JavaScript allowed. Those ads and tracking scripts will never be part of AMP documents (don't worry, Google will still be tracking you).
+
+AMP defines several of its own tags, things like `amp-youtube`, `amp-ad` or `amp-pixel`. The extra tags are part of what's known as web components, which is not now, but likely will eventually be a web standard (or possibly ActiveX part 2, only the future knows for sure).
+
+So far AMP probably sounds like a pretty good idea to most readers. Faster pages, no tracking scripts, no JavaScript at all so no overlay ads about signing up for newsletters or downloading apps no one needs.
+
+But then there are some problematic design choices in AMP. The more you look at AMP the less it looks like a good idea.
+
+Let's start with some of the poor technical decisions in the current incarnation of AMP. Or at least they're poor decisions if you like the open web and the current HTML standards.
+
+AMP re-invents the wheel for images by using the custom component `amp-img` instead of HTML's `img` tag, and it does the same thing with `amp-audio` and `amp-video` rather than the HTML standard `audio` and `video`. AMP developers argue that this allows AMP to serve images only when required, which isn't possible with the HTML `img` tag. That, however, is a limitation of web browsers, not HTML itself. AMP has also very clearly treated accessibility as an after thought. You lose more than just a few HTML tags with AMP.
+
+In other words AMP is technically half baked at best. The good news is that AMP developers are listening. One of the worst things about AMP's initial code was the decision to disable pinch and zoom on articles. Thankfully Google has reversed course and eliminated the tag that prevented pinch and zoom.
+
+There are also dozens of other open issues calling out some of the most egregiousdecisions in AMP's technical design. There are already open issues surrounding nearly every technical shortcoming mentioned in this article.
+
+But AMP's markup language is really just one part of the picture. After all, as pointed out above, if all AMP really wanted to do was strip out all the enhancements and just present the content of a page, there are existing ways to do that. Speeding things up for users is a nice side benefit, but the point of AMP, as with Facebook Articles, looks to be more about locking in users to a particular site/format/service. In this case, though, the "users" aren't you and I as readers; the "users" are the publishers putting content on the Web.
+
+
It's the ads, stupid
+
+The goal of Facebook Instant Articles is to keep you on Facebook. No need to explore the larger Web when it's all right there in Facebook, especially when it loads so much faster in the Facebook app than it does in a browser. (As Facebook puts it, "articles load instantly, as much as 10 times faster than the standard mobile Web."
+
+Google seems to have recognized what a threat Facebook Instant Articles could be to Google's ability to serve ads. This is why Google's project is called Accelerated Mobile Pages. Sorry, desktop users, Google already knows how to get ads to you.
+
+If you watch the AMP demo, which shows how AMP might work when it's integrated into search results next year, you'll notice that the viewer effectively never leaves Google. AMP pages are laid over the Google search page in much the same way that outside webpages are loaded in native applications on most mobile platforms. The experience from the user's point of view is just like the experience of using a mobile app.
+
+Google needs the web to be on par with the speeds in mobile apps. And to its credit the company has some of the smartest engineers around working on the problem. Google has made one of the fastest web browsers around (if not the fastest) and in doing so has pushed other vendors to speed up their browsers as well. Since Chrome debuted web browsers have become faster and better at an astonishing rate. Score one for Google.
+
+The company also been touting the benefits of mobile-friendly pages, first by labeling them as such in search results on mobile devices and then later by ranking mobile friendly pages above not-so-friendly ones when other factors are the same. It's also been quick to adopt speed improving new HTML standards like the responsive images effort, which was first supported by Chrome. Score another one or two for Google.
+
+But pages keep growing faster than network speeds, and the Web slows down. In other words, Google has tried just about everything within its considerable power as a search behemoth to get Web developers and publishers large and small to speed up their pages.
+
+It just isn't working.
+
+One increasingly popular reaction to slow Web pages has been the use of content blockers, typically in the form of browser add-ons that stop pages from loading anything but the primary content of the page. Content blockers have been around for over a decade now (No Script first appeared for Firefox in 2005), but their use has largely been limited to the desktop. That changed in Apple's iOS 9, which for the first time put simple content-blocking tools in the hands of millions of mobile users.
+
+Combine all the eyeballs that are using iOS with content blockers, reading Facebook Instant Articles, and using Apple News, and you suddenly have a whole lot of eyeballs that will never see any Google ads. That's a problem for Google, one that AMP is designed to fix.
+
Static pages that require Google's JavaScript
+The most basic thing you can do on the web is create a flat HTML file that sits on a server and contains some basic tags. This type of page will always be lightning fast. It's also insanely simple. This is literally all you need to do to put information on the web. There's no need for JavaScript, no need even for CSS.
+
+This is more or less the sort of page AMP wants you to create (AMP doesn't care if your pages are actually static or—more likely—generated from a database. The point is what's rendered is static). But then AMP wants to turn around and require that each page include a third-party script in order to load. AMP deliberately sets the opacity of the entire page to 0 until this script loads. Only then is the page revealed.
+
+This is a little odd; as developer Justin Avery writes, "Surely the document itself is going to be faster than loading a library to try and make it load faster."
+
+Pinboard.in creator Maciej Cegłowski did just that, putting together a demo page that duplicates the AMP-based AMP homepage, but without that JavaScript. Over a 3G connection Cegłowski's page fills the viewport in 1.9 seconds. The AMP homepage takes 9.2 seconds.
+
+JavaScript slows down page load times, even when that JavaScript is part of Google's plan to speed up the web.
+
+Ironically, for something that is ostensibly trying to encourage better behavior from developers and publishers, this means that pages using progressive enhancement, keeping scripts to a minimum and aggressively caching content -- in other words sites following best practices and trying to do things right -- will potentially be slower in AMP.
+
+In the end, developers and publishers who have been following best practices for web development and don't rely on dozens of tracking networks and ads have little to gain from AMP.
+
+Unfortunately, the publishers building their sites like that right now are few and far between. Most publishers have much to gain from generating AMP pages -- at least in terms of speed. Google says that AMP can improve page speed index scores by between 15-85%. That huge range is likely a direct result of how many third-party scripts are being loaded on some sites.
+
+The dependency on JavaScript has another detrimental effect, AMP documents depend on JavaScript, which is to say that if their (albeit small) script fails to load for some reason -- say, you're going through a tunnel on a train, only have a flaky one bar connection at the beach -- the AMP page is completely blank. When an AMP page fails, it fails spectacularly.
+
+Google knows better than this. Even Gmail still offers a pure HTML-based fallback version of itself.
+
+
AMP for publishers
+Under the AMP bargain, all big media has to do is give up its ad networks. And interactive maps. And data visualizations. And comment systems.
+
+The deal isn't just for big media, either; your WordPress blog can get in on the stripped-down AMP action as well. Given that WordPress powers roughly 24 percent of all sites on the web, having an easy way to generate AMP documents from WordPress means a huge boost in adoption for AMP. It's certainly possible to build fast websites using WordPress, but it's also easy to do the opposite. WordPress plugins often have a dramatic (negative) impact on load times. It isn't uncommon to see a WordPress site loading not just one but several external JavaScript libraries because the user installed three plugins that each use a different library. AMP neatly solves that problem by stripping everything out.
+
+So why would publishers want to use AMP? Google, while its influence has dipped a tad across industries (as Facebook and Twitter continue to drive more traffic), remains a powerful driver of traffic. When Google promises more eyeballs on their stories, big media listens.
+
+AMP isn't trying to get rid of the Web as we know it; it just wants to create a parallel one. Under this system, publishers would not stop generating regular pages, but they would also start generating AMP files, usually (judging by the early adopter examples) by appending /amp to the end of the URL. The AMP page and the canonical page would reference each other through standard HTML tags. User agents could then pick and choose between them. That is, Google's Web crawler might grab the AMP page, but desktop Firefox might hit the AMP page and redirect to the canonical URL.
+
+On one hand what this amounts to is that, after years of telling the web to stop making m. mobile-specific websites, Google is telling the web to make `/amp`-specific mobile pages. Potato, potato.
+
+On the other hand this nudges publishers toward an idea that's big in the IndieWeb movement: Publish (on your) Own Site, Syndicate Elsewhere, or POSSE for short.
+
+The idea is own the canonical copy of your content on your own site, but then send that content everywhere you can. Or rather, everywhere you want to reach your readers. Facebook Instant Article? Sure, hook up the RSS feed. Apple News? Send the feed over there too. AMP? Sure, generate an AMP page. No need to stop there either, tap the new Medium API and half a dozen others as well.
+
+Reading is a fragmented experience. Some people will love reading on the web, some via RSS in their favorite reader, some in Facebook Instant Articles, some via AMP pages on Twitter, some via Lynx in their terminal running on a restored TRS-80. The beauty of the POSSE approach is that you can reach them all from a single, canonical source.
+
+
+
AMP and the open Web
+While has problems and just might be designed to lock publishers into a Google-controlled format, it does so far seem to be friendlier to the open Web than Facebook Instant Articles.
+
+In fact, if you want to be optimistic, you could look at AMP as the carrot that Google has been looking for in its effort to speed up the Web. As noted Web developer (and AMP optimist) Jeremy Keith writes in a piece on AMP, "My hope is that the current will flow in both directions. As well as publishers creating AMP versions of their pages in order to appease Google, perhaps they will start to ask 'Why can't our regular pages be this fast?' By showing that there is life beyond big bloated invasive web pages, perhaps the AMP project will work as a demo of what the whole Web could be."
+
+Not everyone is that optimistic about AMP, though. Developer and Author Tim Kadlec writes, "[AMP] doesn't feel like something helping the open web so much as it feels like something bringing a little bit of the walled garden mentality of native development onto the Web... Using a very specific tool to build a tailored version of my page in order to 'reach everyone' doesn't fit any definition of the 'open Web' that I've ever heard."
+
+There's one other important aspect to AMP that helps speed up their pages -- Google will cache your pages on its CDN for free.
+
+As the developer and creator of RSS, Dave Winer, says in a post on AMP, "AMP is caching... You can use their caching if you conform to certain rules. If you don't, you can use your own caching. I can't imagine there's a lot of difference unless Google weighs search results based on whether you use their code."
+
+And therein lies the biggest potential problem with AMP. If Google decides to abuse its position as the default search provider for the web and prioritize AMP pages above others then AMP becomes a threat to the open web.
+
+So far Google has said that AMP pages will not get any priority over regular pages in search results. But that could change. It's hard to imagine why that wouldn't change. Why would Google have faster pages at its disposal and not prioritize them over slower pages? After all speed is already a factor in rankings and AMP does make pages faster.
+
+Of course it's hard to tell what AMP will do in the long run. Google throws out new projects all the time, sometimes seemingly at random. Some, like GMail, redefine the world's experience of something previously taken for granted. Other projects go the way of Wave. Remember Google Author? That was the last time Google set out to "help" the publishing industry.
+
+For the web's sake let's hope Google sticks with AMP long enough to convince publishers that the real future is speeding up their own pages and embracing a POSSE-style approach. As Cegłowski writes on his AMP satire page, "it is 2015, and websites should be small and fast enough to render on mobile devices rapidly using minimal resources... Requiring a readable version of these sites is a great idea. Let's take it one step further and make it the only version."
+
+Let's just make sure that fast, readable version is one that lives at a URL on the open web.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/kubuntu1510-desktop.png b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/kubuntu1510-desktop.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a64762
Binary files /dev/null and b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/kubuntu1510-desktop.png differ
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-desktop.png b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-desktop.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6635156
Binary files /dev/null and b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-desktop.png differ
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-scrollbars.png b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-scrollbars.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e33e244
Binary files /dev/null and b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-scrollbars.png differ
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-unity-8.png b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-unity-8.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..057bd79
Binary files /dev/null and b/ars-technica/published/ars-ubuntu1510/ubuntu1510-unity-8.png differ
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/debian8review.html b/ars-technica/published/debian8review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..400b996
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/debian8review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+
Last week the Debian project released Debian 8, the first major update to the stable branch of the venerable Linux distro in two years.
+
Debian Linux consists of three major development branches: Stable, Testing and Unstable. Work on new versions progresses through each, starting life in Unstable and eventually ending up in Stable.
+
Debian 8, nicknamed "Jessie" after the cowgirl character in Toy Story 2 and 3 (all Debian releases are named after Toy Story characters), has been in development in the Testing channel for quite a while. But it wasn't until the official feature freeze for this release (in November of last year) that the contents of Testing really become what you'll actually find in Debian 8 today.
+
If all that sounds complicated and slow that's because it is. And that's kind of the point.
+
Debian Stable is designed to be, well, stable, and that means long development cycles and a conservative approach to application updates.
+
As a general rule Debian Stable lags behind pretty much every other distro on the market when it comes to package updates. If you want the latest and greatest, Debian Stable is not the distro for you. Which is to say that, while Debian 8 may bring a ton of new stuff to Debian, it has almost nothing the rest of the Linux world hasn't been using for, in some cases, years. What's more, many things in Debian 8 are still not going to be the latest available versions.
+
Debian 8 has one giant except to that general rule -- systemd. More on that in a few paragraphs.
+
Why use Debian then? There are plenty of philosophical reasons -- the legendary Debian social contract, the community and all included software in the repos is free as in freedom, which has long been a hallmark of Debian.
+
The more practical appeal of Debian is in its legendary stability. I've been running Debian servers since 2005 (Sarge) and have never had a server crash. This stability is part of the reason Debian is the base for dozens of downstream distros.
+
+[image="debian-family-tree.png" caption="The Debian Family tree (image: Wikimedia)"]
+
+
Not everything downstream uses the Stable channel as its base. In fact it's worth noting that perhaps the most famous project downstream from Debian, Ubuntu, is built off the package base in the Unstable channel. Still, Debian Stable remains one of the most popular distros out there. This is particularly true for web servers where, according to stats from W3Techs.com (which should be taken with a grain, if not a generous helping, of salt), Debian accounts for the largest percentage of Linux servers on the web -- 32.3 percent.
+
All of this makes Debian Stable updates a much bigger deal than faster moving distros like Ubuntu or Fedora.
+
And because Debian 8 makes the leap to systemd it just might be the biggest change in Debian since the first release back in 1993. Debian is justifiably famous for being so stable you could blindly type apt-get dist-upgrade upgrade on a production box and get away with it. This time though, there's systemd to contend with.
+
What's New in Debian 8
+
+[image="debian-gnome-desktop.png" caption="It might not be new, but it's new to Debian"]
+
+
There is far more to Debian 8 than I can cover here. There's probably more than even John Siracusa would be willing to cover. Debian's official release notes report that 24573 software packages have been updated (that's 66 percent of the distro), but amidst that firehose of updates there's one that stands out -- systemd.
+
systemd
+
Unless you've been living under a rock you've probably heard at least something about systemd in the last year or two. Most likely what you heard was some froth-mouthed vitriol about how it's either the second coming of the Penguin or the NSA-backed devil incarnate. There are, it seems, no moderate opinions about systemd and the debate surrounding it has been anything but civil, even in the normally pretty civil Debian community.
+
To understand why you need to understand how your operating system starts up and runs all the various processes it runs. Pardon the analogy, but just as there was one ring that controlled all the rest, there is one application that controls all the rest. This is the init (short for initialization) system. The init system is the first process started when you boot and the last to shutdown. In the time between startup and shutdown the init system is the master controller of all processes and is traditionally assigned the process ID 1.
+
There are quite a few init systems out there, but most Linux distros (Slackware and Gentoo being notable exceptions) have been using SystemV. SystemV is outdated and riddled with crufty, often no longer needed code and is long overdue for a replacement. Few debate that, but start asking what should replace it and you'll soon see the knives come out.
+
Systemd is designed to replace SystemV, providing an init system that's cleaner, faster and considerably easier to use. Or at least that's the sales pitch.
+
Most of the contention about systemd arises because systemd isn't just an init system. Or rather it's an init system that wants to manage far more than processes. If your distro of choice opts to run systemd with all the bells and whistles it will be running some 69 binaries. Some call that monolithic, systemd creator Lennart Poettering disputes that charge arguing that what people don't like is that it all ships as a single tarball and is all updated and maintained in a single codebase.
+
Indeed the very centralized nature of the project is what led Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth to call systemd "hugely invasive". He went on to say that, "one of the ideas in systemd that we think is really bad is to bring lots of disparate pieces of technology into a single process. So lots of formerly-independent pieces of code, which happen to be under the control of folks driving systemd, have been rolled into that codebase."
+
Shuttleworth went on to acknowledge that "it’s still possible to build independent packages of the different pieces from that code," which has long been Poettering's response to the monolithic charge, but there's no denying that systemd throws out the Unix philosophy of small things with narrowly defined functionality. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad though.
+
Much of the debate about systemd is academic at this point because here's a truth that you'll discover in Debian 8, Ubuntu 15.04 and just about every other major distro around: systemd is here.
+
Sure, you can disable it, boot with SysV if you like, but systemd isn't going away. Your long term options are to either embrace it or cast your lot with Devuan or make the switch to FreeBSD.
+
+[image="debian-systemd.png" caption="Systemd it's in your Debian and it's not going away."]
+
+
I decided that, since systemd appears to be here to stay, and is the default starting with Jessie, it was time to roll up my sleeves and RTFM.
+
My experience with systemd had been decidedly mixed. On the desktop I hardly notice it. Indeed I doubt anyone using desktop Linux for everyday tasks like email, web browsing, office docs, photo editing and the like will either know or care that they're running systemd. I have encountered a couple problems with the systemd journal feature when running Debian 8 in a virtual machine, but on actual hardware the same problem has not come up.
+
Debian 8 on the server is a different story though. I've been slowly migrating my sites to Jessie-based servers over the past six months and have had a few hiccups here and there. For example, while systemd likes to say it's fully compatible with older init scripts, that's not completely true.
+
In my case, enough has gone wrong that I suggest you don't jump in immediately with both feet.
+
Before you even think of upgrading a server to Debian 8 be sure to read through the systemd incompatibilities list. In particular note that if you use tools like /sbin/chkconfig you'll quite possibly be getting incorrect or at the very least incomplete information when systemd is in charge. Also note that systemd services are "executed in completely clean contexts", which means not even $HOME is set, so if you have init scripts depending on such variables they will break.
+
Then there's the systemd's journal tool which takes some getting used to if you're more familiar with syslog. That said, you can run syslog alongside journal if you prefer not to switch up your workflow too much.
+
In fact, you can still run Jessie without systemd. All you need to do is use preseed to replace systemd with sysvinit at the end of the install. Check out the Debian wiki for details. This method works well enough on the server, but don't try it with a desktop environment installed.
+
In the end, after finding some new systemd service scripts for the handful of things I need --Nginx, Gunicorn and some other web app tools -- and figuring out how to set up the journal to actually log useful information I've managed to upgrade to Jessie. On one hand no one likes changes and I could have done without learning a new syntax for init scripts -- though systemd files are at least much easier to read and write -- and all the other headaches. But once you're over the migration hurdles I've found systemd is, well, just fine.
+
Debian 8 on the Desktop
+
There's more to Debian 8 than systemd, particularly on the desktop where, as noted, most users will probably not even notice it.
+
The first thing you'll likely notice when installing Debian 8 on the desktop is that there are more desktop choices and picking one is much simpler than before.
+
+[image="debian-installer-tasksel.png" caption="The wide variety of Desktop options in Debian 8"]
+
+
Quite a bit of work has gone into Debian's tasksel app in this release. That's the application that helps you set up Debian and install all the software you need. The installer now offers a list of desktop environments under the generic "Debian Desktop Environment" option. If you just leave everything at the defaults you'll end up with GNOME 3.14 for your desktop, but you can change that by selecting the options to install Xfce (briefly considered for the default option), KDE, Cinnamon, MATE or LXDE. You can of course opt to install nothing and then install the alternate desktop environment of your choice after the base installation. If you prefer something really lightweight like Openbox or Xmonad this is the way to install it.
+
In short it's tough to really say that Debian has a default desktop. To test things out I tried Debian with GNOME, Xfce and Cinnamon.
+
Again, Debian takes a conservative approach so you'll only get GNOME 3.14, though 3.16 was released a few months ago. GNOME 3.14 has a few new tricks up its sleeve, most of which I've covered in past reviews.
The standout new features in 3.14 include better high resolution display support, several of the new GNOME apps like Photos and the redesigned Weather, a new geolocation framework, which the aforementioned Weather takes advantage of, and the first signs of support for Wayland. With 3.14, Mutter (GNOME's default display manager) can work as a Wayland compositor. It's not the default though, you'll have to select this option from the GNOME login screen.
+
GNOME 3.14 is a step up from previous versions, but it still feels a bit crippled next to more full featured desktops like Cinnamon or Unity. The Nautilus file manager in particular is a shell of its former self.
+
Debian's version of GNOME 3.14 is pretty close to stock, but then there aren't many ways to customize GNOME or give it a distro-specific feel.
+
If GNOME is not to your liking there's plenty of other choices, including the increasingly popular Xfce. This being Debian don't expect to see the latest version of Xfce (which is a huge update and well worth upgrading to as soon as you can by the way), instead you'll get Xfce 4.10. In fact Debian's Xfce is a bit of an outlier compared to other distros.
+
+[image="debian-xfce.png" caption="Debian with a barebone install of Xfce"]
+
+
Debian treats Xfce as a very minimalist desktop and the experience might be a bit different if you're accustomed to the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach of, for example, Xubuntu. In Debian optional things like the Xfce extras package are not included by default. Naturally you can install the extras from the repositories, but Linux newcomers might not even realize that's an option, which makes Xubuntu's approach seem a bit friendlier.
+
The best desktop experience in my testing has undoubtedly been Cinnamon. Cinnamon atop Debian has been every bit as reliable and nice to use as Cinnamon is in Linux Mint. The only downside is that you'll only get Cinnamon version 2.2.16, while the latest version of Linux Mint shipped with version 2.4, a not insignificant update.
+
+[image="debian-cinnamon.jpg" caption="Debian with Cinnamon (not to be confused with Linux Mint Debian Edition)"]
+
+
As for default desktop software, Debian ships with favorites like LibreOffice (v4.3.3) and GIMP 2.8, but you'll also find a few extra apps like GNUcash, GNUmeric and Abiword. There's also Icedove 31.6.0 (an unbranded version of Mozilla Thunderbird) and Iceweasel 31.6.0esr (an unbranded version of Mozilla Firefox). Yes, Debian opts to ship with the little-used Firefox Extended Support Release, which lags behind its faster-developing counterpart when it comes to the latest and greatest features on the web.
+
You've probably noticed a theme here, Debian is behind the curve when it comes to version numbers. Why run Debian on the desktop when similar downstream distros like Xubuntu or Ubuntu GNOME or Linux Mint offer arguably the same thing with newer packages and a more polished interface? These are after all Debian derivatives so aren't you in effect using Debian?
+
The answer I suspect lies in that legendary Debian stability. And many developers like to mimic the server in their local environment. For the average Linux user though the downstream derivatives are probably a better bet in many cases. Ubuntu and Linux Mint might not be quite as stable, but they deliver more frequent updates to the applications that most people use every day. That means more new features and arguably a better experience. If you want something similar, but for philosophical reasons feel more comfortable with Debian there's always Debian Testing.
+
Debian on the server
+
If Debian on the desktop is perhaps a bit too far behind to entice today's user, nearly the opposite is true on the server. There's systemd to deal with, but once you get past the systemd changes there's much to love about Jessie on the server.
+
Debian's conservative approach to package updates leads to stability it also sometimes leads to terrible packages hanging around. For example Python developers have had to deal with Python 3.2 package for what seems like an eternity in Debian 7 (unless of course you use backports). Thankfully Jessie bumps Python to 3.4.
+
Perl, PHP, and most other common development tools have been similarly updated, if not to the bleeding edge then at least to the latest stable versions. Web server packages like Apache and lighttpd see similar incremental updates in Jessie.
+
Some things are thankfully missing in this release as well, notably the secure sockets layer protocol SSLv3 is gone by default, which should make for more secure HTTPS connections on the web (assuming people update).
+
Kernel
+
Jessie ships with the 3.16 series Linux kernel, which might sound a tad out of date until you consider that its predecessor, Wheezy was using the 3.2 series.
+
There's been an incredible number of changes since 3.2, far too many to cover in details, but some of the highlights include a host of graphics card improvements (particularly open source Nvidia drivers), EFI boot support, ARM 64-bit support, RAID5 multithreading, Automatic GPU switching in laptops with dual GPUs and support for nftables, the successor of iptables among many, many other new features.
+
There's also been a ton of work put into filesystem improvements with ext4 support getting a lot attention and much better support for Btrfs.
+
Should You Upgrade?
+
In a word: Yes. This is Debian, releases are infrequent and rather massive so there's more than enough in the way of new features and package updates to make the update worth it. The caveat is that you should do a lot of testing before migrating your servers to systemd. VPS instances are cheap, fire one up, install Jessie and spend a few weeks testing because while it's stable Jessie's systemd init is a big change that takes some time to wrap your head around.
+
If Debian is your desktop of choice you don't have as much to worry about with systemd. In fact you're unlikely to even notice it.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/debian8review.txt b/ars-technica/published/debian8review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..581e1f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/debian8review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
+Last week the Debian project released Debian 8, the first major update to the stable branch of the venerable Linux distro in two years.
+
+Debian Linux consists of three major development branches: Stable, Testing and Unstable. Work on new versions progresses through each, starting life in Unstable and eventually ending up in Stable.
+
+Debian 8, nicknamed "Jessie" after the cowgirl character in Toy Story 2 and 3 (all Debian releases are named after Toy Story characters), has been in development in the Testing channel for quite a while. But it wasn't until the official feature freeze for this release (in November of last year) that the contents of Testing really become what you'll actually find in Debian 8 today.
+
+If all that sounds complicated and slow that's because it is. And that's kind of the point.
+
+Debian Stable is designed to be, well, stable, and that means long development cycles and a conservative approach to application updates.
+
+As a general rule Debian Stable lags behind pretty much every other distro on the market when it comes to package updates. If you want the latest and greatest, Debian Stable is not the distro for you. Which is to say that, while Debian 8 may bring a ton of new stuff to Debian, it has almost nothing the rest of the Linux world hasn't been using for, in some cases, years. What's more, many things in Debian 8 are still not going to be the latest available versions.
+
+Debian 8 has one giant except to that general rule -- systemd. More on that in a few paragraphs.
+
+Why use Debian then? There are plenty of philosophical reasons -- the legendary [Debian social contract](https://www.debian.org/social_contract), the community and all included software in the repos is free as in freedom, which has long been a hallmark of Debian.
+
+The more practical appeal of Debian is in its legendary stability. I've been running Debian servers since 2005 (Sarge) and have never had a server crash. This stability is part of the reason Debian is the base for dozens of downstream distros.
+
+[tk pic Debian family tree]
+
+Not everything downstream uses the Stable channel as its base. In fact it's worth noting that perhaps the most famous project downstream from Debian, Ubuntu, is built off the package base in the Unstable channel. Still, Debian Stable remains one of the most popular distros out there. This is particularly true for web servers where, according to stats from [W3Techs.com](http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-linux/all/all) (which should be taken with a grain, if not a generous helping, of salt), Debian accounts for the largest percentage of Linux servers on the web -- 32.3 percent.
+
+All of this makes Debian Stable updates a much bigger deal than faster moving distros like Ubuntu or Fedora.
+
+And because Debian 8 makes the leap to systemd it just might be the biggest change in Debian since the first release back in 1993. Debian is justifiably famous for being so stable you could blindly type `apt-get dist-upgrade` upgrade on a production box and get away with it. This time though, there's systemd to contend with.
+
+##What's New in Debian 8
+
+[tk Debian Gnome]
+
+There is far more to Debian 8 than I can cover here. There's probably more than even John Siracusa would be willing to cover. Debian's official release notes report that 24573 software packages have been updated (that's 66 percent of the distro), but amidst that firehose of updates there's one that stands out -- systemd.
+
+### systemd
+
+Unless you've been living under a rock you've probably heard at least something about systemd in the last year or two. Most likely what you heard was some froth-mouthed vitriol about how it's either the second coming of the Penguin or the NSA-backed devil incarnate. There are, it seems, no moderate opinions about systemd and the debate surrounding it has been anything but civil, even in the normally pretty civil Debian community.
+
+To understand why you need to understand how your operating system starts up and runs all the various processes it runs. Pardon the analogy, but just as there was one ring that controlled all the rest, there is one application that controls all the rest. This is the init (short for initialization) system. The init system is the first process started when you boot and the last to shutdown. In the time between startup and shutdown the init system is the master controller of all processes and is traditionally assigned the process ID 1.
+
+There are quite a few init systems out there, but most Linux distros (Slackware and Gentoo being notable exceptions) have been using SystemV. SystemV is outdated and riddled with crufty, often no longer needed code and is long overdue for a replacement. Few debate that, but start asking what should replace it and you'll soon see the knives come out.
+
+Systemd is designed to replace SystemV, providing an init system that's cleaner, faster and considerably easier to use. Or at least that's the sales pitch.
+
+Most of the contention about systemd arises because systemd isn't just an init system. Or rather it's an init system that wants to manage far more than processes. If your distro of choice opts to run systemd with all the bells and whistles it will be running some 69 binaries. Some call that monolithic, systemd creator Lennart Poettering [disputes that charge](http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html) arguing that what people don't like is that it all ships as a single tarball and is all updated and maintained in a single codebase.
+
+Indeed the very centralized nature of the project is what led Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth to call systemd "[hugely invasive](http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1295)". He went on to say that, "one of the ideas in systemd that we think is really bad is to bring lots of disparate pieces of technology into a single process. So lots of formerly-independent pieces of code, which happen to be under the control of folks driving systemd, have been rolled into that codebase."
+
+Shuttleworth went on to [acknowledge](http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1295#comment-403228) that "it’s still possible to build independent packages of the different pieces from that code," which has long been Poettering's response to the monolithic charge, but there's no denying that systemd throws out the Unix philosophy of small things with narrowly defined functionality. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad though.
+
+Much of the debate about systemd is academic at this point because here's a truth that you'll discover in Debian 8, Ubuntu 15.04 and just about every other major distro around: systemd is here.
+
+Sure, you can disable it, boot with SysV if you like, but systemd isn't going away. Your long term options are to either embrace it or cast your lot with [Devuan](http://debianfork.org/) or make the switch to FreeBSD.
+
+I decided that, since systemd appears to be here to stay, and is the default starting with Jessie, it was time to roll up my sleeves and RTFM.
+
+My experience with systemd had been decidedly mixed. On the desktop I hardly notice it.
+Indeed I doubt anyone using desktop Linux for everyday tasks like email, web browsing, office docs, photo editing and the like will either know or care that they're running systemd. I have encountered a couple problems with the systemd journal feature when running Debian 8 in a virtual machine, but on actual hardware the same problem has not come up.
+
+Debian 8 on the server is a different story though. I've been slowly migrating my sites to Jessie-based servers over the past six months and have had a few hiccups here and there. For example, while systemd likes to say it's fully compatible with older init scripts, that's not completely true.
+
+In my case, enough has gone wrong that I suggest you don't jump in immediately with both feet.
+
+Before you even think of upgrading a server to Debian 8 be sure to read through the [systemd incompatibilities](http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Incompatibilities/) list. In particular note that if you use tools like /sbin/chkconfig you'll quite possibly be getting incorrect or at the very least incomplete information when systemd is in charge. Also note that systemd services are "executed in completely clean contexts", which means not even $HOME is set, so if you have init scripts depending on such variables they will break.
+
+Then there's the systemd's journal tool which takes some getting used to if you're more familiar with syslog. That said, you can run syslog alongside journal if you prefer not to switch up your workflow too much.
+
+In fact, you can still run Jessie without systemd. All you need to do is use preseed to replace systemd with sysvinit at the end of the install. Check out the [Debian wiki](https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd) for details. This method works well enough on the server, but don't try it with a desktop environment installed.
+
+In the end, after finding some new systemd service scripts for the handful of things I need --Nginx, Gunicorn and some other web app tools -- and figuring out how to set up the journal to actually log useful information I've managed to upgrade to Jessie. On one hand no one likes changes and I could have done without learning a new syntax for init scripts -- though systemd files are at least much easier to read and write -- and all the other headaches. But once you're over the migration hurdles I've found systemd is, well, just fine.
+
+## Debian 8 on the Desktop
+
+There's more to Debian 8 than systemd, particularly on the desktop where, as noted, most users will probably not even notice it.
+
+The first thing you'll likely notice when installing Debian 8 on the desktop is that there are more desktop choices and picking one is much simpler than before.
+
+[tk tasksel image]
+
+Quite a bit of work has gone into Debian's tasksel app in this release. That's the application that helps you set up Debian and install all the software you need. The installer now offers a list of desktop environments under the generic "Debian Desktop Environment" option. If you just leave everything at the defaults you'll end up with GNOME 3.14 for your desktop, but you can change that by selecting the options to install Xfce (briefly considered for the default option), KDE, Cinnamon, MATE or LXDE. You can of course opt to install nothing and then install the alternate desktop environment of your choice after the base installation. If you prefer something really lightweight like Openbox or Xmonad this is the way to install it.
+
+In short it's tough to really say that Debian has a default desktop. To test things out I tried Debian with GNOME, Xfce and Cinnamon.
+
+Again, Debian takes a conservative approach so you'll only get GNOME 3.14, though 3.16 was released a few months ago. GNOME 3.14 has a few new tricks up its sleeve, most of which I've [covered in past reviews](http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/01/16/fedora-21-review-linuxs-sprawliest-distro-finds-a-new-focus/).
+
+[tk Debian Gnome]
+
+The standout new features in 3.14 include better high resolution display support, several of the new GNOME apps like Photos and the redesigned Weather, a new geolocation framework, which the aforementioned Weather takes advantage of, and the first signs of support for Wayland. With 3.14, Mutter (GNOME's default display manager) can work as a Wayland compositor. It's not the default though, you'll have to select this option from the GNOME login screen.
+
+GNOME 3.14 is a step up from previous versions, but it still feels a bit crippled next to more full featured desktops like Cinnamon or Unity. The Nautilus file manager in particular is a shell of its former self.
+
+Debian's version of GNOME 3.14 is pretty close to stock, but then there aren't many ways to customize GNOME or give it a distro-specific feel.
+
+If GNOME is not to your liking there's plenty of other choices, including the increasingly popular Xfce. This being Debian don't expect to see the latest version of Xfce (which is a huge update and well worth upgrading to as soon as you can by the way), instead you'll get Xfce 4.10. In fact Debian's Xfce is a bit of an outlier compared to other distros.
+
+[tk Debian XFCE]
+
+Debian treats Xfce as a very minimalist desktop and the experience might be a bit different if you're accustomed to the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach of, for example, Xubuntu. In Debian optional things like the Xfce extras package are not included by default. Naturally you can install the extras from the repositories, but Linux newcomers might not even realize that's an option, which makes Xubuntu's approach seem a bit friendlier.
+
+The best desktop experience in my testing has undoubtedly been Cinnamon. Cinnamon atop Debian has been every bit as reliable and nice to use as Cinnamon is in Linux Mint. The only downside is that you'll only get Cinnamon version 2.2.16, while the latest version of Linux Mint shipped with version 2.4, a not insignificant update.
+
+[tk Debian Cinnamon]
+
+As for default desktop software, Debian ships with favorites like LibreOffice (v4.3.3) and GIMP 2.8, but you'll also find a few extra apps like GNUcash, GNUmeric and Abiword. There's also Icedove 31.6.0 (an unbranded version of Mozilla Thunderbird) and Iceweasel 31.6.0esr (an unbranded version of Mozilla Firefox). Yes, Debian opts to ship with the little-used Firefox Extended Support Release, which lags behind its faster-developing counterpart when it comes to the latest and greatest features on the web.
+
+You've probably noticed a theme here, Debian is behind the curve when it comes to version numbers. Why run Debian on the desktop when similar downstream distros like Xubuntu or Ubuntu GNOME or Linux Mint offer arguably the same thing with newer packages and a more polished interface? These are after all Debian derivatives so aren't you in effect using Debian?
+
+The answer I suspect lies in that legendary Debian stability. And many developers like to mimic the server in their local environment. For the average Linux user though the downstream derivatives are probably a better bet in many cases. Ubuntu and Linux Mint might not be quite as stable, but they deliver more frequent updates to the applications that most people use every day. That means more new features and arguably a better experience. If you want something similar, but for philosophical reasons feel more comfortable with Debian there's always Debian Testing.
+
+## Debian on the server
+
+If Debian on the desktop is perhaps a bit too far behind to entice today's user, nearly the opposite is true on the server. There's systemd to deal with, but once you get past the systemd changes there's much to love about Jessie on the server.
+
+Debian's conservative approach to package updates leads to stability it also sometimes leads to terrible packages hanging around. For example Python developers have had to deal with Python 3.2 package for what seems like an eternity in Debian 7 (unless of course you use backports). Thankfully Jessie bumps Python to 3.4.
+
+Perl, PHP, and most other common development tools have been similarly updated, if not to the bleeding edge then at least to the latest stable versions. Web server packages like Apache and lighttpd see similar incremental updates in Jessie.
+
+Some things are thankfully missing in this release as well, notably the secure sockets layer protocol SSLv3 is gone by default, which should make for more secure HTTPS connections on the web (assuming people update).
+
+## Kernel
+
+Jessie ships with the 3.16 series Linux kernel, which might sound a tad out of date until you consider that its predecessor, Wheezy was using the 3.2 series.
+
+There's been an incredible number of changes since 3.2, far too many to cover in details, but some of the highlights include a host of graphics card improvements (particularly open source Nvidia drivers), EFI boot support, ARM 64-bit support, RAID5 multithreading, Automatic GPU switching in laptops with dual GPUs and support for nftables, the successor of iptables among many, many other new features.
+
+There's also been a ton of work put into filesystem improvements with ext4 support getting a lot attention and much better [support for Btrfs](http://linuxfoundation.ubicast.tv/videos/btrfs-filesystem-status-and-new-features/).
+
+## Should You Upgrade?
+
+In a word: Yes. This is Debian, releases are infrequent and rather massive so there's more than enough in the way of new features and package updates to make the update worth it. The caveat is that you should do a lot of testing before migrating your servers to systemd. VPS instances are cheap, fire one up, install Jessie and spend a few weeks testing because while it's stable Jessie's systemd init is a big change that takes some time to wrap your head around.
+
+If Debian is your desktop of choice you don't have as much to worry about with systemd. In fact you're unlikely to even notice it.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dell7520.txt b/ars-technica/published/dell7520.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..55d1a18
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dell7520.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+Dell's Project Sputnik, which is the company's effort to produce "developer" suited laptops with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed, recently expanded its offerings with quite a few revamped laptops in the company's Precision line.
+
+Project Sputnik has done an admirable job of bringing a "just works" Linux experience to Dell Ultrabooks like the XPS 13 Developer Edition, which I've tested three times now. While the XPS 13 is a great machine that I would not hesitate to recommend for most Linux users, it does have its shortcomings. The biggest problem in my view has long been the limited amount of RAM -- the XPS 13 tops out at 16GB. While that's enough for most users, there are those -- software developers compiling large projects, video editors, even photographers -- who would benefit from more RAM.
+
+Normally in the Dell line to get more RAM you'd pick up a one of the various Precision laptops, which lack the svelteness of the XPS series, but can pack in more RAM and larger hard drives. Unfortunately the availability of the Ubuntu-based Precision machines has been somewhat spotty in the past. With this latest refresh though that's no longer the case, you can get [Ubuntu-based Precision laptops in a variety of configurations from the Dell site](http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/555/campaigns/xps-linux-laptop?c=us&l=en&s=biz).
+
+Dell isn't the only manufacturer producing great Linux machines. And in fact the [Oryx Pro](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/11/system76-oryx-pro-review-linux-in-a-laptop-has-never-been-better/) from System 76 is another great machine, and my previous recommendation for anyone who needed more RAM and didn't mind the additional size and weight.
+
+Naturally Linux will probably work just fine on plenty of hardware not specifically tailored to running Linux, but if you want a "just works" experience I'd suggest staying away from bleeding edge hardware, which sometimes lacks drivers (or stick with a bleeding edge distro like Arch). That's where efforts like Dell's Project Sputnik come in handy, the hardware is already vetted, the drivers pre-installed and configured for a great out of the box experience.
+
+And now, with the revamped Sputnik lineup you can get your just works Linux rig and all the power and RAM of a bigger laptop in the form of the Dell Precision 7520.
+
+## Hardware
+
+The machine Dell sent me for testing was a Dell 7520 Developer Edition with an Intel Xeon E3-1505M v6 (Quad Core Xeon 3.00GHz, 4.00GHz Turbo, 8MB 45W, w/Intel HD Graphics 630), 32 GB RAM, 512 GB of SSD space, an NVIDIA Quadro M2200 w/4GB GDDR5 graphics card, and a brilliant 15.6" UHD IGZO (3840x2160) LED-backlit non-touch screen.
+
+The Xeon is the top of the line chip for Precision 7520s, though you can get a Radeon Pro graphics card, up to 64GB of memory, and up to 3TB of hard drive space. The model I tested maxed out the SSD (512GB), but you can ditch the SSD in favor of a 1TB 7200rpm spinning drive and add a second spinning drive up to 2TB in size. Other customization options include a different finger print reader, and an option to have a PCIe drive as the second drive.
+
+The 7520 boasts a full size keyboard complete with number pad, though the arrow keys, page up/down, and home/end keys are all half size keys, which some may find annoying. There's also "nub" cursor controller in the middle of the keyboard, which would be great were it not so stiff. The really brilliant piece of engineering in the keyboard though is the mouse buttons -- separate left, middle and right -- just below the space bar, which makes it possible to, for example, right click with your thumb without ever taking your fingers off the home row or otherwise interrupting your typing.
+
+I like this bit so much I've had some trouble going back to my Lenovo, I still routinely tap my right thumb just below the space bar only to find there's nothing there. That said, I can see where some people might not like this feature since, especially at first, there's a tendency to accidentally hit the mouse buttons when you meant to hit the space bar. In my case it only took about half a hour of typing for that to go away, but it might be worth heading to a brick and mortar store to try out the keyboard before you rush off to order one.
+
+The keys themselves are your basic chiclet-style keys, though as is the case with other Dell laptops I've tested, they manage to have a rather solid, satisfying feeling with a good bit of give to them. If, like me, you tend to pound on your keys like you're still using a Model M, Dell offers one of the better keyboard experiences in a laptop today.
+
+The trackpad is less remarkable, though it's plenty responsive and smooth enough with separate buttons just below it. With Ubuntu's stock trackpad drivers you can configure the trackpad to respond to taps if you don't like the separate buttons, but there is no Apple-style push anywhere on the trackpad to left-click.
+
+For ports the Precision 7520 offers 4 USB 3.0 ports with PowerShare, three on the left side, one on the right. Also on the left is a Thunderbolt 3 type C port, HDMI, and Mini display port connector. On the right, along with the three USB ports, there's a memory card reader, headphone jack and security lock. The back of the Precision 7520 sports a RJ45 port and the power adapter port. There's also a fingerprint reader and an optional smart card slot.
+
+The case of the Precision 7520 is a somewhat soft dark finish. It looks nice, but it does show fingerprints quite a bit. The body is built around a very sturdy metal chassis that doesn't flex much, even when you carry it open with one hand, which you shouldn't do because this thing is pretty heavy. It's not off the charts but at around six and half pounds (exact weight varies according to customizations) it's definitely a two hander, at least when it's open. It's worth noting though that the hinge is quite smooth and opening it up with one hand isn't difficult.
+
+The Precision 7520 is just under 15in wide, 10.38 inches deep and a little over an inch thick, tapering from the back to front. In other words it's neither a massive beast, nor the most svelte thing on the market. Personally, the extra bulk is nothing compared to the power gained by having the bulk.
+
+The Xeon processor in the machine I tested handled everything I ever threw at it without breaking a sweat. I was able to edit through, color, and render a backlog of video editing that I had been dreading trying to do on my i5 8GB Lenovo (yes I'm one of those weirdos that edits video using FOSS software on Linux).
+
+What would have been hours of rendering time on the Lenovo took, by comparison, hardly any time at all on the Dell. I crunched through several hours worth of footage, compiled and rendered out my edits and the Dell hardly even spun up its fans. A note on those fans though: they didn't run very often in normal use, but when I pushed it they did kick in and they're not the quietest things around. They did, however, do an excellent job of keeping things cool even when I was rendering video while sitting in the afternoon sun while camping in Louisiana swamps in June. I should note here that while the model I tested had 32GB of RAM, you can, for a price, push that up to 64GB of RAM.
+
+The last hardware bit of note is the screen, which offers 3840x2160 pixel resolution in a 15.6 inch package. The screen itself looks amazing and I found the color rendering to be excellent, especially with regard to nice, deep blacks. Unfortunately some Linux apps -- GIMP I'm looking at you -- have really poor HiDPI support. The HiDPI support is getting better, certainly Unity itself is almost flawless, as is GNOME, which I also tested, more on that in a minute, but there are enough apps that have tiny, illegible UIs on a HiDPI screen that it's worth double checking to make sure all your favorites work before you spend the money on the high end screen. The Precision 7520 can also be configured to use 1920x1080 IPS screen for those that don't want to mess with the HiDPI version.
+
+## Software
+
+As with the rest of Dell's Sputnik offerings the Precision 7520 Developer Edition ships with Ubuntu 16.04 LTS. That'll be the base of Dell's machines for the next few years at a minimum despite the fact that, in the midst of my testing, Ubuntu announced it would no longer develop the Unity interface that has been its default desktop since 2010. More on the demise of Unity in a minute, but for now it's worth pointing out that the combination of screen size and hardware specs of the Precision 7520 make for the best Unity machine I've ever used, period.
+
+Ironically, just when I was thinking, hey, Unity isn't so bad on a nice big screen with plenty of RAM to spare, Canonical announced it was stopping the development of Unity and would adopt a mostly stock GNOME interface for future releases.
+
+Since Dell ships with LTS releases, the earliest you'll likely see GNOME on a Dell machine is 18.04, which will arrive in April 2018 and, given adoption time in the past, won't likely ship with Dell hardware until 2019. That might be slightly disappointing to those who want bleeding edge software, but it's the main reason Dell machines don't have hardware issues. It takes time to test and fix bugs.
+
+Of course there's nothing stopping you from updating your system yourself, or installing any other distro you might like. I stuck with Ubuntu on this machine though in the past I have run Fedora, Arch and Mint on Dell machines without encountering any problems (quite a few Fedora developers seem to use XPS 13s so fixes for Dell specific issues seem to get pushed out very quickly in Fedora). This time around I wanted to spend some time with Ubuntu GNOME on high end hardware, since that will, like it or not, be the future of the Ubuntu Desktop.
+
+That's not to say that Unity is abandonware. It will live on in the Universe repos for anyone who'd like to continue using it and it's certainly alive and well in Dell machines. If you're fond of the Unity interface there's no need to panic just yet, you'll be able to continue using it for quite a while. There have already been stirrings of a community around it that would like to continue development. Even if there are just a couple of people fixing bugs and keeping the lights on you should be able to get a good five more years out of it (Canonical is committed to maintaining for the five year release cycle of 16.04, which lasts until April of 2021).
+
+Jared Domínguez, Software Principal Engineer at Dell, says "Dell has been working with Canonical on Unity transition plans." For those buying a 7520 (or other Dell with Ubuntu install) Dominquez says, "we understand the need to keep a consistent experience, especially considering the large corporate Ubuntu desktop deployments that depend on Dell". He goes on to add that, once GNOME starts shipping by default on Ubuntu, "I personally anticipate that everyone will benefit from the combined GNOME effort of Canonical and Red Hat on Ubuntu and RHEL, both of which we ship."
+
+I went ahead and tested Ubuntu GNOME 17.04 quite extensively and didn't run into any problems at all, hardware or otherwise. In fact the near stock GNOME that ships with Ubuntu GNOME 17.04 looks really nice on the HiDPI screen. There's even some nice tools starting to emerge that add some of the best features of Unity to GNOME. For example, [this GNOME extension](https://github.com/ElectricPrism/gnome-hud-menu) takes the idea of Unity's HUD menu (a search interface for application menu items) and uses the very fast dmenu to get the same functionality in GNOME. As an added bonus, dmenu is even faster and more responsive than Unity's HUD, albeit not quite as pretty to look at. I should also note that it doesn't work with Firefox or Chromium.
+
+There are also quite a few GNOME themes out there, which, in conjunction with GNOME Shell extensions, can do an admirable job of impersonating the Unity desktop in both function and form. It's worth noting too that Ubuntu hasn't formally released a GNOME version just yet, it may well ship with some customizations to make the transition from Unity to GNOME a little easier on users.
+
+Whether you opt to stick with Ubuntu 16.04 as it ships with the Precision 7520, upgrade to 17.04. switch to Ubuntu GNOME, or use an entirely different distro, you're unlikely to encounter any issues with the hardware. That's part of what you're paying for when you get the Precision 7520 and yes, there are some cheaper options out there, but few, if any, will work as flawlessly as the Dell.
+
+Perhaps the best comparison machine to the Precision 7520 is System76's Oryx Pro, which I reviewed last year. The Oryx Pro has since been updated and you can configure it to more or less match the Dell Precision 7520. The Dell has the Oryx Pro beat on size and weight, though not by much. On the other hand the Oryx Pro can (for an additional price) pack in up to 6TB of drive space. Both are great machines, which is better suited to you is really something too personal to generalize into a recommendation. Based on my experience you won't be disappointed by either.
+
+## Overall Impressions
+
+I enjoyed my time with the Dell Precision 7520 and would not hesitate to recommend it to anyone that needs the power. That said, if your primary use case is browsing the web, chat/Skype, light photo editing, etc, then this thing is way overkill. If you don't need the power it's hard to justify the additional size and weight over the XPS developer edition line. On the other hand, if the XPS machines have always left you feeling underpowered, the Precision 7520 is for you.
+
+And now it's time for my biggest gripe with this machine: The battery life sucks. As Confucious once said, with great power comes crappy battery life. That's certainly the case with the 7520, which manages to eke out about fours hours doing light duty web browsing and the like, but quickly drops off to less than two if you start pushing it.
+
+Given the size and weight, along with the battery life, suffice to say that the happiest Dell Precision 7520 user will be the one that primarily has it sitting on a desk at home or work and only occasionally ventures out to tax the battery. The more you leave this on the desk -- chained to a couple 4K displays via Dell's Thunderbolt docking station would be nice -- the more your back will thank you anyway.
+
+
+
+The Good
+
+ Trouble-free Linux on good hardware
+ Excellent screen with great resolution
+ Plenty of RAM to handle whatever you throw at it
+ Price is competitive for the hardware you get
+
+The Bad
+
+ Screen resolution of HiDPI models can cause problems with some apps
+ It's not the lightest thing around
+ Charger is also quite large
+
+The Ugly
+
+ It's not Dell's fault, but if you stick with Ubuntu, eventually you're going to wake up one day to GNOME rather than Unity.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dell7520review.html b/ars-technica/published/dell7520review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3efd7ba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dell7520review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+
Dell's Project Sputnik, which is the company's effort to produce "developer" suited laptops with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed, recently expanded its offerings with quite a few revamped laptops in the company's Precision line.
+
Project Sputnik has done an admirable job of bringing a "just works" Linux experience to Dell Ultrabooks like the XPS 13 Developer Edition, which I've tested three times now. While the XPS 13 is a great machine that I would not hesitate to recommend for most Linux users, it does have its shortcomings. The biggest problem in my view has long been the limited amount of RAM -- the XPS 13 tops out at 16GB. While that's enough for most users, there are those -- software developers compiling large projects, video editors, even photographers -- who would benefit from more RAM.
+
Normally in the Dell line to get more RAM you'd pick up a one of the various Precision laptops, which lack the svelteness of the XPS series, but can pack in more RAM and larger hard drives. Unfortunately the availability of the Ubuntu-based Precision machines has been somewhat spotty in the past. With this latest refresh though that's no longer the case, you can get Ubuntu-based Precision laptops in a variety of configurations from the Dell site.
+
Dell isn't the only manufacturer producing great Linux machines. And in fact the Oryx Pro from System 76 is another great machine, and my previous recommendation for anyone who needed more RAM and didn't mind the additional size and weight.
+
Naturally Linux will probably work just fine on plenty of hardware not specifically tailored to running Linux, but if you want a "just works" experience I'd suggest staying away from bleeding edge hardware, which sometimes lacks drivers (or stick with a bleeding edge distro like Arch). That's where efforts like Dell's Project Sputnik come in handy, the hardware is already vetted, the drivers pre-installed and configured for a great out of the box experience.
+
And now, with the revamped Sputnik lineup you can get your just works Linux rig and all the power and RAM of a bigger laptop in the form of the Dell Precision 7520.
+
Hardware
+
The machine Dell sent me for testing was a Dell 7520 Developer Edition with an Intel Xeon E3-1505M v6 (Quad Core Xeon 3.00GHz, 4.00GHz Turbo, 8MB 45W, w/Intel HD Graphics 630), 32 GB RAM, 512 GB of SSD space, an NVIDIA Quadro M2200 w/4GB GDDR5 graphics card, and a brilliant 15.6" UHD IGZO (3840x2160) LED-backlit non-touch screen.
+
The Xeon is the top of the line chip for Precision 7520s, though you can get a Radeon Pro graphics card, up to 64GB of memory, and up to 3TB of hard drive space. The model I tested maxed out the SSD (512GB), but you can ditch the SSD in favor of a 1TB 7200rpm spinning drive and add a second spinning drive up to 2TB in size. Other customization options include a different finger print reader, and an option to have a PCIe drive as the second drive.
+
The 7520 boasts a full size keyboard complete with number pad, though the arrow keys, page up/down, and home/end keys are all half size keys, which some may find annoying. There's also "nub" cursor controller in the middle of the keyboard, which would be great were it not so stiff. The really brilliant piece of engineering in the keyboard though is the mouse buttons -- separate left, middle and right -- just below the space bar, which makes it possible to, for example, right click with your thumb without ever taking your fingers off the home row or otherwise interrupting your typing.
+
I like this bit so much I've had some trouble going back to my Lenovo, I still routinely tap my right thumb just below the space bar only to find there's nothing there. That said, I can see where some people might not like this feature since, especially at first, there's a tendency to accidentally hit the mouse buttons when you meant to hit the space bar. In my case it only took about half a hour of typing for that to go away, but it might be worth heading to a brick and mortar store to try out the keyboard before you rush off to order one.
+
The keys themselves are your basic chiclet-style keys, though as is the case with other Dell laptops I've tested, they manage to have a rather solid, satisfying feeling with a good bit of give to them. If, like me, you tend to pound on your keys like you're still using a Model M, Dell offers one of the better keyboard experiences in a laptop today.
+
The trackpad is less remarkable, though it's plenty responsive and smooth enough with separate buttons just below it. With Ubuntu's stock trackpad drivers you can configure the trackpad to respond to taps if you don't like the separate buttons, but there is no Apple-style push anywhere on the trackpad to left-click.
+
For ports the Precision 7520 offers 4 USB 3.0 ports with PowerShare, three on the left side, one on the right. Also on the left is a Thunderbolt 3 type C port, HDMI, and Mini display port connector. On the right, along with the three USB ports, there's a memory card reader, headphone jack and security lock. The back of the Precision 7520 sports a RJ45 port and the power adapter port. There's also a fingerprint reader and an optional smart card slot.
+
The case of the Precision 7520 is a somewhat soft dark finish. It looks nice, but it does show fingerprints quite a bit. The body is built around a very sturdy metal chassis that doesn't flex much, even when you carry it open with one hand, which you shouldn't do because this thing is pretty heavy. It's not off the charts but at around six and half pounds (exact weight varies according to customizations) it's definitely a two hander, at least when it's open. It's worth noting though that the hinge is quite smooth and opening it up with one hand isn't difficult.
+
The Precision 7520 is just under 15in wide, 10.38 inches deep and a little over an inch thick, tapering from the back to front. In other words it's neither a massive beast, nor the most svelte thing on the market. Personally, the extra bulk is nothing compared to the power gained by having the bulk.
+
The Xeon processor in the machine I tested handled everything I ever threw at it without breaking a sweat. I was able to edit through, color, and render a backlog of video editing that I had been dreading trying to do on my i5 8GB Lenovo (yes I'm one of those weirdos that edits video using FOSS software on Linux).
+
What would have been hours of rendering time on the Lenovo took, by comparison, hardly any time at all on the Dell. I crunched through several hours worth of footage, compiled and rendered out my edits and the Dell hardly even spun up its fans. A note on those fans though: they didn't run very often in normal use, but when I pushed it they did kick in and they're not the quietest things around. They did, however, do an excellent job of keeping things cool even when I was rendering video while sitting in the afternoon sun while camping in Louisiana swamps in June. I should note here that while the model I tested had 32GB of RAM, you can, for a price, push that up to 64GB of RAM.
+
The last hardware bit of note is the screen, which offers 3840x2160 pixel resolution in a 15.6 inch package. The screen itself looks amazing and I found the color rendering to be excellent, especially with regard to nice, deep blacks. Unfortunately some Linux apps -- GIMP I'm looking at you -- have really poor HiDPI support. The HiDPI support is getting better, certainly Unity itself is almost flawless, as is GNOME, which I also tested, more on that in a minute, but there are enough apps that have tiny, illegible UIs on a HiDPI screen that it's worth double checking to make sure all your favorites work before you spend the money on the high end screen. The Precision 7520 can also be configured to use 1920x1080 IPS screen for those that don't want to mess with the HiDPI version.
+
Software
+
As with the rest of Dell's Sputnik offerings the Precision 7520 Developer Edition ships with Ubuntu 16.04 LTS. That'll be the base of Dell's machines for the next few years at a minimum despite the fact that, in the midst of my testing, Ubuntu announced it would no longer develop the Unity interface that has been its default desktop since 2010. More on the demise of Unity in a minute, but for now it's worth pointing out that the combination of screen size and hardware specs of the Precision 7520 make for the best Unity machine I've ever used, period.
+
Ironically, just when I was thinking, hey, Unity isn't so bad on a nice big screen with plenty of RAM to spare, Canonical announced it was stopping the development of Unity and would adopt a mostly stock GNOME interface for future releases.
+
Since Dell ships with LTS releases, the earliest you'll likely see GNOME on a Dell machine is 18.04, which will arrive in April 2018 and, given adoption time in the past, won't likely ship with Dell hardware until 2019. That might be slightly disappointing to those who want bleeding edge software, but it's the main reason Dell machines don't have hardware issues. It takes time to test and fix bugs.
+
Of course there's nothing stopping you from updating your system yourself, or installing any other distro you might like. I stuck with Ubuntu on this machine though in the past I have run Fedora, Arch and Mint on Dell machines without encountering any problems (quite a few Fedora developers seem to use XPS 13s so fixes for Dell specific issues seem to get pushed out very quickly in Fedora). This time around I wanted to spend some time with Ubuntu GNOME on high end hardware, since that will, like it or not, be the future of the Ubuntu Desktop.
+
That's not to say that Unity is abandonware. It will live on in the Universe repos for anyone who'd like to continue using it and it's certainly alive and well in Dell machines. If you're fond of the Unity interface there's no need to panic just yet, you'll be able to continue using it for quite a while. There have already been stirrings of a community around it that would like to continue development. Even if there are just a couple of people fixing bugs and keeping the lights on you should be able to get a good five more years out of it (Canonical is committed to maintaining for the five year release cycle of 16.04, which lasts until April of 2021).
+
Jared Domínguez, Software Principal Engineer at Dell, says "Dell has been working with Canonical on Unity transition plans." For those buying a 7520 (or other Dell with Ubuntu install) Dominquez says, "we understand the need to keep a consistent experience, especially considering the large corporate Ubuntu desktop deployments that depend on Dell". He goes on to add that, once GNOME starts shipping by default on Ubuntu, "I personally anticipate that everyone will benefit from the combined GNOME effort of Canonical and Red Hat on Ubuntu and RHEL, both of which we ship."
+
I went ahead and tested Ubuntu GNOME 17.04 quite extensively and didn't run into any problems at all, hardware or otherwise. In fact the near stock GNOME that ships with Ubuntu GNOME 17.04 looks really nice on the HiDPI screen. There's even some nice tools starting to emerge that add some of the best features of Unity to GNOME. For example, this GNOME extension takes the idea of Unity's HUD menu (a search interface for application menu items) and uses the very fast dmenu to get the same functionality in GNOME. As an added bonus, dmenu is even faster and more responsive than Unity's HUD, albeit not quite as pretty to look at. I should also note that it doesn't work with Firefox or Chromium.
+
There are also quite a few GNOME themes out there, which, in conjunction with GNOME Shell extensions, can do an admirable job of impersonating the Unity desktop in both function and form. It's worth noting too that Ubuntu hasn't formally released a GNOME version just yet, it may well ship with some customizations to make the transition from Unity to GNOME a little easier on users.
+
Whether you opt to stick with Ubuntu 16.04 as it ships with the Precision 7520, upgrade to 17.04. switch to Ubuntu GNOME, or use an entirely different distro, you're unlikely to encounter any issues with the hardware. That's part of what you're paying for when you get the Precision 7520 and yes, there are some cheaper options out there, but few, if any, will work as flawlessly as the Dell.
+
Perhaps the best comparison machine to the Precision 7520 is System76's Oryx Pro, which I reviewed last year. The Oryx Pro has since been updated and you can configure it to more or less match the Dell Precision 7520. The Dell has the Oryx Pro beat on size and weight, though not by much. On the other hand the Oryx Pro can (for an additional price) pack in up to 6TB of drive space. Both are great machines, which is better suited to you is really something too personal to generalize into a recommendation. Based on my experience you won't be disappointed by either.
+
Overall Impressions
+
I enjoyed my time with the Dell Precision 7520 and would not hesitate to recommend it to anyone that needs the power. That said, if your primary use case is browsing the web, chat/Skype, light photo editing, etc, then this thing is way overkill. If you don't need the power it's hard to justify the additional size and weight over the XPS developer edition line. On the other hand, if the XPS machines have always left you feeling underpowered, the Precision 7520 is for you.
+
And now it's time for my biggest gripe with this machine: The battery life sucks. As Confucious once said, with great power comes crappy battery life. That's certainly the case with the 7520, which manages to eke out about fours hours doing light duty web browsing and the like, but quickly drops off to less than two if you start pushing it.
+
Given the size and weight, along with the battery life, suffice to say that the happiest Dell Precision 7520 user will be the one that primarily has it sitting on a desk at home or work and only occasionally ventures out to tax the battery. The more you leave this on the desk -- chained to a couple 4K displays via Dell's Thunderbolt docking station would be nice -- the more your back will thank you anyway.
+
The Good
+
Trouble-free Linux on good hardware
+Excellent screen with great resolution
+Plenty of RAM to handle whatever you throw at it
+Price is competitive for the hardware you get
+
The Bad
+
Screen resolution of HiDPI models can cause problems with some apps
+It's not the lightest thing around
+Charger is also quite large
+
The Ugly
+
It's not Dell's fault, but if you stick with Ubuntu, eventually you're going to wake up one day to GNOME rather than Unity.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dellreview.html b/ars-technica/published/dellreview.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d4538fa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dellreview.html
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+
Hardware that ships with Linux installed isn't as rare as it used to be. System 76, Purism, ZaReason and others have been cranking out hardware with Linux pre-installed for quite a while now. But, while those of us who use Linux may know these companies, there's only one household name that ships laptops with Linux installed -- Dell.
+
Dell's Project Sputnik has been dedicating resources to creating a "just works" experience for Dell Ultrabooks running Ubuntu for nearly four years now. Barton George, who leads the effort, and other developers have been writing code where necessary (and contributing that code back upstream) and refining the user experience to a point where everything does indeed just work.
+
I reviewed the original Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition for Wired and found that it had a few rough edges. Since then I sat on the sidelines watching as George and Dell polished off those rough edges and tweaked the hardware options to better meet the needs of developers -- like expanding the available RAM to 16GB, adding a matte screen option (albeit only on the low end model) and shrinking the dimensions down considerably.
+
The result is the sixth iteration of the XPS 13 developer edition. This might be the best supported Linux ultrabook on the market. It actually might be one of the only officially supported Linux ultrabooks on the market.
+
Not only does the hardware work nearly flawlessly with the stock Ubuntu installation, but Dell stands behind it with the same level of support it offers for Windows users. That doesn't make it the best Linux laptop around, but for many people the ability to know that your hardware will work, rather than hoping for the best, will make Dell's premium price worth it.
+
Before I dive into the review though, first a little context. I am a Linux user and have been using it full time since Ubuntu 9.04 was released. I split my time between writing (which I can do on pretty much any hardware), photography (Darktable and Gimp) and web-based software development (Python, various web servers, and sysadmin tasks).
+
I've been using Linux off and on for long enough to have edited xorg.conf, have my own tweaked Xmodmap file, and to be all too familiar with audio and video codecs. Which is to say I generally know my way around what used to be the somewhat torturous process of making Linux work on hardware that was never intended to work with Linux. Currently I dual boot Debian and OS X on a MacBook Pro, which took no small amount of tweaking to get working at all.
+
I consider all of the problem solving and troubleshooting I've done to get Linux working on various pieces of hardware to be a learning experience. But these days I know longer enjoy staying up until the predawn hours trying to figure out which @#$Sing Broadcom driver I need just to get online without an ethernet cable. I prefer hardware that has already been tested and is known to work. Typically that means avoiding the latest and greatest hardware in favor of laptops from a couple of years ago. Slightly older hardware usually means some other poor user has already figured out how to solve all the problems.
+
Would I like the latest and greatest? Sure. But I dislike Arch, so getting everything working can be a pain. Enter Dell, System 76 and all the rest.
+
To be clear, I don't often have much trouble getting Linux working these days. But there's usually at least one thing that requires some research. Especially if you prefer less popular setups like I do (I like minimal setups even on good hardware, which typically revolve around Openbox). So, while I don't have much trouble with Linux and hardware, that doesn't mean that everything always "just works".
+
When Linux does "just work" it's usually luck. Windows just works because people make it just work. Windows doesn't have any better hardware support than Linux. Manufacturers have better Windows support. Which is to say, Windows machines just work because the manufacturer has spent the time and effort to make it just work. There's absolutely no reason the manufacturer couldn't do the same with Linux.
+
And that's what Dell has done with the Developer Edition laptops.
+
If you're looking for the cheapest way to get a powerful Linux machine, the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition is not for you. If, on the other hand, you're willing to spend a little extra to avoid late night hardware debugging sessions, the new XPS 13 is worth considering.
+
The Specs
+
First the bad news. This is an ultrabook, which is a marketing term for "not upgradable".
+
The latest XPS 13 DE comes in a few pre-built configurations with variations in RAM, hard drive size and screen type. At the low end there's an $1100 option that ships with a Core i5, 8GB of RAM, 256GB PCIe SSD and a 1920x1080 display with the Intel HD Graphics 520 card. At the high end you get a Core i7-6560U, 16GB of RAM, 1 TB SSD and Dell's QHD+ (3200x1800) InfinityEdge touch display with an Intel Iris 540 graphics card, but all that will set you back $2500.
+
There are two models in the middle with specs identical to the high end model, though less RAM and/or less SSD space. The model I tested featured 16GB of RAM, a 512 GB SSD, the QHD+ 3200x1800 display and the Iris graphics card. It lists for $2,079.
+
The first and most notable thing about the XPS when it arrived is just how small it is for a 13 inch laptop. It's tiny. The InfinityEdge display is very close to borderless, which cuts out a lot of space. It essentially means that Dell can squeeze a 13.3 inch display into the size more typical of 11‐inch machines (it's also worth noting that there's a 15" model that manages to be more the size of a 14" if you're looking for a larger display).
+
The screen is gorgeous, colors are rich and edges sharp. The screen is also the source of what will likely been the biggest complaint from many users -- it's glossy (it's Gorilla glass though). There is a matte option, but it's limited to the lower resolution 1920x1080 display in the low end model. As someone who mainly stares at a near black terminal window with light colored text, glossy screens don't bother me. When I work with photos and video I tend to do so indoors and relatively dim lighting that I can control, which mitigates the glare problem on glossy screens. If your use case is different, or if you just hate glossy screens, stop reading now.
+
Gorgeous and sharp as the screen is this is the one place I ran into some Linux-related shortcomings.
+
The XPS 13 DE ships with Ubuntu 14.04, which frankly, has mediocre support for high resolution displays. GNOME's high res display support doesn't really get to be very good until GNOME 3.16, which you won't get in Ubuntu 14.04. This means that some applications end up with tiny interfaces. To be clear, 95 percent of the applications I tried worked just fine, but there were some outliers, like Gimp, which is basically unusable at this resolution.
+
There are some custom themes available that make Gimp tolerable, if not ideal, at this resolution but they all require newer versions of the underlying GNOME components than you'll get with Ubuntu 14.04.
+
Dell does not officially support the just released Ubuntu 16.04 yet, but I went for it anyway. Most of Dell's hardware support revolves around a half dozen or so PPAs that come installed and which may or may not work with 16.04. Since it's a review laptop I threw caution to the wind and upgraded it to 16.04. I had no problems, but I don't necessarily suggest doing it unless you're comfortable troubleshooting Linux. Dell plans to eventually migrate to 16.04, but did not have a date available when I asked.
+
It's also worth noting that if you wish to use a different flavor of Ubuntu, Dell recommends installing it via the Software Center (or apt-get) rather than starting from scratch. That way the extra Dell PPAs are still there. It's also possible to install other distros, but in my experience this is hit or miss. Mint 17.3 with Cinnamon worked pretty well after I added the Dell PPAs by hand. Arch most likely works perfectly. Fedora seems to work except for the microphone. Debian testing on the other hand was rough. Rough enough that I went back to Ubuntu. You can see some helpful bios update advice on Barton George's site. Suffice to say that you can get other distros working, but you may lose some of the "just works" aspect that you're paying for.
+
The rest of the XPS 13's specs are roughly what you'd expect from a 13" laptop in 2016: there's 2 USB 3.0 ports, one with PowerShare, a thunderbolt port that supports charging, a 3-in-1 Card Reader, DisplayPort 1.2 video output, VGA, HDMI and Ethernet is available via an adapter (sold separately).
+
There's the same 720p webcam that's been in the last couple of models, though with the infinity display it's at the bottom left side of the screen. The palm rests are carbon fiber composite that's very comfortable and wraps around a backlit chiclet keyboard with 1.3mm of travel in the keys. As chiclet keyboards go this one is very nice, though it is still a chiclet keyboard, which might send some developers reaching for something more substantial. Unlike some Linux hardware makers Dell sticks with the Windows logo on the "Win" or super key. I should also mention that there are three levels of brightness for the keyboard, bright, half and off, which you can toggle with the F10 key. I also like the five light battery life indicator on the left side. It's a quick way to see if you need to plugin without having to open it up and boot the OS.
+
The touch pad is large and, as is the current style, lacks dedicated buttons though there is a visual line near the base to differentiate left and right clicks at a glance. I didn't mind the feel of it, it has a satisfying click to it when you press, but I did occasionally find it unresponsive for a few seconds. It happens seemingly at random and I only noticed it after I upgraded to 16.04 -- though I'm not positive that was the reason -- so I won't count it against Dell, but be aware that similar problems seem to have plagued previous releases as well.
+
Inside the full aluminum exterior there's an aluminum frame as well which gives the XPS 13 DE a very solid feel. This is not some flimsy off-brand plastic with a Linux logo on it by any means. In fact in terms of construction the Dell is far superior to any of the other Linux-friendly hardware offerings currently on the market. The aluminum exterior held up to several weeks of being shoved in my bag and bounced around with nary a scratch to show for the experience.
+
Real World Performance
+
The XPS 13 DE is fast, even with Ubuntu's Unity interface, which I find to be one of the more RAM hungry sluggish desktops around. It's not a desktop replacement by any means, particularly if you're going to be building C#, F#, C++, C, etc, but it's no slouch either. It could use more RAM though.
+
Aside from the high resolution display issues -- which are neither Dell, nor Linux's fault -- my other gripe with the XPS 13 is the 16GB RAM limit. For the typical consumer 16GB of RAM is probably sufficient, but Dell is billing this as a "developer" laptop and these days 16GB of RAM feels like the bare minimum. An option for 32GB in the high end model would make the XPS line feel a bit more future-proof, especially given how RAM hungry Ubuntu's Unity interface is: doing absolutely nothing but displaying the desktop and running terminal window with the "free -t -m" command, Unity manages to use over a gigabyte of RAM.
+
The XPS 13 features 56wHR, 4-cell not user replaceable battery. Dell claims up to 17 hours, though it's not clear on the company's site which XPS 13 this refers to. While I never got that long in my real work use, turning down brightness to below 50 percent (still very bright) I was able to get very near the 10 hour mark doing basic things like web browsing, email, etc (i.e. no software compiling). That's far and away the best battery life I've ever seen with Linux.
+
I also ran Ars Technica's standard web browsing battery life test, with the screen brightness at 50 percent. In Ars' test the XPS 13 managed just under 6 hours (347 minutes).
+
I ran into one other technical glitch where occasionally (again somewhat randomly) the XPS 13 would not wake from sleep/suspend properly. It would wake up, display to login screen for a second or two and then the screen would go black. Nothing seemed to fix this save restarting, which makes it a pretty serious bug if you have unsaved work. A bit of digging revealed this is a known issue though and there is a fix available. Dell has a solution on its support site, though I fixed things by simply upgrading to 16.04, after which the problem disappeared.
+
As with previous models it's near impossible to open the XPS 13 with one hand, which I find irrationally irritating. It's a tiny thing and probably it won't bother you, but the hinge is too stiff and the edge meets too closely for one handed operation. Other than that though I found the ergonomics of it to be very comfortable, particularly the carbon fiber palm rests which are much nicer than the hard, sharp-edged experience I'm used to with the MacBook Pro. And at 2.9 pounds it's a wonderfully light machine you'll hardly notice in your bag.
+
Conclusion
+
The XPS is a lightweight, well-specced, Linux-supporting laptop. That in and of itself is notable, but Dell heavily touts it as a "developer" laptop. What exactly makes the XPS a developer laptop? Essentially Dell has saved you a few apt-get commands. The XPS continues to oriented toward "DevOps" work, which means you get Virtualbox pre-installed, the more popular-with-developers Chromium browser replaces Firefox and reasonably up-to-date packages of most popular programming languages are included.
+
Dell has made the sound decision to err on the side of not enough here though. There's no massive IDEs or any monolithic tools to get in your way. Instead there's nice little additions like an icon that launches htop or a pre-installed remote desktop client. Dell's own devops tools, like "Cloud Launcher" and "Profile Tool," are available on Project Sputnik's Github page as well, though none of them have seen updates in several years.
+
Most of Dell's efforts though have gone into getting Linux working with hardware. The developer bit seems primarily to refer to the idea that only developers are interested in Linux. That's not to belittle the effort Dell has made, which is considerable, rather I think at this point Dell could probably just drop the developer pretense and call this the XPS 13 Ubuntu Edition.
+
And that is probably the best thing about the XPS 13 Developer Edition: it works so well it's really no different than the experience anyone would have with a Windows machine. The only difference is of course, no Windows.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dellreview.txt b/ars-technica/published/dellreview.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b0b7b7e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dellreview.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+Hardware that ships with Linux installed isn't as rare as it used to be. System 76, Purism, ZaReason and others have been cranking out hardware with Linux pre-installed for quite a while now. But, while those of us who use Linux may know these companies, there's only one household name that ships laptops with Linux installed -- Dell.
+
+Dell's Project Sputnik has been dedicating resources to creating a "just works" experience for Dell Ultrabooks running Ubuntu for nearly four years now. Barton George, who leads the effort, and other developers have been writing code where necessary (and contributing that code back upstream) and refining the user experience to a point where everything does indeed just work.
+
+I reviewed the original Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition for Wired and found that it had a few rough edges. Since then I sat on the sidelines watching as George and Dell polished off those rough edges and tweaked the hardware options to better meet the needs of developers -- like expanding the available RAM to 16GB, adding a matte screen option (albeit only on the low end model) and shrinking the dimensions down considerably.
+
+The result is the sixth iteration of the XPS 13 developer edition. This might be the best supported Linux ultrabook on the market. It actually might be one of the only officially supported Linux ultrabooks on the market.
+
+Not only does the hardware work nearly flawlessly with the stock Ubuntu installation, but Dell stands behind it with the same level of support it offers for Windows users. That doesn't make it the best Linux laptop around, but for many people the ability to know that your hardware will work, rather than hoping for the best, will make Dell's premium price worth it.
+
+Before I dive into the review though, first a little context. I am a Linux user and have been using it full time since Ubuntu 9.04 was released. I split my time between writing (which I can do on pretty much any hardware), photography (Darktable and Gimp) and web-based software development (Python, various web servers, and sysadmin tasks).
+
+I've been using Linux off and on for long enough to have edited xorg.conf, have my own tweaked Xmodmap file, and to be all too familiar with audio and video codecs. Which is to say I generally know my way around what used to be the somewhat torturous process of making Linux work on hardware that was never intended to work with Linux. Currently I dual boot Debian and OS X on a MacBook Pro, which took no small amount of tweaking to get working at all.
+
+I consider all of the problem solving and troubleshooting I've done to get Linux working on various pieces of hardware to be a learning experience. But these days I know longer enjoy staying up until the predawn hours trying to figure out which @#$Sing Broadcom driver I need just to get online without an ethernet cable. I prefer hardware that has already been tested and is known to work. Typically that means avoiding the latest and greatest hardware in favor of laptops from a couple of years ago. Slightly older hardware usually means some other poor user has already figured out how to solve all the problems.
+
+Would I like the latest and greatest? Sure. But I dislike Arch, so getting everything working can be a pain. Enter Dell, System 76 and all the rest.
+
+To be clear, I don't often have much trouble getting Linux working these days. But there's usually at least one thing that requires some research. Especially if you prefer less popular setups like I do (I like minimal setups even on good hardware, which typically revolve around Openbox). So, while I don't have much trouble with Linux and hardware, that doesn't mean that everything always "just works".
+
+When Linux does "just work" it's usually luck. Windows just works because people make it just work. Windows doesn't have any better hardware support than Linux. Manufacturers have better Windows support. Which is to say, Windows machines just work because the manufacturer has spent the time and effort to make it just work. There's absolutely no reason the manufacturer couldn't do the same with Linux.
+
+And that's what Dell has done with the Developer Edition laptops.
+
+If you're looking for the cheapest way to get a powerful Linux machine, the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition is not for you. If, on the other hand, you're willing to spend a little extra to avoid late night hardware debugging sessions, the new XPS 13 is worth considering.
+
+## The Specs
+
+First the bad news. This is an ultrabook, which is a marketing term for "not upgradable".
+
+The latest XPS 13 DE comes in a few pre-built configurations with variations in RAM, hard drive size and screen type. At the low end there's an $1100 option that ships with a Core i5, 8GB of RAM, 256GB PCIe SSD and a 1920x1080 display with the Intel HD Graphics 520 card. At the high end you get a Core i7-6560U, 16GB of RAM, 1 TB SSD and Dell's QHD+ (3200x1800) InfinityEdge touch display with an Intel Iris 540 graphics card, but all that will set you back $2500.
+
+There are two models in the middle with specs identical to the high end model, though less RAM and/or less SSD space. The model I tested featured 16GB of RAM, a 512 GB SSD, the QHD+ 3200x1800 display and the Iris graphics card. It lists for $2,079.
+
+The first and most notable thing about the XPS when it arrived is just how small it is for a 13 inch laptop. It's tiny. The InfinityEdge display is very close to borderless, which cuts out a lot of space. It essentially means that Dell can squeeze a 13.3 inch display into the size more typical of 11‐inch machines (it's also worth noting that there's a 15" model that manages to be more the size of a 14" if you're looking for a larger display).
+
+The screen is gorgeous, colors are rich and edges sharp. The screen is also the source of what will likely been the biggest complaint from many users -- it's glossy (it's Gorilla glass though). There is a matte option, but it's limited to the lower resolution 1920x1080 display in the low end model. As someone who mainly stares at a near black terminal window with light colored text, glossy screens don't bother me. When I work with photos and video I tend to do so indoors and relatively dim lighting that I can control, which mitigates the glare problem on glossy screens. If your use case is different, or if you just hate glossy screens, stop reading now.
+
+Gorgeous and sharp as the screen is this is the one place I ran into some Linux-related shortcomings.
+
+The XPS 13 DE ships with Ubuntu 14.04, which frankly, has mediocre support for high resolution displays. GNOME's high res display support doesn't really get to be very good until GNOME 3.16, which you won't get in Ubuntu 14.04. This means that some applications end up with tiny interfaces. To be clear, 95 percent of the applications I tried worked just fine, but there were some outliers, like Gimp, which is basically unusable at this resolution.
+
+There are some custom themes available that make Gimp tolerable, if not ideal, at this resolution but they all require newer versions of the underlying GNOME components than you'll get with Ubuntu 14.04.
+
+Dell does not officially support the just released Ubuntu 16.04 yet, but I went for it anyway. Most of Dell's hardware support revolves around a half dozen or so PPAs that come installed and which may or may not work with 16.04. Since it's a review laptop I threw caution to the wind and upgraded it to 16.04. I had no problems, but I don't necessarily suggest doing it unless you're comfortable troubleshooting Linux. Dell plans to eventually migrate to 16.04, but did not have a date available when I asked.
+
+It's also worth noting that if you wish to use a different flavor of Ubuntu, Dell recommends installing it via the Software Center (or apt-get) rather than starting from scratch. That way the extra Dell PPAs are still there. It's also possible to install other distros, but in my experience this is hit or miss. Mint 17.3 with Cinnamon worked pretty well after I added the Dell PPAs by hand. Arch most likely works perfectly. Fedora seems to work except for the microphone. Debian testing on the other hand was rough. Rough enough that I went back to Ubuntu. You can see some helpful bios update advice on [Barton George's site](https://bartongeorge.net/2015/04/09/4th-gen-dell-xps-13-developer-edition-available/). Suffice to say that you *can* get other distros working, but you may lose some of the "just works" aspect that you're paying for.
+
+The rest of the XPS 13's specs are roughly what you'd expect from a 13" laptop in 2016: there's 2 USB 3.0 ports, one with PowerShare, a thunderbolt port that supports charging, a 3-in-1 Card Reader, DisplayPort 1.2 video output, VGA, HDMI and Ethernet is available via an adapter (sold separately).
+
+There's the same 720p webcam that's been in the last couple of models, though with the infinity display it's at the bottom left side of the screen. The palm rests are carbon fiber composite that's very comfortable and wraps around a backlit chiclet keyboard with 1.3mm of travel in the keys. As chiclet keyboards go this one is very nice, though it is still a chiclet keyboard, which might send some developers reaching for something more substantial. Unlike some Linux hardware makers Dell sticks with the Windows logo on the "Win" or super key. I should also mention that there are three levels of brightness for the keyboard, bright, half and off, which you can toggle with the F10 key. I also like the five light battery life indicator on the left side. It's a quick way to see if you need to plugin without having to open it up and boot the OS.
+
+The touch pad is large and, as is the current style, lacks dedicated buttons though there is a visual line near the base to differentiate left and right clicks at a glance. I didn't mind the feel of it, it has a satisfying click to it when you press, but I did occasionally find it unresponsive for a few seconds. It happens seemingly at random and I only noticed it after I upgraded to 16.04 -- though I'm not positive that was the reason -- so I won't count it against Dell, but be aware that similar problems seem to have plagued previous releases as well.
+
+Inside the full aluminum exterior there's an aluminum frame as well which gives the XPS 13 DE a very solid feel. This is not some flimsy off-brand plastic with a Linux logo on it by any means. In fact in terms of construction the Dell is far superior to any of the other Linux-friendly hardware offerings currently on the market. The aluminum exterior held up to several weeks of being shoved in my bag and bounced around with nary a scratch to show for the experience.
+
+## Real World Performance
+
+The XPS 13 DE is fast, even with Ubuntu's Unity interface, which I find to be one of the more RAM hungry sluggish desktops around. It's not a desktop replacement by any means, particularly if you're going to be building C#, F#, C++, C, etc, but it's no slouch either. It could use more RAM though.
+
+Aside from the high resolution display issues -- which are neither Dell, nor Linux's fault -- my other gripe with the XPS 13 is the 16GB RAM limit. For the typical consumer 16GB of RAM is probably sufficient, but Dell is billing this as a "developer" laptop and these days 16GB of RAM feels like the bare minimum. An option for 32GB in the high end model would make the XPS line feel a bit more future-proof, especially given how RAM hungry Ubuntu's Unity interface is: doing absolutely nothing but displaying the desktop and running terminal window with the "free -t -m" command, Unity manages to use over a gigabyte of RAM.
+
+The XPS 13 features 56wHR, 4-cell not user replaceable battery. Dell claims up to 17 hours, though it's not clear on the company's site which XPS 13 this refers to. While I never got that long in my real work use, turning down brightness to below 50 percent (still very bright) I was able to get very near the 10 hour mark doing basic things like web browsing, email, etc (i.e. no software compiling). That's far and away the best battery life I've ever seen with Linux.
+
+I also ran Ars Technica's standard web browsing battery life test, with the screen brightness at 50 percent. In Ars' test the XPS 13 managed just under 6 hours (347 minutes).
+
+I ran into one other technical glitch where occasionally (again somewhat randomly) the XPS 13 would not wake from sleep/suspend properly. It would wake up, display to login screen for a second or two and then the screen would go black. Nothing seemed to fix this save restarting, which makes it a pretty serious bug if you have unsaved work. A bit of digging revealed this is a known issue though and there is a fix available. Dell has a [solution on its support site](http://www.dell.com/support/article/uk/en/ukdhs1/SLN297551/en), though I fixed things by simply upgrading to 16.04, after which the problem disappeared.
+
+As with previous models it's near impossible to open the XPS 13 with one hand, which I find irrationally irritating. It's a tiny thing and probably it won't bother you, but the hinge is too stiff and the edge meets too closely for one handed operation. Other than that though I found the ergonomics of it to be very comfortable, particularly the carbon fiber palm rests which are much nicer than the hard, sharp-edged experience I'm used to with the MacBook Pro. And at 2.9 pounds it's a wonderfully light machine you'll hardly notice in your bag.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+The XPS is a lightweight, well-specced, Linux-supporting laptop. That in and of itself is notable, but Dell heavily touts it as a "developer" laptop. What exactly makes the XPS a developer laptop? Essentially Dell has saved you a few apt-get commands. The XPS continues to oriented toward "DevOps" work, which means you get Virtualbox pre-installed, the more popular-with-developers Chromium browser replaces Firefox and reasonably up-to-date packages of most popular programming languages are included.
+
+Dell has made the sound decision to err on the side of not enough here though. There's no massive IDEs or any monolithic tools to get in your way. Instead there's nice little additions like an icon that launches htop or a pre-installed remote desktop client. Dell's own devops tools, like "Cloud Launcher" and "Profile Tool," are available on Project Sputnik's Github page as well, though none of them have seen updates in several years.
+
+Most of Dell's efforts though have gone into getting Linux working with hardware. The developer bit seems primarily to refer to the idea that only developers are interested in Linux. That's not to belittle the effort Dell has made, which is considerable, rather I think at this point Dell could probably just drop the developer pretense and call this the XPS 13 Ubuntu Edition.
+
+And that is probably the best thing about the XPS 13 Developer Edition: it works so well it's really no different than the experience anyone would have with a Windows machine. The only difference is of course, no Windows.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dellxps-review.html b/ars-technica/published/dellxps-review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bfdee79
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dellxps-review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+
Dell's XPS Developer Edition laptop family has produced some of the best Linux "ultrabooks" in recent memory. The company's Developer Edition moniker refers specifically to the XPS models that ship with Ubuntu Linux installed instead of Windows.
+
This month, November 2018, marks the six year anniversary of the first Ubuntu-based version of the Dell XPS 13.
+
To see where Project Sputnik is at after six years, Dell sent Ars the latest model of the XPS 13, the 13in version, which received a serious overhaul earlier this year (see Ars' earlier review for more details). While Dell bumped the the hardware specs, revamped the thermal system and introduced a new rose and white version, the big news in the latest Developer Edition, which began shipping earlier this year, is the upgrade to Ubuntu 18.04.
+
It's true that Linux users did have a wait bit, but it was more Ubuntu's release schedule than Dell's that caused the delay. The Windows version of the XPS 13 (model 9370) arrived before the release of Ubuntu 18.04, the latest long term support release from Canonical. Since its debut in 2012, the XPS Developer Edition line has always tracked Canonical's LTS releases. That means that even the XPS DE released in February of this year still shipped Ubuntu 16.04. While I've never had a problem upgrading to the latest Ubuntu release on any of the three XPSes I've tested over the years, nothing beyond 16.04 has ever been supported by Dell.
+
The latest release of the XPS 13 Developer Edition model 9370 changes that. The latest and greatest hardware now features full support for Ubuntu 18.04, which is no small feat considering that the move from Ubuntu 16.04 to 18.04 means a completely new desktop, GNOME 3, a major revamp of underlying technologies (more modern GTK libraries), and a new very different user interface to contend with. On the hardware side there's quite a bit of newer tech in the XPS 13, including USB C and Thunderbolt, all of which now work under Ubuntu without a hitch.
+
After a few weeks living with the XPS 13, I'm happy to say that, with a few small exceptions, Dell has pulled off the transition to Ubuntu 18.04 with remarkable aplomb.
+
Some might argue that Linux has reached a stage where it tends to work out of the box on almost any hardware. But, while the situation is certainly better than it once was, my experience has been that it's rare to buy a brand new laptop and get everything working right away. Stick with last year's model and you'll likely be fine, but with new hardware there almost always seems to be an edge case, a trackpad that's missing drivers in all but the latest kernel (which might not be available immediately in your distro of choice, unless that happens to be Arch Linux), some application that lacks good support for HiDPI screens, or other small glitches. Nothing deal breaking, but always something annoying.
+
It's true that most of the hardware I've installed Linux on in the last few years has not had any show stopping problems, but there's typically some problems that require a bit of research to solve when they turn out to be solvable, or some patience when the solution turns out to be waiting for upstream updates to be released.
+
If you depend on Linux to get your work done every day, that's just not acceptable, which is where Dell's official Linux support becomes not just nice to have, but a necessity. You don't want to be tracking down hardware drivers or trying to figure out the best Xrandr settings for your display when you have work to get done and deadlines to meet.
+
If you want a Linux rig that "just works", weighs under 3lbs, and has the battery life you need to work most of the day power-cable free, the XPS 13 is the laptop you've been looking for. The upgrade to Ubuntu 18.04 means you'll also have the latest and greatest tools that Ubuntu has to offer, including much-improved support for Snap packages, which is a game changer for anyone sticking with the LTS base system.
+
Hardware
+
The Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition has always been an exceptionally well built, great-looking piece of hardware. The revamped version is no exception and the new new white and rose-gold version, while not my style exactly, looks pretty slick. On the rose-and-white model, the palm rest area and space around the keyboard are covered with a very nice fiberglass-like weave that gives it a bit of texture and makes for a little bit softer edge that's easier on my wrists than the last model I used.
I was hesitant to take a white laptop out and about for fear of sending Dell back a gray-brown laptop, but in the six weeks I've been using it, it hasn't picked up a single spot of dirt or a mark that didn't easily disappear with the quick swipe of a rag.
+
The Infinity Edge display on the XPS 13 comes in two flavors -- 3840 x 2160 touchscreen 4k or an FHD non-touch option. There's a roughly $200 difference between the two, but the big catch, as far as I could tell on the Dell website, is that the 16GB RAM model is only available with the HiDPI screen. Since most developers are going to want the max RAM possible, that pretty much means you're going to get the HiDPI display.
+
+[image="dellxps-front.jpg" caption="Ubuntu on the XPS 13's HiDPI screen"]
+
+
There's two things to note about the 4K display (which is what came with the model I tested). First, it's wonderfully bright and sharp. Ubuntu's GNOME interface works well at this resolution, but keep in mind there's there's no half scaling -- it's 2x or 1X. KDE supports arbitrary scaling, which might make Kubuntu a compelling option for some users. The downside to the HiDPI screen is that battery life isn't a good as the FHD non-touch version, and, if you're buying it with the idea of running some other distro, well, do your research, not every desktop/distro combo is going to work well with this display (I happen to really like LXQT these days, but even the Lubuntu version did not play well with the HiDPI screen out of the box).
+
The 16GB model comes equipped with a 8th Generation Intel Core i7-8550U Processor (8M Cache, up to 4.0 GHz, 4 cores) and has the onboard Intel UHD Graphics 620. There are two Thunderbolt 3 ports, and Dell has made it possible to use four-lane PCI connections, which means in theory you could add an external graphics card for a better gaming experience. At least that's possible with the Windows version, I did not test how well this works under Ubuntu because I am not a gamer and this is a serious developer laptop, no playing games here. I did throw some video rendering tasks at it, (using Blender) and the XPS 13 cranked through them with impressive ease.
+
Despite the new case color, not everything on XPS 13 comes up roses. There's still that webcam. Yes it's still at the bottom of the screen, aimed up your nose. At this point is seems safe to assume Dell isn't changing it. I found some nice white electrical tape at my local hardware store and stuck it over the camera and had no further problems with it. If you're going to do any teleconferencing or the like, the $20 you spend on an external USB webcam will not be wasted.
+
On the upside, some of the earlier models of the XPS 13 I tested had a tendency to produce a high pitched whine in some situations. If you read users' complaints around the web you'll get a mix of theories, the most likely being coil whine. Whatever it was, I have not noticed it with this model.
+
Aside from the aforementioned Thunderbolt ports, you'll find that, like a certain other laptop maker, the latest version of the XPS 13 ditches USB A in favor of a USB Type C port. Technically the XPS 13 has three USB type C ports, two of which are Thunderbolt 3 enabled, the other is USB 3.1.
+
While I understand this move somewhat -- USB C is the future and I want my laptop to last a few years, which means I want at least one USB C port; and you aren't getting that 4mm edge with USB A ports in there -- from a purely practical standpoint I find it irritating. The USB C future still feels a long way off. I have plenty of devices that are USB A and I'm not going to be replacing perfectly capable accessories just because hardware ports are disappearing. Dell does helpfully include a USB C to A dongle, but really, I did not need yet another dongle.
+
Other ports include a microSD card reader, headset jack, and Noble lock slot. The included power supply remains small enough that toting it around does not significantly alter the weight of your bag. Just remember to throw in that USB C to A dongle as well. And the USB A to Ethernet dongle if you're hoping to use the internet from a hotel room. It's not really criticism of Dell so much as the industry at large, but the potential daisy chain of dongles necessary to connect modern ultrabooks to any technology older than six months is quickly approaching the ridiculous.
+
Ubuntu 18.04 on the XPS
+
What's not approaching the ridiculous is Ubuntu 18.04, this is perhaps the best mainstream version of Linux ever released. Coupled with Dell's hardware and support, Ubuntu 18.04 makes for an outstanding desktop experience that will, for many developers, trump both Windows and macOS.
+
That said, it's worth noting that if you're coming from Ubuntu 16.04 or earlier, for example upgrading from a previous XPS model, you're in for something of a shock. The Ubuntu that ships with the latest XPS 13 is significantly different from the moment you first turn it on -- there’s a new desktop, a new lock screen, some new default apps and of course a new kernel under the hood. For a full review of everything that's new, see Ars' earlier review.
+
+[image="dellxps-default1804desk.jpg" caption="The new Welcome to Ubuntu guide in 18.04"]
+
+
To help users transition from previous releases to this one, Canonical has a little "first-run" app called "Welcome to Ubuntu", which Dell includes as well. The app does a good job of highlighting some of the most used new features and points out where things are in GNOME.
+
The Developer slant to the XPS 13 DE starts to show as soon as you configure Ubuntu and book to the desktop for the first time. Regular Ubuntu users will note that Dell has included quite a few things out of the box that Ubuntu does not such as both the Chrome and Chromium web browsers and the very nice Dellrecovery tool that allows you to create an image of your XPS as it arrived. If you plan to do any distro experimenting, I strongly suggest you create a backup image with Dell's extra repos and tools before you do anything else.
+
One bit of hardware support I immediately noticed is missing out of the box is support for two-finger clicks for right-click. From what I can tell this is a shortcoming of GNOME, not Dell. Still, it would be nice for Dell to include the GNOME Tweaks tool by default since it allows for customization options that the GNOME devs have seen fit to remove from GNOME proper. You could of course also enable two-finger right clicks and some other tweaks using included tools like xinput.
+
One of the big things you get with Ubuntu 18.04 is much-improved support for Snap applications. It's a little bit of an oversimplification, but a Snap application is an app packaged in a container, which ships separately from Ubuntu itself. That doesn't sound all that great, but what it allows you to do is stay up to date with releases of the Snap application, without needing to worry about updating Ubuntu itself.
+
Snaps are useful as a way to keep up to date with desktop apps that may be developing faster than Ubuntu's package maintainers can package them. For example, I used both Darktable and Gimp as Snaps to be able to have the latest releases of both, which are sometimes a bit of head of what's in Ubuntu's repositories.
+
+[image="dell-snaps-inappcenter.png" caption="Install Skype as a Snap package in Ubuntu 18.04"]
+
+
Snaps are also useful for developers because Snaps contain all their own dependencies. This means it's easy, for instance, to run a Snap app that requires a specific version of Python, without worrying about that conflicting with the system-wide version of Python. Developers wanting the latest version of any number of tools would do well to look at Canonical's Snapcraft store, where you'll find Snaps for developer necessities like Docker, LXD and PostgreSQL, as well as the latest version of nearly every language you can think of, from Go to Javascript, even .NET if you've got one of "those" jobs.
+
Conclusion
+
While the update to 18.04 is a welcome one, and there are a couple of bones thrown to developers, it feels a little bit like Dell is moving away from the developer angle to a more mainstream Linux laptop. I think that's a good thing.
+
Previous releases shipped with a quite a few developer tools pre-installed, Virtualbox, some extra programming languages, and there were a couple of Dell-developed devops tools called Cloud Launcher and Profile Tool, which could be easily installed, but neither seemed to get much traction with developers.
+
Aside from the extra web browsers though, there's nothing particularly developer-oriented about the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition. Aside from the marketing. And I think that's a good thing. I appreciate that Dell chooses to err on the side of not enough rather than throwing in a bunch of IDEs or tools that not every developer is going to want. Part of the reason Linux is so popular with developers is that it allows everyone to work in their own way using whatever toolset they happen to like out the vast array of tools available in the open source world.
+
Rather than worrying about some custom tools developers aren't going to use anyway, Dell's efforts have instead gone where it should: into getting Linux working with the hardware. In other words Dell gets out of your way. That's not to belittle the effort Dell has made here, which is considerable, rather I think at this point Dell should drop the developer pretense and call this the XPS 13 Linux Edition.
+
And that is probably the best thing about the XPS 13 Developer Edition. It provides a solid platform from which you can build up your workflow and tools to suit your tastes, whether you're a developer or just want a solid laptop with an operating system that stays out of your way and lets you do what you want to do.
+
The Good
+ Light weight hardware with a brilliant screen
+ Solid performance
+ Ubuntu 18.04
+ No bloatware
+The Bad
+ No USB Type A ports.
+ Max 16GB of RAM feels limited for a "Developer" machine
+The Ugly
+* The webcam. Still.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dellxps-review.txt b/ars-technica/published/dellxps-review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3c7c746
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dellxps-review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+Dell's XPS Developer Edition laptop family has produced some of the best Linux "ultrabooks" in recent memory. The company's Developer Edition moniker refers specifically to the [XPS models](https://pilot.search.dell.com/ubuntu%20xps%2013#products) that ship with Ubuntu Linux installed instead of Windows.
+
+This month, November 2018, marks the six year anniversary of the first Ubuntu-based version of the Dell XPS 13.
+
+To see where Project Sputnik is at after six years, Dell sent Ars the latest model of the XPS 13, the 13in version, which received a serious overhaul earlier this year (see Ars' [earlier review](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/review-improved-dell-xps-13-laptop-holds-its-own-against-other-ultrabooks/) for more details). While Dell bumped the the hardware specs, revamped the thermal system and introduced a new rose and white version, the big news in the latest Developer Edition, which began shipping earlier this year, is the upgrade to Ubuntu 18.04.
+
+It's true that Linux users did have a wait bit, but it was more Ubuntu's release schedule than Dell's that caused the delay. The Windows version of the XPS 13 (model 9370) arrived before the release of Ubuntu 18.04, the latest long term support release from Canonical. Since its debut in 2012, the XPS Developer Edition line has always tracked Canonical's LTS releases. That means that even the XPS DE released in February of this year still shipped Ubuntu 16.04. While I've never had a problem upgrading to the latest Ubuntu release on any of the three XPSes I've tested over the years, nothing beyond 16.04 has ever been supported by Dell.
+
+The latest release of the XPS 13 Developer Edition model 9370 changes that. The latest and greatest hardware now features full support for Ubuntu 18.04, which is no small feat considering that the move from Ubuntu 16.04 to 18.04 means a completely new desktop, GNOME 3, a major revamp of underlying technologies (more modern GTK libraries), and a new very different user interface to contend with. On the hardware side there's quite a bit of newer tech in the XPS 13, including USB C and Thunderbolt, all of which now work under Ubuntu without a hitch.
+
+After a few weeks living with the XPS 13, I'm happy to say that, with a few small exceptions, Dell has pulled off the transition to Ubuntu 18.04 with remarkable aplomb.
+
+Some might argue that Linux has reached a stage where it tends to work out of the box on almost any hardware. But, while the situation is certainly better than it once was, my experience has been that it's rare to buy a brand new laptop and get everything working right away. Stick with last year's model and you'll likely be fine, but with new hardware there almost always seems to be an edge case, a trackpad that's missing drivers in all but the latest kernel (which might not be available immediately in your distro of choice, unless that happens to be Arch Linux), some application that lacks good support for HiDPI screens, or other small glitches. Nothing deal breaking, but always something annoying.
+
+It's true that most of the hardware I've installed Linux on in the last few years has not had any show stopping problems, but there's typically some problems that require a bit of research to solve when they turn out to be solvable, or some patience when the solution turns out to be waiting for upstream updates to be released.
+
+If you depend on Linux to get your work done every day, that's just not acceptable, which is where Dell's official Linux support becomes not just nice to have, but a necessity. You don't want to be tracking down hardware drivers or trying to figure out the best Xrandr settings for your display when you have work to get done and deadlines to meet.
+
+If you want a Linux rig that "just works", weighs under 3lbs, and has the battery life you need to work most of the day power-cable free, the XPS 13 is the laptop you've been looking for. The upgrade to Ubuntu 18.04 means you'll also have the latest and greatest tools that Ubuntu has to offer, including much-improved support for Snap packages, which is a game changer for anyone sticking with the LTS base system.
+
+## Hardware
+
+The Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition has always been an exceptionally well built, great-looking piece of hardware. The revamped version is no exception and the new new white and rose-gold version, while not my style exactly, looks pretty slick. On the rose-and-white model, the palm rest area and space around the keyboard are covered with a very nice fiberglass-like weave that gives it a bit of texture and makes for a little bit softer edge that's easier on my wrists than the last model I used.
+
+I was hesitant to take a white laptop out and about for fear of sending Dell back a gray-brown laptop, but in the six weeks I've been using it, it hasn't picked up a single spot of dirt or a mark that didn't easily disappear with the quick swipe of a rag.
+
+The Infinity Edge display on the XPS 13 comes in two flavors -- 3840 x 2160 touchscreen 4k or an FHD non-touch option. There's a roughly $200 difference between the two, but the big catch, as far as I could tell on the Dell website, is that the 16GB RAM model is only available with the HiDPI screen. Since most developers are going to want the max RAM possible, that pretty much means you're going to get the HiDPI display.
+
+There's two things to note about the 4K display (which is what came with the model I tested). First, it's wonderfully bright and sharp. Ubuntu's GNOME interface works well at this resolution, but keep in mind there's there's no half scaling -- it's 2x or 1X. KDE supports arbitrary scaling, which might make Kubuntu a compelling option for some users. The downside to the HiDPI screen is that battery life isn't a good as the FHD non-touch version, and, if you're buying it with the idea of running some other distro, well, do your research, not every desktop/distro combo is going to work well with this display (I happen to really like LXQT these days, but even the Lubuntu version did not play well with the HiDPI screen out of the box).
+
+The 16GB model comes equipped with a 8th Generation Intel Core i7-8550U Processor (8M Cache, up to 4.0 GHz, 4 cores) and has the onboard Intel UHD Graphics 620. There are two Thunderbolt 3 ports, and Dell has made it possible to use four-lane PCI connections, which means in theory you could add an external graphics card for a better gaming experience. At least that's possible with the Windows version, I did not test how well this works under Ubuntu because I am not a gamer and this is a serious *developer* laptop, no playing games here. I did throw some video rendering tasks at it, (using Blender) and the XPS 13 cranked through them with impressive ease.
+
+Despite the new case color, not everything on XPS 13 comes up roses. There's still that webcam. Yes it's still at the bottom of the screen, aimed up your nose. At this point is seems safe to assume Dell isn't changing it. I found some nice white electrical tape at my local hardware store and stuck it over the camera and had no further problems with it. If you're going to do any teleconferencing or the like, the $20 you spend on an external USB webcam will not be wasted.
+
+On the upside, some of the earlier models of the XPS 13 I tested had a tendency to produce a high pitched whine in some situations. If you read users' complaints around the web you'll get a mix of theories, the most likely being coil whine. Whatever it was, I have not noticed it with this model.
+
+Aside from the aforementioned Thunderbolt ports, you'll find that, like a certain other laptop maker, the latest version of the XPS 13 ditches USB A in favor of a USB Type C port. Technically the XPS 13 has three USB type C ports, two of which are Thunderbolt 3 enabled, the other is USB 3.1.
+
+While I understand this move somewhat -- USB C is the future and I want my laptop to last a few years, which means I want at least one USB C port; and you aren't getting that 4mm edge with USB A ports in there -- from a purely practical standpoint I find it irritating. The USB C future still feels a long way off. I have plenty of devices that are USB A and I'm not going to be replacing perfectly capable accessories just because hardware ports are disappearing. Dell does helpfully include a USB C to A dongle, but really, I did not need yet another dongle.
+
+Other ports include a microSD card reader, headset jack, and Noble lock slot. The included power supply remains small enough that toting it around does not significantly alter the weight of your bag. Just remember to throw in that USB C to A dongle as well. And the USB A to Ethernet dongle if you're hoping to use the internet from a hotel room. It's not really criticism of Dell so much as the industry at large, but the potential daisy chain of dongles necessary to connect modern ultrabooks to any technology older than six months is quickly approaching the ridiculous.
+
+## Ubuntu 18.04 on the XPS
+
+What's not approaching the ridiculous is Ubuntu 18.04, this is perhaps the best mainstream version of Linux ever released. Coupled with Dell's hardware and support, Ubuntu 18.04 makes for an outstanding desktop experience that will, for many developers, trump both Windows and macOS.
+
+That said, it's worth noting that if you're coming from Ubuntu 16.04 or earlier, for example upgrading from a previous XPS model, you're in for something of a shock. The Ubuntu that ships with the latest XPS 13 is significantly different from the moment you first turn it on -- there’s a new desktop, a new lock screen, some new default apps and of course a new kernel under the hood. For a full review of everything that's new, see Ars' [earlier review](https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/05/ubuntu-18-04-the-return-of-a-familiar-interface-marks-the-best-ubuntu-in-years/).
+
+To help users transition from previous releases to this one, Canonical has a little "first-run" app called "Welcome to Ubuntu", which Dell includes as well. The app does a good job of highlighting some of the most used new features and points out where things are in GNOME.
+
+The Developer slant to the XPS 13 DE starts to show as soon as you configure Ubuntu and book to the desktop for the first time. Regular Ubuntu users will note that Dell has included quite a few things out of the box that Ubuntu does not such as both the Chrome and Chromium web browsers and the very nice Dellrecovery tool that allows you to create an image of your XPS as it arrived. If you plan to do any distro experimenting, I strongly suggest you create a backup image with Dell's extra repos and tools before you do anything else.
+
+One bit of hardware support I immediately noticed is missing out of the box is support for two-finger clicks for right-click. From what I can tell this is a shortcoming of GNOME, not Dell. Still, it would be nice for Dell to include the GNOME Tweaks tool by default since it allows for customization options that the GNOME devs have seen fit to remove from GNOME proper. You could of course also enable two-finger right clicks and some other tweaks using included tools like `xinput`.
+
+One of the big things you get with Ubuntu 18.04 is much-improved support for Snap applications. It's a little bit of an oversimplification, but a Snap application is an app packaged in a container, which ships separately from Ubuntu itself. That doesn't sound all that great, but what it allows you to do is stay up to date with releases of the Snap application, without needing to worry about updating Ubuntu itself.
+
+Snaps are useful as a way to keep up to date with desktop apps that may be developing faster than Ubuntu's package maintainers can package them. For example, I used both Darktable and Gimp as Snaps to be able to have the latest releases of both, which are sometimes a bit of head of what's in Ubuntu's repositories.
+
+Snaps are also useful for developers because Snaps contain all their own dependencies. This means it's easy, for instance, to run a Snap app that requires a specific version of Python, without worrying about that conflicting with the system-wide version of Python. Developers wanting the latest version of any number of tools would do well to look at Canonical's [Snapcraft store](https://snapcraft.io/), where you'll find Snaps for developer necessities like Docker, LXD and PostgreSQL, as well as the latest version of nearly every language you can think of, from Go to Javascript, even .NET if you've got one of "those" jobs.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+While the update to 18.04 is a welcome one, and there are a couple of bones thrown to developers, it feels a little bit like Dell is moving away from the developer angle to a more mainstream Linux laptop. I think that's a good thing.
+
+Previous releases shipped with a quite a few developer tools pre-installed, Virtualbox, some extra programming languages, and there were a couple of Dell-developed devops tools called Cloud Launcher and Profile Tool, which could be easily installed, but neither seemed to get much traction with developers.
+
+Aside from the extra web browsers though, there's nothing particularly developer-oriented about the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition. Aside from the marketing. And I think that's a good thing. I appreciate that Dell chooses to err on the side of not enough rather than throwing in a bunch of IDEs or tools that not every developer is going to want. Part of the reason Linux is so popular with developers is that it allows everyone to work in their own way using whatever toolset they happen to like out the vast array of tools available in the open source world.
+
+Rather than worrying about some custom tools developers aren't going to use anyway, Dell's efforts have instead gone where it should: into getting Linux working with the hardware. In other words Dell gets out of your way. That's not to belittle the effort Dell has made here, which is considerable, rather I think at this point Dell should drop the developer pretense and call this the XPS 13 Linux Edition.
+
+And that is probably the best thing about the XPS 13 Developer Edition. It provides a solid platform from which you can build up your workflow and tools to suit your tastes, whether you're a developer or just want a solid laptop with an operating system that stays out of your way and lets you do what you want to do.
+
+
+The Good
+* Light weight hardware with a brilliant screen
+* Solid performance
+* Ubuntu 18.04
+* No bloatware
+The Bad
+* No USB Type A ports.
+* Max 16GB of RAM feels limited for a "Developer" machine
+The Ugly
+* The webcam. Still.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dellxps13-2.html b/ars-technica/published/dellxps13-2.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4ad639b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dellxps13-2.html
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+
Dell recently updated the company's extremely popular XPS 13 Developer Edition.
+
Dell's Linux effort, known as Project Sputnik, is led by developer Barton George, who, along with the rest of the Sputnik team, has done an excellent job of bringing a "just works" Linux experience to Dell Ultrabooks. The XPS 13 Developer Edition has been available for 4 years now and this release marks the 7th version of Dell's Ubuntu powered ultrabook.
+
Dell isn't the only manufacturer producing great Linux machines. In fact there's almost an embarrassment of riches for Linux fans these days. System76, whose Oryx Pro remains my top pick for anyone who needs massive power, Purism, ZaReason and others are all producing solid offerings that work with Linux out of the box.
+
Even hardware not explicitly made for Linux tends to work out of box these days. I recently installed Fedora on a Sony Vaio and was shocked that the only problem I encountered was that the default trackpad configuration was terribly slow.
+
Admittedly, the Vaio is a few years old, which means there's been more time for hardware issues to be addressed. Sometimes getting Linux running on the bleeding edge hardware is still a bit tricky -- or requires running a bleeding edge distro like Arch. That's where efforts like Dell's Project Sputnik come in handy, the hardware is already vetted, the drivers pre-installed and configured for a great out of the box experience.
+
It also doesn't hurt that the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition is an exceptionally well built, great-looking piece of hardware. If you want your Linux rig to "just work" and be a powerful, svelte little package that weighs under 3lbs, the XPS 13 is the laptop you've been looking for.
+
The latest iteration of the XPS 13 line, and the third I've tested, features Intel's new Kaby Lake chip that bumps the clock speed by about 10 percent. The more impressive side of the chipset upgrade is the different graphics architecture which is said to improve performance in 3D graphics and 4K video. The results in this Linux-based model make especially 4K video playback incredibly smooth and not nearly as battery-draining as previous models.
+
The Specs
+
Outwardly there's nothing new to see here. The 7th generation Dell XPS 13 DE uses the same wonderful InfinityEdge display that manages to pack a 13 in screen into a body that looks and feels more like an 11 inch laptop. The model I tested came with the 3200x1800 IPS touch panel. There's also a version with a 1920x1080 IPS non-touch panel, but I think the higher res display is worth the extra money.
+
This is quite simply the best looking display I've seen in a laptop. Naturally the HiDPI model suffers a little in battery life compared to the lower res model. I've never used the lower res version so I can't compare battery life times, but more pixels takes more power, so if battery life is your top priority don't go with the HiDPI model. That said, I find the brightest setting (400 nit brightness) to be a bit much indoors. It's great for working outside and goes a long way to compensate for the inevitable glare on glossy screens, but indoors I rarely push the brightness past 60 percent, which improves battery life considerably.
+
The model Dell sent me featured a i7-7500U Kaby Lake chip with 16GB of RAM and a 512GB solid state drive. As configured the model I tested would set you back $1799. The lowest model, which has the 1920x1080 display, an i5 chip, 128GB SSD and only 8GB of RAM, can be had for $975. For an extra $375 you can step up to the higher res screen and a 256GB SSD. There's also a new option in there for what Dell calls a "Rose Gold" exterior.
+
The model I tested had the same full aluminum exterior as previous models. Underneath it there's an aluminum frame as well, which provides a stiffness that makes the XPS line feel very solid even at their minimal weight. As has been my experience with most Dell machines, the construction is excellent. I used the previous model for over six months, shoving it in and out of my bag on several times a day every day and it doesn't have a scratch on it. I can see no reason to think the latest model would be any different.
+
Also unchanged in this release are the ports and layout. There are still two USB 3.0 ports, one with PowerShare for charging your devices (note that USB charging generally requires a trip into the BIOS settings to enable, see Dell's support site for more info). There's also a Thunderbolt port that supports charging, a 3-in-1 card reader, DisplayPort 1.2 video output, VGA and HDMI. As with any laptop this thin, Ethernet requires an adapter (sold separately).
+
There's the same 720p webcam that has been in the last couple of models, and yes, it's still at the bottom of the lid. And yes, it still sucks that it's down there, though in fairness to Dell, there is nowhere else to put it, the InfinityEdge display comes within 1/8 inch of the edge of the lid. Still, like fellow Ars reviewer Peter Bright, I find this decision irritating: why not just move the display panel down an 1/8 inch and put the camera at the top so it's usable? Or stop pretending that the bottom camera is useful and just ditch the camera altogether.
+
The palm rests are made of a carbon fiber composite that I found very comfortable. The keyboard also appears to be the same as previous models. It's a very thin chiclet-style keyboard that works just fine, though coming from the ThinkPad world I still find these keyboards disappointing. More disappointing for some Linux fans, Dell still uses the Windows logo on the super key.
+
The touch pad is reportedly the same, though using the testing model next to the previous I felt a noticeable difference with the newer model being somewhat "stickier", which doesn't sound good, but I found my movements were actually more precise with the new trackpad. This was particularly noticeable in Darktable, a photo editing app with some of the tiniest imaginable control elements, which that can be a real pain to adjust, especially on such a HiDPI screen like the one the XPS 13 uses. The problem I experienced previously, where the trackpad would unaccountably freeze at times appears to have been related to something in Ubuntu 14.04, because the new XPS, which comes with Ubuntu 16.04, did nothing of the sort.
+
Another common complaint about the XPS 13 is a high pitched coil whine that plagues some models. At least in Reddit threads. In the three models I've used I've never encountered this issue. It's possible that the whine comes from something related to Windows drivers (some people report fixing the problem by reinstalling drivers), though I have seen reports of the whine being present on the Ubuntu-based models as well.
+
Performance
+
The previous iteration of the XPS 13 DE was plenty fast and the much hyped Kaby Lake should give performance a roughly 10 percent boost overall, though some tasks, particularly things that involve hi-res video, may see an even bigger performance improvement. In terms of everyday tasks like compiling small programs, browsing the web and so on I did not notice a huge difference from the previous release. One things I did notice, however, was that the Unity interface is considerably snappier, though that may well be a combination of hardware and software improvements. Even for more significant tasks, like say compiling the Linux kernel on a regular basis, the previous version seems to be good enough for Linus Torvalds.
+
As with previous models the RAM limit is 16GB, which is disappointing but makes sense given the space available inside the very compact chassis. There's only room for one RAM card and so far compatible, low-powered RAM chips at 32GB don't exist. Would it make sense to have a slightly larger profile and ability to go up to 32 or even 64 GB? Sure it would, but for that scenario there's the XPS 15.
+
After the Kaby Lake upgrade, The other major improvement is the move from a 56wHR 4 cell battery to a slightly greater capacity 60wHR model. That doesn't sound like much, but Dell now claims an astounding 21 hour battery life for the 1080p version of the XPS 13. That claim was largely borne out in Ars testing of that model, which managed to last for over 18 hours in Ars' standard WiFi browsing test.
+
If Linux on laptops has an Achilles heel it's power consumption. Straight out of the box, running stock Ubuntu 16.04 I only managed to get 11 hours of battery life in Ars' standard WiFi browsing test. The difference may well be largely attributable to the HiDPI screen, but the good news is that it's possible to get more life of the XPS 13 if you take a dive into the world of laptop-mode-tools. To get started install the package from the Ubuntu repositories. The project has some documentation on how to configure things, but I find the Arch Wiki entry to be more helpful.
+
After playing with customizations like disabling Bluetooth and tweaking some of the disk-related parts of laptop-mode-tools, I re-ran the Ars WiFi browsing test and managed to get 13 hours, a score I can only beat with my Lenovo x240, which has a far inferior screen, a larger battery and a second battery, making it a less than fair comparison. Suffice to say, in my experience, the Dell XPS 13 is as good as battery life is going to get with such a hi-res screen in such a small package. It's good enough that in all my time with the XPS models I've tested I have never really had to think about battery life.
+
Another change worth noting is the move to "Killer Wireless". Killer is marketing-speak for Qualcomm Atheros cards. There's a bunch of technical upgrades compared to the older Broadcom chips, like much improved throughput and traffic prioritization, which are all good news, but for Linux users the move away from Broadcom more importantly means there are open source Linux drivers that don't suck.
+
Ubuntu 16.04
+
For a complete rundown of Ubuntu 16.04, see my earlier review. The short story is that I have found Ubuntu 16.04 fairly buggy. Dell does not officially support the just-released Ubuntu 16.10, and given that Dell sticks with LTS releases, it likely never will. Most of Dell's hardware support revolves around a half dozen or so PPAs that come installed and which may or may not work with 16.10. But since this is a review laptop I went for the upgrade to 16.10 and have had no problems in my week of testing. That said, I don't necessarily suggest doing it unless you're comfortable troubleshooting Linux.
+
The "developer edition" in the XPS 13 line isn't just a code word for ships with Linux installed, you actually get some tools pre-installed. For example Virtualbox is pre-installed, which means you can get your Vagrant-based development environment set up quickly. Ubuntu isn't always completely up to date with every programming language, but with 16.04 things are reasonable. For example, gcc is at 5.3.1 and most languages are current -- Python is at 2.7, with version 3.5 available via the python3 command. Ruby is not installed by default.
+
Other little touches include the more popular-with-developers Chromium browser (and Chrome if you want the bundled Flash player) instead of the Ubuntu default, Firefox. Dell's own devops tools, like "Cloud Launcher" and "Profile Tool," are available on Project Sputnik's Github page as well, though none of them have seen updates in several years.
+
In my view though what's more impressive about Dell's developer tools is that it doesn't ship with any massive IDEs or any monolithic tools. If you want those they're in the repos, but out of the box there's nothing to get in your way, just a few nice little additions that save you a few apt-get commands.
+
Finally, there's some good news on the horizon for those of us who like the HiDPI screens. For now, my criticisms of Ubuntu in HiDPI environments still stand from the last review. Things have improved a bit in the move to 16.04 (versus 14.04 in the last model), but most of the improvement comes from Ubuntu moving to newer version of GNOME and GTK+ elements. The problems specific to LightDM and Ubuntu's own interface customizations remain in this release, as do problems with any third-party software, for example GIMP.
+
All that said, a recent partnership between System76 and Canonical may provide some improvements to the HiDPI situation in Ubuntu (specifically Unity 7, not the great white whale that is Unity 8). Canonical recently released a statement about the improvements, noting that "some patches that improve HiDPI support are in review and they are expected to land in Ubuntu soon." It seems safe to assume -- judging by the new emphasis on HiDPI bugs in Ubuntu's Launchpad bug tracker -- that many of these fixes will land in 17.04. There's one bug in particular that you'll see if you buy the XPS 13 DE, during the setup process there will be two header bars across the screen. It doesn't affect anything and it goes away once you get done with the setup, but it's a disconcerting way to start out with a brand new machine that supposedly supports Ubuntu.
+
While these are welcome improvements, they don't help outside applications like GIMP or Virtualbox. The latter will work with HiDPI screens, but it sometimes takes considerable work to get the guest OS looking good. There are in other words, workarounds for most the HiDPI problems you're likely to encounter, but be aware that HiDPI on Ubuntu, even with Dell tweaking things for you, is far from a "just works" experience right now.
+
I should probably note here as well that I did install and test both Fedora 25 and Arch on the new hardware and had no problems in either case. For Fedora I went with the default GNOME 3.22 desktop, which, frankly, it's what I think Dell should ship out of the box. It's got far better HiDPI support than Ubuntu and the developer tools available through Fedora are considerably more robust than most of what you'll find in Ubuntu's repos.
+
Conclusion
+
The XPS Developer Edition has developed a strong following over the years and the big question for many fans will be, is this worth the upgrade? If you've got the previous release I would say probably not. If you do a lot of video editing (what kind of developer are you?) or want it to do double duty as a gaming machine then you might see some benefit to the upgrade, but that's a lot of money for not much gain.
+
If you've got an XPS 13 from further back, say the first InfinityEdge version with a Haswell chip then the upgrade becomes more appealing. The gains in battery life, coupled with performance improvements make a much more convincing case for the upgrade.
+
If you're new to the idea of buying hardware specifically tailored to Linux and you're wondering why you should, the answer is more complicated. The XPS 13 DE is a fantastic machine, web cam aside, regardless of what OS it's running. But it's an especially fantastic machine for anyone who's tired of wrestling with their hardware just to get their OS of choice set up. If you want a machine that's stylish, reasonably powerful, light in your bag and runs Linux without a hitch the Dell XPS 13 DE continues to make a great choice.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/dellxps13-2.txt b/ars-technica/published/dellxps13-2.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9fca4c3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/dellxps13-2.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+Dell recently updated the company's extremely popular XPS 13 Developer Edition.
+
+Dell's Linux effort, known as Project Sputnik, is led by developer Barton George, who, along with the rest of the Sputnik team, has done an excellent job of bringing a "just works" Linux experience to Dell Ultrabooks. The XPS 13 Developer Edition has been available for 4 years now and this release marks the 7th version of Dell's Ubuntu powered ultrabook.
+
+Dell isn't the only manufacturer producing great Linux machines. In fact there's almost an embarrassment of riches for Linux fans these days. System76, whose [Oryx Pro](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/11/system76-oryx-pro-review-linux-in-a-laptop-has-never-been-better/) remains my top pick for anyone who needs massive power, Purism, ZaReason and others are all producing solid offerings that work with Linux out of the box.
+
+Even hardware not explicitly made for Linux tends to work out of box these days. I recently installed Fedora on a Sony Vaio and was shocked that the only problem I encountered was that the default trackpad configuration was terribly slow.
+
+Admittedly, the Vaio is a few years old, which means there's been more time for hardware issues to be addressed. Sometimes getting Linux running on the bleeding edge hardware is still a bit tricky -- or requires running a bleeding edge distro like Arch. That's where efforts like Dell's Project Sputnik come in handy, the hardware is already vetted, the drivers pre-installed and configured for a great out of the box experience.
+
+It also doesn't hurt that the Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition is an exceptionally well built, great-looking piece of hardware. If you want your Linux rig to "just work" *and* be a powerful, svelte little package that weighs under 3lbs, the XPS 13 is the laptop you've been looking for.
+
+The latest iteration of the XPS 13 line, and the third I've tested, features Intel's new Kaby Lake chip that bumps the clock speed by about 10 percent. The more impressive side of the chipset upgrade is the different graphics architecture which is said to improve performance in 3D graphics and 4K video. The results in this Linux-based model make especially 4K video playback incredibly smooth and not nearly as battery-draining as previous models.
+
+## The Specs
+
+Outwardly there's nothing new to see here. The 7th generation Dell XPS 13 DE uses the same wonderful InfinityEdge display that manages to pack a 13 in screen into a body that looks and feels more like an 11 inch laptop. The model I tested came with the 3200x1800 IPS touch panel. There's also a version with a 1920x1080 IPS non-touch panel, but I think the higher res display is worth the extra money.
+
+This is quite simply the best looking display I've seen in a laptop. Naturally the HiDPI model suffers a little in battery life compared to the lower res model. I've never used the lower res version so I can't compare battery life times, but more pixels takes more power, so if battery life is your top priority don't go with the HiDPI model. That said, I find the brightest setting (400 nit brightness) to be a bit much indoors. It's great for working outside and goes a long way to compensate for the inevitable glare on glossy screens, but indoors I rarely push the brightness past 60 percent, which improves battery life considerably.
+
+The model Dell sent me featured a i7-7500U Kaby Lake chip with 16GB of RAM and a 512GB solid state drive. As configured the model I tested would set you back $1799. The lowest model, which has the 1920x1080 display, an i5 chip, 128GB SSD and only 8GB of RAM, can be had for $975. For an extra $375 you can step up to the higher res screen and a 256GB SSD. There's also a new option in there for what Dell calls a "Rose Gold" exterior.
+
+The model I tested had the same full aluminum exterior as previous models. Underneath it there's an aluminum frame as well, which provides a stiffness that makes the XPS line feel very solid even at their minimal weight. As has been my experience with most Dell machines, the construction is excellent. I used the previous model for over six months, shoving it in and out of my bag on several times a day every day and it doesn't have a scratch on it. I can see no reason to think the latest model would be any different.
+
+Also unchanged in this release are the ports and layout. There are still two USB 3.0 ports, one with PowerShare for charging your devices (note that USB charging generally requires a trip into the BIOS settings to enable, see [Dell's support site](http://www.dell.com/support/article/us/en/04/SLN155147/EN) for more info). There's also a Thunderbolt port that supports charging, a 3-in-1 card reader, DisplayPort 1.2 video output, VGA and HDMI. As with any laptop this thin, Ethernet requires an adapter (sold separately).
+
+There's the same 720p webcam that has been in the last couple of models, and yes, it's still at the bottom of the lid. And yes, it still sucks that it's down there, though in fairness to Dell, there is nowhere else to put it, the InfinityEdge display comes within 1/8 inch of the edge of the lid. Still, like fellow Ars reviewer Peter Bright, I find [this decision irritating](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/11/review-dells-kaby-lake-xps-13-isnt-quite-good-enough-to-keep-its-crown/): why not just move the display panel down an 1/8 inch and put the camera at the top so it's usable? Or stop pretending that the bottom camera is useful and just ditch the camera altogether.
+
+The palm rests are made of a carbon fiber composite that I found very comfortable. The keyboard also appears to be the same as previous models. It's a very thin chiclet-style keyboard that works just fine, though coming from the ThinkPad world I still find these keyboards disappointing. More disappointing for some Linux fans, Dell still uses the Windows logo on the super key.
+
+The touch pad is reportedly the same, though using the testing model next to the previous I felt a noticeable difference with the newer model being somewhat "stickier", which doesn't sound good, but I found my movements were actually more precise with the new trackpad. This was particularly noticeable in Darktable, a photo editing app with some of the tiniest imaginable control elements, which that can be a real pain to adjust, especially on such a HiDPI screen like the one the XPS 13 uses. The problem I experienced previously, where the trackpad would unaccountably freeze at times appears to have been related to something in Ubuntu 14.04, because the new XPS, which comes with Ubuntu 16.04, did nothing of the sort.
+
+Another common complaint about the XPS 13 is a high pitched coil whine that plagues some models. At least in Reddit threads. In the three models I've used I've never encountered this issue. It's possible that the whine comes from something related to Windows drivers (some people report fixing the problem by reinstalling drivers), though I have seen reports of the whine being present on the Ubuntu-based models as well.
+
+## Performance
+
+The previous iteration of the XPS 13 DE was plenty fast and the much hyped Kaby Lake should give performance a roughly 10 percent boost overall, though some tasks, particularly things that involve hi-res video, may see an even bigger performance improvement. In terms of everyday tasks like compiling small programs, browsing the web and so on I did not notice a huge difference from the previous release. One things I did notice, however, was that the Unity interface is considerably snappier, though that may well be a combination of hardware and software improvements. Even for more significant tasks, like say compiling the Linux kernel on a regular basis, the previous version seems to be good enough for Linus Torvalds.
+
+As with previous models the RAM limit is 16GB, which is disappointing but makes sense given the space available inside the very compact chassis. There's only room for one RAM card and so far compatible, low-powered RAM chips at 32GB don't exist. Would it make sense to have a slightly larger profile and ability to go up to 32 or even 64 GB? Sure it would, but for that scenario there's the XPS 15.
+
+After the Kaby Lake upgrade, The other major improvement is the move from a 56wHR 4 cell battery to a slightly greater capacity 60wHR model. That doesn't sound like much, but Dell now claims an astounding 21 hour battery life for the 1080p version of the XPS 13. That claim was largely borne out in Ars testing of that model, which managed to last for over 18 hours in Ars' standard WiFi browsing test.
+
+If Linux on laptops has an Achilles heel it's power consumption. Straight out of the box, running stock Ubuntu 16.04 I only managed to get 11 hours of battery life in Ars' standard WiFi browsing test. The difference may well be largely attributable to the HiDPI screen, but the good news is that it's possible to get more life of the XPS 13 if you take a dive into the world of laptop-mode-tools. To get started install the package from the Ubuntu repositories. The project has some documentation on how to configure things, but I find the Arch Wiki entry to be more helpful.
+
+After playing with customizations like disabling Bluetooth and tweaking some of the disk-related parts of laptop-mode-tools, I re-ran the Ars WiFi browsing test and managed to get 13 hours, a score I can only beat with my Lenovo x240, which has a far inferior screen, a larger battery and a second battery, making it a less than fair comparison. Suffice to say, in my experience, the Dell XPS 13 is as good as battery life is going to get with such a hi-res screen in such a small package. It's good enough that in all my time with the XPS models I've tested I have never really had to think about battery life.
+
+Another change worth noting is the move to "Killer Wireless". Killer is marketing-speak for Qualcomm Atheros cards. There's a bunch of technical upgrades compared to the older Broadcom chips, like much improved throughput and traffic prioritization, which are all good news, but for Linux users the move away from Broadcom more importantly means there are open source Linux drivers that don't suck.
+
+## Ubuntu 16.04
+
+For a complete rundown of Ubuntu 16.04, see my earlier review. The short story is that I have found Ubuntu 16.04 fairly buggy. Dell does not officially support the just-released Ubuntu 16.10, and given that Dell sticks with LTS releases, it likely never will. Most of Dell's hardware support revolves around a half dozen or so PPAs that come installed and which may or may not work with 16.10. But since this is a review laptop I went for the upgrade to 16.10 and have had no problems in my week of testing. That said, I don't necessarily suggest doing it unless you're comfortable troubleshooting Linux.
+
+The "developer edition" in the XPS 13 line isn't just a code word for ships with Linux installed, you actually get some tools pre-installed. For example Virtualbox is pre-installed, which means you can get your Vagrant-based development environment set up quickly. Ubuntu isn't always completely up to date with every programming language, but with 16.04 things are reasonable. For example, gcc is at 5.3.1 and most languages are current -- Python is at 2.7, with version 3.5 available via the python3 command. Ruby is not installed by default.
+
+Other little touches include the more popular-with-developers Chromium browser (and Chrome if you want the bundled Flash player) instead of the Ubuntu default, Firefox. Dell's own devops tools, like "Cloud Launcher" and "Profile Tool," are available on Project Sputnik's Github page as well, though none of them have seen updates in several years.
+
+In my view though what's more impressive about Dell's developer tools is that it doesn't ship with any massive IDEs or any monolithic tools. If you want those they're in the repos, but out of the box there's nothing to get in your way, just a few nice little additions that save you a few apt-get commands.
+
+Finally, there's some good news on the horizon for those of us who like the HiDPI screens. For now, my criticisms of Ubuntu in HiDPI environments still stand from the last review. Things have improved a bit in the move to 16.04 (versus 14.04 in the last model), but most of the improvement comes from Ubuntu moving to newer version of GNOME and GTK+ elements. The problems specific to LightDM and Ubuntu's own interface customizations remain in this release, as do problems with any third-party software, for example GIMP.
+
+All that said, a recent partnership between System76 and Canonical may provide some improvements to the HiDPI situation in Ubuntu (specifically Unity 7, not the great white whale that is Unity 8). Canonical recently released a statement about the improvements, noting that "some patches that improve HiDPI support are in review and they are expected to land in Ubuntu soon." It seems safe to assume -- judging by the new emphasis on HiDPI bugs in Ubuntu's Launchpad bug tracker -- that many of these fixes will land in 17.04. There's one bug in particular that you'll see if you buy the XPS 13 DE, during the setup process there will be [two header bars](https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1622686) across the screen. It doesn't affect anything and it goes away once you get done with the setup, but it's a disconcerting way to start out with a brand new machine that supposedly supports Ubuntu.
+
+While these are welcome improvements, they don't help outside applications like GIMP or Virtualbox. The latter will work with HiDPI screens, but it sometimes takes considerable work to get the guest OS looking good. There are in other words, workarounds for most the HiDPI problems you're likely to encounter, but be aware that HiDPI on Ubuntu, even with Dell tweaking things for you, is far from a "just works" experience right now.
+
+I should probably note here as well that I did install and test both Fedora 25 and Arch on the new hardware and had no problems in either case. For Fedora I went with the default GNOME 3.22 desktop, which, frankly, it's what I think Dell should ship out of the box. It's got far better HiDPI support than Ubuntu and the developer tools available through Fedora are considerably more robust than most of what you'll find in Ubuntu's repos.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+The XPS Developer Edition has developed a strong following over the years and the big question for many fans will be, is this worth the upgrade? If you've got the previous release I would say probably not. If you do a lot of video editing (what kind of developer are you?) or want it to do double duty as a gaming machine then you might see some benefit to the upgrade, but that's a lot of money for not much gain.
+
+If you've got an XPS 13 from further back, say the first InfinityEdge version with a Haswell chip then the upgrade becomes more appealing. The gains in battery life, coupled with performance improvements make a much more convincing case for the upgrade.
+
+If you're new to the idea of buying hardware specifically tailored to Linux and you're wondering why you should, the answer is more complicated. The XPS 13 DE is a fantastic machine, web cam aside, regardless of what OS it's running. But it's an especially fantastic machine for anyone who's tired of wrestling with their hardware just to get their OS of choice set up. If you want a machine that's stylish, reasonably powerful, light in your bag and runs Linux without a hitch the Dell XPS 13 DE continues to make a great choice.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/elementaryos-review.html b/ars-technica/published/elementaryos-review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6a3f51a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/elementaryos-review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+
The elementaryOS project, which bills itself as an open, privacy-respecting alternative to Windows and macOS, recently released "Juno", version 5 of its Linux-based desktop.
+
Linux is a strange beast. You'd be hard pressed to come up with another tool so widely used, so widely deployed, so absolutely necessary to the functioning of the modern world, and yet so utterly unknown outside the tech community.
+
Everyone is a Linux user, but almost no one knows it.
+
From ATMs, to phones, to in flight displays, to the web server your browser got this page from, we are all using Linux every day even if we don't know it. But despite that ubiquity there's one place Linux has never really succeeded: the desktop. Windows and macOS dominate the desktop and that's unlikely to change in the near term, but if it ever does it will likely be because of projects like elementaryOS, which seeks to bring the polish of commercial desktops to the world of Linux.
+
ElementaryOS began life over a decade ago as a set of icons. Yes, seriously. If ever there was a group of developers who started at the bottom and worked their way up to the top it's Daniel Foré and the rest of today's elementaryOS team. From a set of icons designed to improve the look of Ubuntu's then GNOME 2 desktop, the elementary project expanded to include some custom apps, including a fork of the default GNOME files app, Nautilus, called nautilus-elementary. As with most open source, the borrowing went both ways, Ubuntu's Humanity theme was a fork of elementaryOS's icon set.
+
As the project grew to encompass ever more apps and ever more customizations for the desktop it became more cumbersome for users to install everything. Eventually there was enough momentum behind the project that Foré decided the logical thing to to was to create their own distribution. The project took Ubuntu as a base and began layering in their custom apps, and highly refined look and feel and elementaryOS was born.
+
ElementaryOS launched with considerable fanfare thanks to its revolutionary idea of asking users to pay for it. Unfortunately for elementaryOS, a blog post about the pay-what-you-want model rubbed a lot of people in the Linux community the wrong way. Most of the kerfuffle was not about the money, it was about the wording of the post, which essentially called non-paying users thieves.
+
When I spoke with Foré he was quick to point out how little experience the team had had with PR at the time and clearly regretted the post. It was poorly worded, but as with all things in Linux, it was something of a tempest in a teapot even at the time and it is well behind the project at this point. I bring it up not to revisit the controversy, but because the funding model elementaryOS established early on has succeeded.
+
Today elementaryOS is a bootstrapped business with quite a few full time employees. It's not Canonical by any means, but it is self-sustaining and it has a model for how to continue sustaining itself, which is more than a lot of open source projects can say. If I were an open source project heavily dependent on contributions from Red Hat employees, I might, right about now, have a closer look at how elementaryOS's funding model works. Of course the elementaryOS model doesn't necessarily work at the scale of Red Hat, but it doesn't have to to sustain elementaryOS.
+
And its funding model does work, so well in fact that the project has extended it to developers in its app store. There are quite a few apps out there targeting specifically the elementaryOS desktop and if you head to elementaryOS's app store you can choose to support the developers of those apps using the same pay-what-you-want system that elementaryOS uses at the distro level. Every app developer can set a price that they feel is fair, but users can ultimately decide what they want to pay, including nothing.
+
ElementaryOS 5 Juno
+
The latest release of elementaryOS is nicknamed Juno, and should be version .5, following the previous release, .4 or Loki. However since .5 implies incomplete and elementaryOS is more or less complete (in terms of stability certainly) the project is calling this release elementaryOS 5.
+
+[image="eos-desktop.jpg" caption="The default look of ElementaryOS Juno"]
+
+
Whatever the version number may be, one thing is for sure -- there's ton of new stuff in Juno. Enough features in fact that the release notes, written by elementaryOS's Cassidy James Blaede, are an impressive John Sircusa-style essay of some 8,000 words. If you want to know everything that's new, Blaede's notes are worth a read, if you want to know what it's like to actually use all that stuff, read on.
+
One thing to note before we get started: Linux users wanting to try elementaryOS be forewarned, it doesn't work very well in a virtual machine. I installed it, but it was very slow. According to Foré, it's an upstream problem. GTK requires hardware acceleration for animations, which does not currently work in Virtualbox. That may change soon though. One of the big lessons Canonical has learned from collecting hardware metrics is that Ubuntu ends up in virtual machines a lot. Improvements are apparently in the works. That will help downstream distros like elementaryOS, as well as others like Linux Mint Cinnamon edition, which also doesn't run very well in a virtual machine.
+
In the mean time though, to get an accurate sense of performance, you'll need to install elementaryOS. The Juno installer is a thinly skinned version of Ubuntu's Ubiquity Installer, which means you can easily install elementaryOS alongside your existing OS just as you would Ubuntu. The installer is perfectly functional, but it doesn't really convey elementaryOS's unique look and feel, which is why there's a new installer in the works. It's a collaboration between elementaryOS and System76 (creators of PopOS) and will be, I assume, what you'll see installing future versions of PopOS as well. The new installer isn't ready for Juno though, so for now you'll have to make do with the Ubiquity installer.
+
+[image="eos-desktop-comp.jpg" caption="Composite screenshot of some of the top bar menus in ElementaryOS Juno"]
+
+
I went ahead and installed elementaryOS on a separate partition to keep my existing Arch Linux installation isolated.
+
ElementaryOS was plenty snappy on my Lenovo x240 (i5 with 8GB of RAM), but I also installed it on a brand new Dell XPS 13 where it really shined. ElementaryOS's theme, typography and icons all looked really nice on the XPS's HiDPI screen. My only gripe is that elementaryOS's scaling is either 1X or 2X, there's no in-between. My preference on the XPS would be more like 1.5X, but as far as I know only the KDE and Cinnamon desktops support incremental scaling without command line fiddling.
+
Once you've got elementaryOS installed and you reboot, you'll be greeted by the Pantheon desktop. While Pantheon is based on GNOME, it's very much its own thing. Like GNOME, Pantheon has a top menu bar, but it functions very differently in that it's never used for application menus (something GNOME is getting rid of as well). Instead the top bar in elementaryOS is a global bar -- it never changes. The top bar shows the date and time in the middle, status notifications, a power menu, settings for audio, power, and wireless to the right and an application launcher to the left.
+
+[image="eos-files.jpg" caption="The dock and Files file browser in Juno"]
+
+
ElementaryOS also sports a dock-style app launcher along the bottom of the screen that is, well, somewhat macOSish. ElementaryOS has taken some flack over the years for being heavily macOS-inspired and it does have some element of macOS -- the dock, a column view in Files (which KDE used to offer as well), and, perhaps more than anything else an obsession with details. ElementaryOS clearly sweats the small stuff, paying careful attention to typography, icon design, color use, shading, and so on, which ends up creating a kind of feel that's perhaps reminiscent of macOS. Having played with elementaryOS since version .2, I would say the macOS influence has been declining with every new release and I really don't see it at all in Juno, beyond the use of the dock.
+
Another possible reason some users find elementaryOS to be macOS-like is that it lacks the level of customization many Linux desktops offer. There's really no way to change the look and feel of elementaryOS, and little way to customize the behavior of its default apps. It's a take it or leave it operating system -- you either like it or you don't, and if you don't you're better off using something else than trying to tweak elementaryOS to suit your whims.
+
ElementaryOS is not a Linux desktop in the traditional sense. Rather it's an operating system in the same sense that Windows and macOS are.
+
That said, you can make certain customizations without too much trouble. For example, elementaryOS puts the windows close button on the left, which, for me, messes with 25 years of muscle memory. There's no setting to change this in elementaryOS, but since GNOME is under the hood you can use gsettings to change the button layout. In other words, little adjustments are possible, but I'd suggest staying away from the tweak apps.
+
Juno ships with the ability to remap the Super key. By default it brings up a list keyboard shortcuts (mostly inherited from GNOME), but you can set it to open the main menu, which, combined with the ability to immediately search by typing, turns the main menu into an application launcher as well.
+
Juno doesn't make any sweeping changes to the basic look and feel that elementaryOS has been working with for some time. It's made some refinements and given third-party developers some much-improved guidelines and a new color palette, but most of the work in Juno has come into the compliment of tightly integrated applications that ship with elementaryOS.
+
Unlike most GNOME-based distros, elementaryOS does not ship with the usual slew of GNOME applications. Instead you'll get elementaryOS's own versions of the same. In this release that means Files, a terminal app, Photos, Noise (music player), Code (previously known as Scratch), and then a few outside apps like the Epiphany web browser and the Geary mail client.
+
For the most part elementaryOS's homegrown apps are quite capable, though again, there's a notable lack of customization available. The Terminal app, for instance, offers three color schemes and not much else in way of preferences. It also, by default, uses ctrl-v for paste and ctrl-c for copy, which is annoying if you're used to ctrl-c killing a process. Since there's no preferences for Terminal, there's no way to fix this beyond installing a more powerful terminal like rxvt-unicode.
+
+[image="eos-terminal.jpg" caption="The Terminal app showing memory use with nothing open (596MB)."]
+
+
ElementaryOS has often been seen as a good option for new users, which is to say users not entirely comfortable with Linux. I'd say this it true to a point, but elementaryOS has appeal beyond that, or at least it would like to. Juno has seen a lot of work geared toward developers, especially the changes to AppCenter which make it easier than ever for developers to get paid for their work (more on that in a minute), but also in the tools available for developers. As mentioned above there are quite a few new toolkits under the hood, but there's also completely revamped code editor known, appropriately enough, as Code.
+
Code is quite nice, reminiscent of GNOME's Gedit, but without the abandonware feel. As with most of elementaryOS Code doesn't have a ton of customization options, but it does have the important ones -- control over tab/space settings, code folding, automatic syntax highlighting, and a quick toggle comments feature. And unlike the Terminal, Code manages to allow for complexity through a plugin system that can add extra features. You can actually add a terminal to Code and run your tests without leaving your editor, and you can install a plugin to give you "Vim style" shortcuts, which is, well, not Vim, but does allow some Vim-like features.
+
+[image="eos-code.jpg" caption="The Code app in elementaryOS."]
+
+
Code is a very pretty editor -- it has nice anti-aliased text and a lot of attention has been paid to the visual details -- but if you're coming from an IDE like Eclipse or powerful text editors Vim or Emacs, to be frank, Code isn't going to cut it. It may be that the gray is showing in my beard here, but I feel like the effort put into Code might have been better spent elsewhere given that IDEs and text editors seem like a problem that's already been solved several hundred times.
+
The other homegrown elementaryOS apps take a similar approach, reinventing the wheel a little, though the results are always very nice and fit well with the rest of elementaryOS. For instance, Files is a good, if simple, file manager. But that simplicity is by design. As Blaede puts it in the release notes, elementaryOS encourages "a workflow where users access content from the related apps instead of worrying about the intricacies of moving files around their device’s storage." Files does have one feature I wish more file managers offered: a column view.
+
+[image="eos-photos.jpg" caption="The Code app in elementaryOS."]
+
+
The Photos and Noise apps are photo and music managers respectively. Photos is very close to GNOME's Photos app, allowing for basic organization and editing of photos (including RAW files). Noise integrates well with system, allowing you to control your music from the menu bar. The default web browser is Epiphany, which, like many default web browsers, is best used to download and install a real web browser (just kidding, in elementaryOS you should use AppCenter to install a real web browser).
+
One things you won't find in elementaryOS is an office suite. LibreOffice and more lightweight alternatives like Abiword and Gnumeric, are all available via the AppCenter, but are not part of the initial installation.
+
The default software suite for elementaryOS does a good job of balancing simplicity and ease-of-use against powerful features, this only falls down in two places really, Code, while nice, probably isn't going to cut it for most programmers and Epiphany is pretty simplistic if you're used to Firefox or Chrome.
+
One of the more interesting and innovative new features in this release is a picture-in-picture video feature that allows you to watch a video while doing something else.
+
The easiest way to use picture-in-picture, is to hit the keyboard shortcut super-F, which will change your cursor into a crosshairs. Just drag the cursor over the video to clip it and elementaryOS will pull the portion of the page out and display it in its own window. The only catch is that, for web video at least, you'll need to leave the browser window open (I just sent it to another desktop). It's a pretty cool feature, but unfortunately I found it a little buggy. Twice playback stopped for no apparent reason, and resizing the window sometimes caused the "clipped" video window to disappear entirely.
+
+[image="eos-pip.jpg" caption="The new picture-in-picture in elementaryOS. When it works, it's awesome."]
+
+
The AppCenter
+
Perhaps the biggest news in elementaryOS Juno is the new and improved AppCenter, which offers some improvements to AppCenter's pay-what-you-want model. The biggest improvement is the option to try an app before you buy.
+
+[image="eos-app-center.jpg" caption="The AppCenter in elementaryOS."]
+
+
Previously you could, as you would now, put in $0 to download an app for free. Now, however, you'll be prompted to pay for that app after you've tried it, not with some nagging reminder, but with a lack of updates. If you opt not to pay for a paid app, you won't get automatic updates. The exception is security updates, those will be automatically applied regardless of whether you paid or not. As Foré, said in an announcement earlier this year, "we will never withhold security updates based on payment status."
+
That means you can continue to get updates for paid apps for free, you just have to re-download each one individually. It is, as Foré puts it, "a convenience tax." If you pay you get the convenience of automatic updates, if you don't pay you don't.
+
+[image="eos-app-center-paying.jpg" caption="Paying for an app in the elementaryOS AppCenter."]
+
+
This will, no doubt, rub some people the wrong way, but elementaryOS is in uncharted waters here and is trying to build a sustainable development model in a world where most things are free. That's no easy task and there will inevitably be some pushback. It also may not work. So far developing for elementaryOS is not exactly lucrative. The project released some numbers earlier this year, reporting that it had processed $1,700 worth of payments from about 750 charges. That puts the average price of an app at $2.26. Divide that among the paid apps in the app center and unfortunately it becomes rather obvious that not only is building apps for elementaryOS not going to pay the bills, it's probably not even going to buy you coffee.
+
Will the new model change that? That remains to be seen. It certainly makes it easier to pay for an app after you've been using it for a while, something that was impossible before. There's also a new button to send money to a developer any time you like, just look up the app in the AppCenter and scroll to the bottom and you'll find a button to send money.
+
Conclusion
+
ElementaryOS has a reputation of being a good distro for Linux newcomers. Juno continues to that legacy and is one of the easiest ways I know of to dip a toe in the Linux waters without needing to learn a whole new way of working. It's especially familiar for macOS users and makes a good choice to install on your Apple hardware, since elementaryOS ships with most of the drivers you'll need for Apple hardware, which makes it easy to install. The exception would be that shiny new the Apple hardware with the T2 chip which (as of November 2018) currently blocks Linux bootloaders.
+
What about for developers though? Clearly with the improvements to Code, elementaryOS is aiming to provide a usable desktop that's also a good platform for development. I suspect most developers will probably want more familiar tools, but elementaryOS does make a good development platform. One thing elementaryOS does well that so many desktops these days refuse to do is get out of the way. The month I spent using Juno was not spectacularly different for me than using my usual i3, or LXQT on my wife's machine. Like the simpler, lightweight i3 and LXQT, elementaryOS does a good job of giving you the tools you need, but also, and often more importantly, it gets out of the way and lets you focus on what you need to get done.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/elementaryos-review.txt b/ars-technica/published/elementaryos-review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3e1f92d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/elementaryos-review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+The elementaryOS project, which bills itself as an open, privacy-respecting alternative to Windows and macOS, recently released "Juno", version 5 of its Linux-based desktop.
+
+Linux is a strange beast. You'd be hard pressed to come up with another tool so widely used, so widely deployed, so absolutely necessary to the functioning of the modern world, and yet so utterly unknown outside the tech community.
+
+Everyone is a Linux user, but almost no one knows it.
+
+From ATMs, to phones, to in flight displays, to the web server your browser got this page from, we are all using Linux every day even if we don't know it. But despite that ubiquity there's one place Linux has never really succeeded: the desktop. Windows and macOS dominate the desktop and that's unlikely to change in the near term, but if it ever does it will likely be because of projects like elementaryOS, which seeks to bring the polish of commercial desktops to the world of Linux.
+
+ElementaryOS began life over a decade ago as a set of icons. Yes, seriously. If ever there was a group of developers who started at the bottom and worked their way up to the top it's Daniel Foré and the rest of today's elementaryOS team. From a set of icons designed to improve the look of Ubuntu's then GNOME 2 desktop, the elementary project expanded to include some custom apps, including a fork of the default GNOME files app, Nautilus, called nautilus-elementary. As with most open source, the borrowing went both ways, Ubuntu's Humanity theme was a fork of elementaryOS's icon set.
+
+As the project grew to encompass ever more apps and ever more customizations for the desktop it became more cumbersome for users to install everything. Eventually there was enough momentum behind the project that Foré decided the logical thing to to was to create their own distribution. The project took Ubuntu as a base and began layering in their custom apps, and highly refined look and feel and elementaryOS was born.
+
+ElementaryOS launched with considerable fanfare thanks to its revolutionary idea of asking users to pay for it. Unfortunately for elementaryOS, a blog post about the pay-what-you-want model rubbed a lot of people in the Linux community the wrong way. Most of the kerfuffle was not about the money, it was about the wording of the post, which essentially called non-paying users thieves.
+
+When I spoke with Foré he was quick to point out how little experience the team had had with PR at the time and clearly regretted the post. It was poorly worded, but as with all things in Linux, it was something of a tempest in a teapot even at the time and it is well behind the project at this point. I bring it up not to revisit the controversy, but because the funding model elementaryOS established early on has succeeded.
+
+Today elementaryOS is a bootstrapped business with quite a few full time employees. It's not Canonical by any means, but it is self-sustaining and it has a model for how to continue sustaining itself, which is more than a lot of open source projects can say. If I were an open source project heavily dependent on contributions from Red Hat employees, I might, right about now, have a closer look at how elementaryOS's funding model works. Of course the elementaryOS model doesn't necessarily work at the scale of Red Hat, but it doesn't have to to sustain elementaryOS.
+
+And its funding model does work, so well in fact that the project has extended it to developers in its app store. There are quite a few apps out there targeting specifically the elementaryOS desktop and if you head to elementaryOS's app store you can choose to support the developers of those apps using the same pay-what-you-want system that elementaryOS uses at the distro level. Every app developer can set a price that they feel is fair, but users can ultimately decide what they want to pay, including nothing.
+
+## ElementaryOS 5 Juno
+
+The latest release of elementaryOS is nicknamed Juno, and should be version .5, following the previous release, .4 or Loki. However since .5 implies incomplete and elementaryOS is more or less complete (in terms of stability certainly) the project is calling this release elementaryOS 5.
+
+Whatever the version number may be, one thing is for sure -- there's ton of new stuff in Juno. Enough features in fact that the release notes, written by elementaryOS's Cassidy James Blaede, are an impressive John Sircusa-style [essay](https://medium.com/elementaryos/elementary-os-5-juno-is-here-471dfdedc7b3) of some 8,000 words. If you want to know everything that's new, Blaede's notes are worth a read, if you want to know what it's like to actually use all that stuff, read on.
+
+One thing to note before we get started: Linux users wanting to try elementaryOS be forewarned, it doesn't work very well in a virtual machine. I installed it, but it was very slow. According to Foré, it's an upstream problem. GTK requires hardware acceleration for animations, which does not currently work in Virtualbox. That may change soon though. One of the big lessons Canonical has learned from collecting hardware metrics is that Ubuntu ends up in virtual machines a lot. Improvements are apparently in the works. That will help downstream distros like elementaryOS, as well as others like Linux Mint Cinnamon edition, which also doesn't run very well in a virtual machine.
+
+In the mean time though, to get an accurate sense of performance, you'll need to install elementaryOS. The Juno installer is a thinly skinned version of Ubuntu's Ubiquity Installer, which means you can easily install elementaryOS alongside your existing OS just as you would Ubuntu. The installer is perfectly functional, but it doesn't really convey elementaryOS's unique look and feel, which is why there's a new installer in the works. It's a [collaboration](https://blog.system76.com/post/170167029168/installer-elementary-and-popos-collaboration) between elementaryOS and System76 (creators of PopOS) and will be, I assume, what you'll see installing future versions of PopOS as well. The new installer isn't ready for Juno though, so for now you'll have to make do with the Ubiquity installer.
+
+I went ahead and installed elementaryOS on a separate partition to keep my existing Arch Linux installation isolated.
+
+ElementaryOS was plenty snappy on my Lenovo x240 (i5 with 8GB of RAM), but I also installed it on a brand new Dell XPS 13 where it really shined. ElementaryOS's theme, typography and icons all looked really nice on the XPS's HiDPI screen. My only gripe is that elementaryOS's scaling is either 1X or 2X, there's no in-between. My preference on the XPS would be more like 1.5X, but as far as I know only the KDE and Cinnamon desktops support incremental scaling without command line fiddling.
+
+Once you've got elementaryOS installed and you reboot, you'll be greeted by the Pantheon desktop. While Pantheon is based on GNOME, it's very much its own thing. Like GNOME, Pantheon has a top menu bar, but it functions very differently in that it's never used for application menus (something GNOME is getting rid of as well). Instead the top bar in elementaryOS is a global bar -- it never changes. The top bar shows the date and time in the middle, status notifications, a power menu, settings for audio, power, and wireless to the right and an application launcher to the left.
+
+ElementaryOS also sports a dock-style app launcher along the bottom of the screen that is, well, somewhat macOSish. ElementaryOS has taken some flack over the years for being heavily macOS-inspired and it does have some element of macOS -- the dock, a column view in Files (which KDE used to offer as well), and, perhaps more than anything else an obsession with details. ElementaryOS clearly sweats the small stuff, paying careful attention to typography, icon design, color use, shading, and so on, which ends up creating a kind of feel that's perhaps reminiscent of macOS. Having played with elementaryOS since version .2, I would say the macOS influence has been declining with every new release and I really don't see it at all in Juno, beyond the use of the dock.
+
+Another possible reason some users find elementaryOS to be macOS-like is that it lacks the level of customization many Linux desktops offer. There's really no way to change the look and feel of elementaryOS, and little way to customize the behavior of its default apps. It's a take it or leave it operating system -- you either like it or you don't, and if you don't you're better off using something else than trying to tweak elementaryOS to suit your whims.
+
+ElementaryOS is not a Linux desktop in the traditional sense. Rather it's an operating system in the same sense that Windows and macOS are.
+
+That said, you can make certain customizations without too much trouble. For example, elementaryOS puts the windows close button on the left, which, for me, messes with 25 years of muscle memory. There's no setting to change this in elementaryOS, but since GNOME is under the hood you can use `gsettings` to change the button layout. In other words, little adjustments are possible, but I'd suggest staying away from the tweak apps.
+
+Juno ships with the ability to remap the Super key. By default it brings up a list keyboard shortcuts (mostly inherited from GNOME), but you can set it to open the main menu, which, combined with the ability to immediately search by typing, turns the main menu into an application launcher as well.
+
+Juno doesn't make any sweeping changes to the basic look and feel that elementaryOS has been working with for some time. It's made some refinements and given third-party developers some much-improved guidelines and a new color palette, but most of the work in Juno has come into the compliment of tightly integrated applications that ship with elementaryOS.
+
+Unlike most GNOME-based distros, elementaryOS does not ship with the usual slew of GNOME applications. Instead you'll get elementaryOS's own versions of the same. In this release that means Files, a terminal app, Photos, Noise (music player), Code (previously known as Scratch), and then a few outside apps like the Epiphany web browser and the Geary mail client.
+
+For the most part elementaryOS's homegrown apps are quite capable, though again, there's a notable lack of customization available. The Terminal app, for instance, offers three color schemes and not much else in way of preferences. It also, by default, uses `ctrl-v` for paste and `ctrl-c` for copy, which is annoying if you're used to `ctrl-c` killing a process. Since there's no preferences for Terminal, there's no way to fix this beyond installing a more powerful terminal like rxvt-unicode.
+
+ElementaryOS has often been seen as a good option for new users, which is to say users not entirely comfortable with Linux. I'd say this it true to a point, but elementaryOS has appeal beyond that, or at least it would like to. Juno has seen a lot of work geared toward developers, especially the changes to AppCenter which make it easier than ever for developers to get paid for their work (more on that in a minute), but also in the tools available for developers. As mentioned above there are quite a few new toolkits under the hood, but there's also completely revamped code editor known, appropriately enough, as Code.
+
+Code is quite nice, reminiscent of GNOME's Gedit, but without the abandonware feel. As with most of elementaryOS Code doesn't have a ton of customization options, but it does have the important ones -- control over tab/space settings, code folding, automatic syntax highlighting, and a quick toggle comments feature. And unlike the Terminal, Code manages to allow for complexity through a plugin system that can add extra features. You can actually add a terminal to Code and run your tests without leaving your editor, and you can install a plugin to give you "Vim style" shortcuts, which is, well, not Vim, but does allow some Vim-like features.
+
+Code is a very pretty editor -- it has nice anti-aliased text and a lot of attention has been paid to the visual details -- but if you're coming from an IDE like Eclipse or powerful text editors Vim or Emacs, to be frank, Code isn't going to cut it. It may be that the gray is showing in my beard here, but I feel like the effort put into Code might have been better spent elsewhere given that IDEs and text editors seem like a problem that's already been solved several hundred times.
+
+The other homegrown elementaryOS apps take a similar approach, reinventing the wheel a little, though the results are always very nice and fit well with the rest of elementaryOS. For instance, Files is a good, if simple, file manager. But that simplicity is by design. As Blaede puts it in the release notes, elementaryOS encourages "a workflow where users access content from the related apps instead of worrying about the intricacies of moving files around their device’s storage." Files does have one feature I wish more file managers offered: a column view.
+
+The Photos and Noise apps are photo and music managers respectively. Photos is very close to GNOME's Photos app, allowing for basic organization and editing of photos (including RAW files). Noise integrates well with system, allowing you to control your music from the menu bar. The default web browser is Epiphany, which, like many default web browsers, is best used to download and install a real web browser (just kidding, in elementaryOS you should use AppCenter to install a real web browser).
+
+One things you won't find in elementaryOS is an office suite. LibreOffice and more lightweight alternatives like Abiword and Gnumeric, are all available via the AppCenter, but are not part of the initial installation.
+
+The default software suite for elementaryOS does a good job of balancing simplicity and ease-of-use against powerful features, this only falls down in two places really, Code, while nice, probably isn't going to cut it for most programmers and Epiphany is pretty simplistic if you're used to Firefox or Chrome.
+
+One of the more interesting and innovative new features in this release is a picture-in-picture video feature that allows you to watch a video while doing something else.
+
+The easiest way to use picture-in-picture, is to hit the keyboard shortcut super-F, which will change your cursor into a crosshairs. Just drag the cursor over the video to clip it and elementaryOS will pull the portion of the page out and display it in its own window. The only catch is that, for web video at least, you'll need to leave the browser window open (I just sent it to another desktop). It's a pretty cool feature, but unfortunately I found it a little buggy. Twice playback stopped for no apparent reason, and resizing the window sometimes caused the "clipped" video window to disappear entirely.
+
+## The AppCenter
+
+Perhaps the biggest news in elementaryOS Juno is the new and improved AppCenter, which offers some improvements to AppCenter's pay-what-you-want model. The biggest improvement is the option to try an app before you buy.
+
+Previously you could, as you would now, put in $0 to download an app for free. Now, however, you'll be prompted to pay for that app after you've tried it, not with some nagging reminder, but with a lack of updates. If you opt not to pay for a paid app, you won't get automatic updates. The exception is security updates, those will be automatically applied regardless of whether you paid or not. As Foré, said in an [announcement](https://medium.com/elementaryos/about-appcenter-payments-daa76a1a3b59) earlier this year, "we will never withhold security updates based on payment status."
+
+That means you can continue to get updates for paid apps for free, you just have to re-download each one individually. It is, as Foré puts it, "a convenience tax." If you pay you get the convenience of automatic updates, if you don't pay you don't.
+
+This will, no doubt, rub some people the wrong way, but elementaryOS is in uncharted waters here and is trying to build a sustainable development model in a world where most things are free. That's no easy task and there will inevitably be some pushback. It also may not work. So far developing for elementaryOS is not exactly lucrative. The project released some numbers earlier this year, reporting that it had processed $1,700 worth of payments from about 750 charges. That puts the average price of an app at $2.26. Divide that among the paid apps in the app center and unfortunately it becomes rather obvious that not only is building apps for elementaryOS not going to pay the bills, it's probably not even going to buy you coffee.
+
+Will the new model change that? That remains to be seen. It certainly makes it easier to pay for an app after you've been using it for a while, something that was impossible before. There's also a new button to send money to a developer any time you like, just look up the app in the AppCenter and scroll to the bottom and you'll find a button to send money.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+ElementaryOS has a reputation of being a good distro for Linux newcomers. Juno continues to that legacy and is one of the easiest ways I know of to dip a toe in the Linux waters without needing to learn a whole new way of working. It's especially familiar for macOS users and makes a good choice to install on your Apple hardware since elementaryOS also ships with a lot of drivers for Apple hardware, which makes it easy to install. The exception would be that shiny new the Apple hardware with the T2 chip which (as of November 2018) currently blocks Linux bootloaders.
+
+What about for developers though? Clearly with the improvements to Code, elementaryOS is aiming to provide a usable desktop that's also a good platform for development. One thing elementaryOS does well that so many desktops these days refuse to do is get out of the way. The month I spent using Juno was not spectacularly different for me than using my usual i3 or the LXQT on my wife's machine. Like the simpler, lightweight i3 and LXQT, elementaryOS does a good job of giving you the tools you need, but also, often more importantly, keeping out of the way and letting you focus on what you need to get done.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora21review.html b/ars-technica/published/fedora21review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2f393b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora21review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+
The Fedora Project recently rolled out a major update in the form of Fedora 21. This release marks the first that's built around the newly restructured Fedora Project.
+
Like most Linux distros Fedora is a massive, sprawling project that has, frankly, felt unfocused and a bit lost at times. Just what is Fedora? Fedora has served as a kind of showcase distro of GNOME 3 ever since GNOME 3 hit the beta stage, which would seem to target everyday users, but then at the same time the project pours tremendous energy into building developer tools like DevAssistant. So is Fedora a developer distro? A newbie-friendly GNOME showcase? A server distro? An obscure robotics distro?
+
Recently Fedora did a bit of soul searching and discovered that the answer to all those questions is yes. The way to make sense of it all is what Fedora calls Fedora.Next.
+
Fedora.Next is Fedora's term for its new organization and release structure. There is a core (no, not like the old Fedora Core/Extras division, this is different), then there is a second layer, the APIs and such, and then the "Environments" that users like you and I interact with.
+
You can think of Fedora.Next's structure as a series of concentric rings where each ring is supported by the one inside it. At the center are the core components of the system, APIs that applications hook into and so on. Up from that are the actual system components and then the most visible of the new layers, what Fedora calls "Environments." For now the available Environments consist of Workstation (Desktop), Server and Cloud. Each environment is optimized to suit what it says on the tin. Because these are very modular it won't be hard for Fedora to add new Environments as needed. For example perhaps there will one day be a Mobile Environment.
+
The new pre-packaged Environments don't mean you can't configure Fedora however you like, just that these three Environments represent the primary areas of focus for developers. This offers Fedora a bit of direction and focus internally and more targeted "products" for users.
+
Fedora Project Leader Matthew Miller likens the Fedora.Next structure to Lego: "One of the related (and perpetual) community discussions centers around what exactly Fedora is. Traditionally, the answer is: we take the 'raw plastic' of the software out there in the universe and we mold it into high-precision Lego bricks, and users can plug them together."
+
"The idea [with Environments] is," continues Miller, "we can take some of our bricks, and we can ship those as sets." That doesn't mean though that you can't build your own thing as well. Miller is quick to reassure long-time Fedora fans that the project is "not getting rid of the basic supply of bricks... we want you to build other things."
+
The renewed sense of focus apparent in the new Fedora.Next release structure seems to have re-invigorated the Fedora project -- at least it looks that way from an outsider's perspective. Whatever the case, Fedora 21 is one of the strongest releases the project has put out in recent memory and is well worth the upgrade.
+
Fedora 21 Workstation
+
The Workstation Environment is what you would have installed previously if you had just downloaded Fedora Live CD and installed the defaults.
+
In Fedora 21 that will get you a GNOME desktop. The old "spins", which consist primarily of different desktops, are still available (and presumably build on the same basic set of packages found in the GNOME Workstation release), but as noted earlier Fedora has long been a showcase distro of GNOME 3.x and with that in mind I stuck with the default GNOME 3.14 desktop.
First though you have to install Fedora using what I think is supposed to be an intuitive installer that's so simple you can't fail. Except that instead of "can't fail", it's so simple you can't tell what you need to do. Perhaps I'm just too brainwashed by the form-based installers found in Mint, Ubuntu, Debian, openSUSE, ElementaryOS and well, just about everywhere, but Fedora's button-based installer -- buttons, which hide forms mind you -- drives me crazy. Why make me click an extra button to set up a user account for a workstation environment when I will obviously need a user account?
+
+[image="fedora21-installer.jpg" caption="Fedora's nearly inscrutable installer, complete with instructions in the form of a tiny-font error message."]
+
+
The Fedora installer isn't part of the GNOME project, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn the same developer who turned the Nautilus file browser into a useless toy also had a go at the Fedora installer. I'm sure you'll figure it out, it's not Arch (at least Arch's arcane install process is well documented), but it gets things off the bumpy start.
+
The best thing I can say about Fedora's installer is that you only have to use it once. Just remember to create a new user and set your root password.
+
GNOME 3.14
+
Once Fedora 21 is installed you'll be greeted by the GNOME 3.14 desktop (assuming you found the button to create a user account).
+
Fedora leap-frogged over GNOME 3.12 -- Fedora 20 shipped with GNOME 3.10 -- so this is a major leap forward for Fedora fans. GNOME 3.14 brings plenty of new features, including a couple new applications, an updated theme and some more improvements in HiDPI screen support. In fact GNOME has long boasted some of the best HiDPI support around and this release continues to build on that, polishing the little details to the point that I haven't seen anything amiss running Fedora 21 in a virtual machine on a retina Macbook Pro.
+
Fedora's nearly stock GNOME 3.14 looks great on HiDPI screens and the updated GNOME theme gives the desktop a clean, simple look and feel.
+
If you're updating all the way from GNOME 3.10 you'll notice a completely rewritten Weather app that taps GNOME's new geolocation API to automatically pull in your local forecast. Fedora 21 does not, however, ship with some of the other new GNOME apps like Photos. Fedora 21 has elected to stick with the slightly more feature-rich Shotwell. GNOME Photos is available in the Fedora repos and has some new online account support, but in my experience it's a bit buggy for actually working with something as important as your photo library.
This release also brings the first real support for Wayland -- Mutter (GNOME's default display manager) can now work as a Wayland compositor. Just log out of the default session and click the gear icon to choose the "GNOME on Wayland" option. Fedora should seamlessly fall back to X where Wayland isn't supported.
+
GNOME 3.14 makes for a different, but perfectly usable desktop. At this point the 3.x line is well polished and feels mature. Its rather different take on the desktop interface is not for everyone, in fact it's not my choice for everyday use, but if you come around to its way of thinking GNOME 3 is perfectly capable of getting out of your way and letting you do what you want to do. The only real downside to GNOME I found is the default file manager, Nautilus, which is pretty limited. I swapped it out with the Nautilus fork, Nemo, and found I liked GNOME 3 a lot more after that.
+
If you haven't taken GNOME for a spin in a while it might be worth another look and Fedora 21 makes hands down the best GNOME platform I've tested.
+
Yum, Now With More Yuminess
+
As much as I love some of the developer tools and little side projects Fedora churns out (like the GNOME color management tools it pioneered), I've never been a fan of Fedora's package manager. Fedora 21 changes that. Yum is no longer the slow, awkward beast it used to be and by extension neither is the Software center tools (which is the pretty-much-only-works-in-Fedora GNOME Software app).
+
There was a time when Ubuntu's Software Center was perhaps one of the best graphical software installation tools out there and yum-based distros like Fedora looked slow and ugly in comparison. These days more or less the opposite is true. Not only is Fedora's graphical software app one of the fastest I've ever used (speed will obviously depend somewhat on your internet connection speeds and available mirrors) but it's also clean, well organized and offers a great search tool.
+
+[image="fedora21-software.jpg" caption="GNOME's Software app in Fedora 21."]
+
+
And Fedora continues to target the developer audience with very up-to-date versions of Perl, Python, Ruby and most other languages you can think of. Anything that isn't there out of the box is most likely available in single DevAssistant command. If you're a developer and you haven't checked out DevAssistant you need to, it's the simplest way I've seen to get a complete development stack up and running.
+
Kernel Updates
+
Fedora 21 ships with Linux kernel 3.17.1, which brings the usual slew of latest hardware support, but is also notable for giving Fedora 21 tentative support for ARM 64 chips. ARM 64 is not yet considered a "primary architecture" for Fedora, but most things should work according to Fedora Magazine.
+
Fedora's kernel team has also adopted a more modular approach with this release, stripping things back a bit at the request of the Cloud environment developers. The result is a considerably smaller footprint for the Cloud environment, though both Workstation and Server will be roughly the same as the previous releases size-wise.
+
Fedora Server
+
While the Workstation environment is a good base on which to build your desktop experience, the new Fedora Server Environment is more specifically tailored to the needs of sysadmins and the like.
+
The first release of the Server Environment features a few new tools, like Cockpit, a server monitoring tool with a web-based interface you can connect to with your browser. If you're new to sysadmin tasks -- things like starting and stopping services, storage admin, and so on, or, if you just dislike doing everything through an SSH session, then Cockpit is worth checking out. It's more or less everything you're already doing on the command line, but available via a web-based GUI. It's all the same processes in the end, you can start Apache in the web panel and stop it from the command line. It's probably not going to replace your hand crafted shell scripts and preferred command line tools, but it's a nice option for newcomers.
+
+[image="fedora21-server-cockpit.jpg" caption="Cockpit running on locally on Fedora 21 Workstation."]
+
+
This release also bundles in a couple new-to-Fedora tools like OpenLMI, perhaps best thought of as a remote API for system management, and FreeIPA, which aims to simplify the process of managing user and groups securely.
+
Then there's RoleKit, which is a brand new Fedora creation that looks like it will be very handy in the future, though it's limited right now. In a sense RoleKit is the sysadmin equivalent of Fedora's DevAssistant. That is, RoleKit will help you install and configure packages aimed a specific role. For example, call up everything you need to run a mail server, or everything you need to run a LAMP stack. Promising, but thus far incomplete.
+
Conclusion
+
I've used Fedora off and on since Fedora 6 (which at that time known as Fedora Core 6) and can say without reservation that this is the best release I've ever used.
+
That said, the GNOME desktop is not for me. Fortunately there are plenty of other "spins" available, including a version with the MATE-desktop, which can now use Compiz if you'd like to re-experience Fedora with wobbly windows just like the days of yore. There are also spins featuring KDE, Xfce and LXDE among other desktops.
+
More importantly, Fedora 21 sees the project plowing into the future with what feels like a renewed sense of direction and purpose.
+
If you're a desktop user there's a Fedora for you. If you're a sysadmin there's a Fedora for you. If you're chasing the dream of cloud server futures there's a Fedora for you. And of course if you're just looking for a distro on which to build the ultimate robot, there's still a Fedora for you.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora21review.txt b/ars-technica/published/fedora21review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..979db7e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora21review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+The Fedora Project recently rolled out a major update in the form of [Fedora 21](https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/download/). This release marks the first that's built around the newly restructured Fedora Project.
+
+Like most Linux distros Fedora is a massive, sprawling project that has, frankly, felt unfocused and a bit lost at times. Just what is Fedora? Fedora has served as a kind of showcase distro of GNOME 3 ever since GNOME 3 hit the beta stage, which would seem to target everyday users, but then at the same time the project pours tremendous energy into building developer tools like [DevAssistant](http://devassistant.org/). So is Fedora a developer distro? A newbie-friendly GNOME showcase? A server distro? An obscure robotics distro?
+
+Recently Fedora did a bit of soul searching and discovered that the answer to all those questions is yes. The way to make sense of it all is what Fedora calls [Fedora.Next](https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora.next).
+
+Fedora.Next is Fedora's term for its new organization and release structure. There is a core (no, not like the old Fedora Core/Extras division, this is different), then there is a second layer, the APIs and such, and then the "Environments" that users like you and I interact with.
+
+You can think of Fedora.Next's structure as a series of concentric rings where each ring is supported by the one inside it. At the center are the core components of the system, APIs that applications hook into and so on. Up from that are the actual system components and then the most visible of the new layers, what Fedora calls "Environments." For now the available Environments consist of Workstation (Desktop), Server and Cloud. Each environment is optimized to suit what it says on the tin. Because these are very modular it won't be hard for Fedora to add new Environments as needed. For example perhaps there will one day be a Mobile Environment.
+
+The new pre-packaged Environments don't mean you can't configure Fedora however you like, just that these three Environments represent the primary areas of focus for developers. This offers Fedora a bit of direction and focus internally and more targeted "products" for users.
+
+Fedora Project Leader Matthew Miller [likens](http://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-present-and-future-a-fedora-next-2014-update-part-ii-whats-happening/) the Fedora.Next structure to Lego: "One of the related (and perpetual) community discussions centers around what exactly Fedora is. Traditionally, the answer is: we take the 'raw plastic' of the software out there in the universe and we mold it into high-precision Lego bricks, and users can plug them together."
+
+"The idea [with Environments] is," continues Miller, "we can take some of our bricks, and we can ship those as sets." That doesn't mean though that you can't build your own thing as well. Miller is quick to reassure long-time Fedora fans that the project is "not getting rid of the basic supply of bricks... we want you to build other things."
+
+The renewed sense of focus apparent in the new Fedora.Next release structure seems to have re-invigorated the Fedora project -- at least it looks that way from an outsider's perspective. Whatever the case, Fedora 21 is one of the strongest releases the project has put out in recent memory and is well worth the upgrade.
+
+## Fedora 21 Workstation
+
+The Workstation Environment is what you would have installed previously if you had just downloaded Fedora Live CD and installed the defaults.
+
+In Fedora 21 that will get you a GNOME desktop. The old "spins", which consist primarily of different desktops, are still available (and presumably build on the same basic set of packages found in the GNOME Workstation release), but as noted earlier Fedora has long been a showcase distro of GNOME 3.x and with that in mind I stuck with the default GNOME 3.14 desktop.
+
+First though you have to install Fedora using what I think is supposed to be an intuitive installer that's so simple you can't fail. Except that instead of "can't fail", it's so simple you can't tell what you need to do. Perhaps I'm just too brainwashed by the form-based installers found in Mint, Ubuntu, Debian, openSUSE, ElementaryOS and well, just about everywhere, but Fedora's button-based installer -- buttons, which hide forms mind you -- drives me crazy. Why make me click an extra button to set up a user account for a workstation environment when I will obviously need a user account?
+
+The Fedora installer isn't part of the GNOME project, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn the same developer who turned the Nautilus file browser into a useless toy also had a go at the Fedora installer. I'm sure you'll figure it out, it's not Arch (at least Arch's arcane install process is well documented), but it gets things off the bumpy start.
+
+The best thing I can say about Fedora's installer is that you only have to use it once. Just remember to create a new user and set your root password.
+
+### GNOME 3.14
+
+Once Fedora 21 is installed you'll be greeted by the GNOME 3.14 desktop (assuming you found the button to create a user account).
+
+Fedora leap-frogged over GNOME 3.12 -- Fedora 20 shipped with GNOME 3.10 -- so this is a major leap forward for Fedora fans. GNOME 3.14 brings plenty of new features, including a couple new applications, an updated theme and some more improvements in HiDPI screen support. In fact GNOME has long boasted some of the best HiDPI support around and this release continues to build on that, polishing the little details to the point that I haven't seen anything amiss running Fedora 21 in a virtual machine on a retina Macbook Pro.
+
+Fedora's nearly stock GNOME 3.14 looks great on HiDPI screens and the updated GNOME theme gives the desktop a clean, simple look and feel.
+
+If you're updating all the way from GNOME 3.10 you'll notice a completely rewritten Weather app that taps GNOME's new geolocation API to automatically pull in your local forecast. Fedora 21 does not, however, ship with some of the other new GNOME apps like Photos. Fedora 21 has elected to stick with the slightly more feature-rich Shotwell. GNOME Photos is available in the Fedora repos and has some new online account support, but in my experience it's a bit buggy for actually working with something as important as your photo library.
+
+This release also brings the first real support for Wayland -- Mutter (GNOME's default display manager) can now work as a Wayland compositor. Just log out of the default session and click the gear icon to choose the "GNOME on Wayland" option. Fedora should seamlessly fall back to X where Wayland isn't supported.
+
+GNOME 3.14 makes for a different, but perfectly usable desktop. At this point the 3.x line is well polished and feels mature. Its rather different take on the desktop interface is not for everyone, in fact it's not my choice for everyday use, but if you come around to its way of thinking GNOME 3 is perfectly capable of getting out of your way and letting you do what you want to do. The only real downside to GNOME I found is the default file manager, Nautilus, which is pretty limited. I swapped it out with the Nautilus fork, [Nemo](http://cinnamon.linuxmint.com/?p=198), and found I liked GNOME 3 a lot more after that.
+
+If you haven't taken GNOME for a spin in a while it might be worth another look and Fedora 21 makes hands down the best GNOME platform I've tested.
+
+### Yum, Now With More Yuminess
+
+As much as I love some of the developer tools and little side projects Fedora churns out (like the GNOME color management tools it pioneered), I've never been a fan of Fedora's package manager. Fedora 21 changes that. Yum is no longer the slow, awkward beast it used to be and by extension neither is the Software center tools (which is the pretty-much-only-works-in-Fedora GNOME Software app).
+
+There was a time when Ubuntu's Software Center was perhaps one of the best graphical software installation tools out there and yum-based distros like Fedora looked slow and ugly in comparison. These days more or less the opposite is true. Not only is Fedora's graphical software app one of the fastest I've ever used (speed will obviously depend somewhat on your internet connection speeds and available mirrors) but it's also clean, well organized and offers a great search tool.
+
+And Fedora continues to target the developer audience with very up-to-date versions of Perl, Python, Ruby and most other languages you can think of. Anything that isn't there out of the box is most likely available in single DevAssistant command. If you're a developer and you haven't checked out DevAssistant you need to, it's the simplest way I've seen to get a complete development stack up and running.
+
+### Kernel Updates
+
+Fedora 21 ships with Linux kernel 3.17.1, which brings the usual slew of latest hardware support, but is also notable for giving Fedora 21 tentative support for ARM 64 chips. ARM 64 is not yet considered a "primary architecture" for Fedora, but most things should work according to [Fedora Magazine](http://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-21-to-ship-the-3-16-linux-kernel-and-a-smaller-minimal-install-set/).
+
+Fedora's kernel team has also adopted a more modular approach with this release, stripping things back a bit at the request of the Cloud environment developers. The result is a considerably smaller footprint for the Cloud environment, though both Workstation and Server will be roughly the same as the previous releases size-wise.
+
+## Fedora Server
+
+While the Workstation environment is a good base on which to build your desktop experience, the new Fedora Server Environment is more specifically tailored to the needs of sysadmins and the like.
+
+The first release of the Server Environment features a few new tools, like Cockpit, a server monitoring tool with a web-based interface you can connect to with your browser. If you're new to sysadmin tasks -- things like starting and stopping services, storage admin, and so on, or, if you just dislike doing everything through an SSH session, then Cockpit is worth checking out. It's more or less everything you're already doing on the command line, but available via a web-based GUI. It's all the same processes in the end, you can start Apache in the web panel and stop it from the command line. It's probably not going to replace your hand crafted shell scripts and preferred command line tools, but it's a nice option for newcomers.
+
+This release also bundles in a couple new-to-Fedora tools like OpenLMI, perhaps best thought of as a remote API for system management, and FreeIPA, which aims to simplify the process of managing user and groups securely.
+
+Then there's RoleKit, which is a brand new Fedora creation that looks like it will be very handy in the future, though it's limited right now. In a sense RoleKit is the sysadmin equivalent of Fedora's DevAssistant. That is, RoleKit will help you install and configure packages aimed a specific role. For example, call up everything you need to run a mail server, or everything you need to run a LAMP stack. Promising, but thus far incomplete.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+I've used Fedora off and on since Fedora 6 (which at that time known as Fedora Core 6) and can say without reservation that this is the best release I've ever used.
+
+That said, the GNOME desktop is not for me. Fortunately there are plenty of other "spins" available, including a version with the MATE-desktop, which can now use Compiz if you'd like to re-experience Fedora with wobbly windows just like the days of yore. There are also spins featuring KDE, Xfce and LXDE among other desktops.
+
+More importantly, Fedora 21 sees the project plowing into the future with what feels like a renewed sense of direction and purpose.
+
+If you're a desktop user there's a Fedora for you. If you're a sysadmin there's a Fedora for you. If you're chasing the dream of cloud server futures there's a Fedora for you. And of course if you're just looking for a distro on which to build the ultimate robot, there's still a Fedora for you.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora23review.html b/ars-technica/published/fedora23review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..10edb1b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora23review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+
The Fedora project recently released Fedora 23. The last time Ars looked at Fedora was two releases ago, Fedora 21, which saw Fedora introducing its "Fedora Next" plan.
+
Fedora Next's goal was to bring the massive, sprawling entity that is Fedora into some neatly organized categories that would clearly define each of Fedora's aims. Since Next launched, Fedora has been busy doing just that and the results are impressive.
+
Fedora Next's structure is like a series of concentric rings where each ring is supported by the one inside it. At the center are the core components of the system, APIs that applications hook into and so on. On the outside are the visible layers that users interact with, what Fedora calls "Environments." It's this last layer that users interact with. For Fedora 23, as with the two releases prior, those Environments consist of Workstation (Desktop), Server, and Cloud. The latter still has the feel of an also-ran, but the Workstation and Server releases see quite a bit of welcome new packages in this release, particularly the GNOME-based Workstation.
+
Fedora 23 Workstation
+
The biggest change in Fedora 23's default Workstation release comes from upstream in the form of GNOME 3.18. But before you get to enjoy what's new in GNOME 3.18, you have to get Fedora installed and to do that you have to make it through Anaconda.
+
In the Fedora 21 review I gave Anaconda a hard time, its button-based approach felt clunky compared to similar offerings from other distros. Most of those criticism stand with Fedora 23. For example, it still takes an extra click of the button to create a user account on the desktop when everyone installing Fedora 23 Workstation will need an account -- why not just present a screen to create one?
+
+[image="fedora23-install.jpg" caption="The user creation and root password screens hidden away behind buttons."]
+
+
Two things in Fedora 23 make Anaconda a bit more tolerable though. First, it's better at guessing defaults. For example, it successfully set my timezone and keyboard preferences with no input from me at all. That's one win for the button based approach since there was no need to click those buttons. Provided you stick with single partition, the default disk partitioning setup in Fedora 23 also may not require much input on your part either, which is nice. The second change that makes Anaconda a bit better this time around is a new orange bar across the bottom which helps call your attention to any unfinished business you may have in the installer, for example, creating that user account.
+
It's a marginal improvement over past releases, but I stand by my last assessment: the best you can say about Fedora's installer is that you only have to use it once.
+
GNOME 3.18
+
Once you get past Anaconda, Fedora 23 will land you in what might well be one of the nicest, and certainly one of the newest, GNOME desktops around.
+
Fedora 23 ships with the just-released GNOME 3.18, which is one of the best GNOME releases to date and features dozens of new features, better Wayland support and a new option to update your firmware through GNOME Software. Regrettably it also, as all GNOME releases seem to, has a few steps backward.
+
The first thing you'll likely notice when you set up Fedora 23 Workstation is the new Google Drive integration in GNOME 3.18. Google Drive joins Facebook and Microsoft in the GNOME online accounts panel (along with what I like to hope is the more popular option for Linux users, ownCloud). The new Google Drive support makes all your Google documents into first class citizens on the GNOME desktop.
+
+[image="fedora23-drive.jpg" caption="Google Drive joins ownCloud, Microsoft and Facebook in the GNOME online accounts dialog. Set up is just a matter of granting GNOME access to your account."]
+
+
To set up Drive all you need to do is follow the prompts to sign in to Google and authorize GNOME to access your account. In about 10 seconds you'll have complete access to everything in your Drive within the GNOME Files app (AKA, Nautilus). Your Google Drive account is displayed as a network share in the file browser sidebar. Interacting with your Google Drive documents is no different than local documents. You can set your documents to open in any application you like (by default they'll open in the web editor) and creating new files and folders in Drive is just like it is for ordinary drives. Like the ownCloud integration, Google Drive in GNOME, "just works".
+
+[image="fedora23-drive-files.jpg" caption="Interacting with documents stored in Google Drive is just like interacting with any other file on your machine."]
+
+
There's still no Google Drive client for Linux, but for GNOME users anyway, GNOME's integration is good enough that you won't miss it. If you're not a Google Drive user there's nothing to see here other than the possibility that now that Drive support is done perhaps the GNOME team can move on to integrating other online sync services.
+
Support for Drive isn't the only thing new in the Files app, although it is the only thing that's new and good. The other change, while relatively minor, is yet another step backward for usability in GNOME. The file copy dialog has been moved to a tiny icon at the top right of the file browser window. An indicator circle animates large file copy operations and clicking the icon reveals more details and a drop down that looks roughly like the file copy dialog you'd see in most other applications. It works quite well enough if you know it's there. If you don't know, well, good luck finding any feedback on what your machine is doing when you drag and drop files.
+
+[image="fedora23-files-copy.jpg" caption="If you know it's there the new file copy dialog isn't so bad, but it's certainly not easy to discover."]
+
+
For example, if you're backing up say your photo folder with many gigabytes of data to an external drive you might accidentally copy it 3, perhaps even 4, times before you realized that, despite the totally absence of feedback, something is in fact happening. Don't ask me how I know this, just know that you will not suffer the same because now you know -- look for the tiny icon. At least GNOME is getting closer to its goal of making the command line look downright discoverable.
+
This release will also send you hunting for your network drives since those no longer appear in the sidebar by default, to, in the words of GNOME's announcement, "reduce clutter". Instead those drives now require an extra click on the new "Other Locations" menu item which will reveal all that unsightly clutter should you actually need to access those cluttered drives.
+
+[image="fedora23-files-network.jpg" caption="Networked drives, known as 'clutter' in GNOME parlance, are now hidden behind 'Other Locations' in the sidebar."]
+
+
There is one other actual improvement of note in the UI of GNOME 3.18, which is that you can now search by typing in open and save dialogs. One step forward, two back.
+
Most of the other big changes in Fedora 23 and GNOME 3.18 are less visible, though more welcome.
+
Fedora has long been an early adopter of Wayland and Fedora 23 is no different, offering considerably more support than any other distro to date. In fact the Wayland support is getting close enough to feature complete that it appears Fedora 24 may boot to Wayland by default. By and large you won't notice much difference should you try out Wayland in Fedora 23 (just logout of your current session and select Wayland from the menu that drops down from the gear icon at the lower right side of the login dialog). The lack of noticeable difference is a good thing since you really shouldn't need to know what your display manager is up to, but there are some new features available if you need them.
+
The most notable thing Wayland can do right now is run DPI-independent monitors. That is, if you have a normal resolution display and something more like a 4K display, Wayland can handle that scenario. Not having a high-res monitor I haven't been able to test this one, but the GNOME forums are full of success reports. Other new Wayland-specific features include trackpad support for gestures like pinch-to-zoom, twirling to rotate and four-finger swipes to switch workspaces. All of these gestures were previously available if you've got a touch screen, but they're now available to supported trackpads under Wayland. That said, I wasn't able to get them working in Fedora 23.
+
Fedora 23 does support GNOME 3.18's new "automatic brightness" support, which taps your laptop's integrated light sensor to automatically dim and brighten the screen based on the lighting around you. It saves fiddling with the brightness buttons and can help cut down on power use since it will dim without you having to remember anything. However, if you're really trying to eke the last bit out of your battery you'll probably want to disable automatic screen brightness in the power settings, since it tends to err on the brighter side. Most of the time though this feature works well.
+
There are quite a few notable updates for GNOME's stock applications, as well as two brand new applications -- Calendar and GNOME To Do. Possibly the best part though is that GNOME Software now supports firmware updates via fwupd. That means you don't need any proprietary tools or original install DVDs just to update your firmware, provided of course that the firmware you need is available via the Linux Vendor Firmware Service.
+
+[image="fedora23-software.jpg" caption="GNOME Software can now update firmware."]
+
+
As a side note, Ubuntu users, take a good look at GNOME software, it's in your future. Canonical has decided to abandon its homegrown software center in favor of GNOME software for Ubuntu 16.04. First Upstart gave way to systemd, then Unity 8 moved to Qt, then the scrollbars went to stock GNOME and now the Ubuntu Software Center is abandoned in favor of GNOME Software... makes you wonder about Mir.
+
GNOME 3.18 adds two new default apps to the ever-increasing GNOME app suite, Calendar and GNOME To Do. The lack of a good GUI calendar app for Linux has always been puzzling. There's Evolution of course, but until now there hasn't really been a nice simple stand alone Calendar app. GNOME Calendar is that app. Or rather, it's close to being that app. If you stick with the integrated GNOME online accounts -- Google Calendar, ownCloud, etc -- Calendar works as expected. Regrettably I have not been able to get it working with any of my CalDav servers, including my primary calendar which resides on Fastmail's CalDav servers.
+
+[image="fedora23-software.jpg" caption="GNOME Calendar, simple but functional — provided your online calendar resides in one of GNOME's supported online account options."]
+
+
The other newcomer is GNOME To Do (not to be confused with the older, independent application launcher, GNOME-Do), which is, as the name suggests, a to do list manager. GNOME To Do is still a "technical preview" in GNOME 3.18, but it has most of what you'd want in a task manager application. You can enter new tasks, group them, add colors and priorities, and attach notes to them. Tasks also integrate and sync with, for example, Gmail's Tasks. It was perfectly stable in my testing (including syncing with Gmail), but bear in mind that it is still a preview release -- you might not want to trust your entire life schedule to it just yet.
+
+[image="fedora23-software.jpg" caption="GNOME To Do, a nice, if still experimental, task manager."]
+
+
I should also note that while Fedora mentions both new GNOME apps in its release notes, in the case of the live CD I used to install Fedora 23, neither were installed by default. They're both in the repos though and thanks to GNOME's helpful ability to search for apps not installed yet they're easy enough to install on your own.
+
The last big update of note in Fedora 23's GNOME desktop is support for what might be the biggest change coming soon in the GNOME world: the Xdg project. Xdg is a new effort designed to help developers build and distribute Linux applications. Ultimately Xdg wants to be a kind of one-package-to-rule-them-all, that developers can use to package apps across distros. Xdg will also add some much stricter application sandboxing.
+
In Fedora 23 Xdg is not much more than an outline. None of the apps that ship in Fedora's repos are packaged this way yet, but Xdg does indeed look to be part of the GNOME roadmap, which likely means Fedora will be an early adopter as Xdg expands.
+
Kernel
+
Like the recently released Ubuntu 15.10, Fedora 23 ships with Linux Kernel 4.2. The biggest news in 4.2 is support for recent Radeon GPUs and Intel's new Broxton chips, though let's face it Fedora running on mobile chips is about as likely as this being the year of the Linux desktop.
+
On the more useful side there are some new encryption options for ext4 disks and the new live kernel patching features. The encryption features should make using whole disk encryption a bit faster.
+
Other under the hood changes in Fedora 23 include some improvements for Fedora's new DNF package manager, which replaced Yum a few releases ago (Yum is aliased to DNF now). With this release DNF takes over from fedup, becoming the new way to perform system upgrade. Aside from the welcome unification of purpose -- that Fedora had to build a separate tool for system upgrades says something about Yum -- DNF's new upgrade support hooks into systemd's support for offline updates and allows you to easily roll back updates if necessary.
+
Server
+
Fedora 23 Server includes everything found in the Workstation release (minus the desktop itself) and layers in some great tools for sysadmins, most notably Cockpit. Cockpit is Fedora's effort to bring the tools of the sysadmin into an interface anyone can use. Want to deploy a Docker container? Search for what you want, click install, done.
+
Cockpit also feels a bit like a covert effort to build a more secure web since it makes deploying secure servers something that anyone with a bit of Linux experience can figure out. Cockpit is really just a graphical interface layered on top of all the, let's face it, often inscrutable tools, sysadmins already use. Cockpit adds a welcome layer of abstraction and while it isn't a substitute for experience, it can point you in the right direction.
+
Fedora 23 Server beefs up Cockpit security with support for SSH key authentication and the ability to configure user accounts with authorized keys.
+
In this release Fedora rolekit gains the ability to deploy Server Roles as containerized applications. This allows better isolation of roles from the rest of the system and paves the way for roles to migrate into cloud-based systems like Fedora's Project Atomic.
+
Conclusion
+
Fedora 23 is such a strong release it highlights what feels like Fedora's Achilles heel -- there's no Long Term Support release.
+
If you want an LTS release in the Red Hat world it's RHEL you're after (or CentOS and other derivatives). Fedora is a bleeding edge and as such Fedora 23 will, as always, be supported for 12 months after which you'll need upgrade.
+
The good news is that DNF's new upgrade tools with transactional updates and rollbacks temper the missing LTS release a bit. After all, if updating is simple and you can roll back if something goes wrong then there's less risk to updating. Still, what if you do need to rollback because something went wrong? What if that something isn't something you can quickly fix?
+
The lack of an LTS release isn't likely to stop desktop users, but it does make Fedora feel like a riskier bet on the server. In the end though, that's probably how Red Hat likes things, if you want stable RHEL is there, if you want the latest and greatest, Fedora 23 delivers.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora23review.txt b/ars-technica/published/fedora23review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..24e8b6b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora23review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+The Fedora project recently released Fedora 23. The last time Ars looked at Fedora was two releases ago, [Fedora 21](http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/01/fedora-21-review-linuxs-sprawliest-distro-finds-a-new-focus/), which saw Fedora introducing its "Fedora Next" plan.
+
+Fedora Next's goal was to bring the massive, sprawling entity that is Fedora into some neatly organized categories that would clearly define each of Fedora's aims. Since Next launched, Fedora has been busy doing just that and the results are impressive.
+
+Fedora Next's structure is like a series of concentric rings where each ring is supported by the one inside it. At the center are the core components of the system, APIs that applications hook into and so on. On the outside are the visible layers that users interact with, what Fedora calls "Environments." It's this last layer that users interact with. For Fedora 23, as with the two releases prior, those Environments consist of Workstation (Desktop), Server, and Cloud. The latter still has the feel of an also-ran, but the Workstation and Server releases see quite a bit of welcome new packages in this release, particularly the GNOME-based Workstation.
+
+## Fedora 23 Workstation
+
+The biggest change in Fedora 23's default Workstation release comes from upstream in the form of GNOME 3.18. But before you get to enjoy what's new in GNOME 3.18, you have to get Fedora installed and to do that you have to make it through Anaconda.
+
+In the Fedora 21 review I gave Anaconda a hard time, its button-based approach felt clunky compared to similar offerings from other distros. Most of those criticism stand with Fedora 23. For example, it still takes an extra click of the button to create a user account on the desktop when everyone installing Fedora 23 Workstation will need an account -- why not just present a screen to create one?
+
+Two things in Fedora 23 make Anaconda a bit more tolerable though. First, it's better at guessing defaults. For example, it successfully set my timezone and keyboard preferences with no input from me at all. That's one win for the button based approach since there was no need to click those buttons. Provided you stick with single partition, the default disk partitioning setup in Fedora 23 also may not require much input on your part either, which is nice. The second change that makes Anaconda a bit better this time around is a new orange bar across the bottom which helps call your attention to any unfinished business you may have in the installer, for example, creating that user account.
+
+It's a marginal improvement over past releases, but I stand by my last assessment: the best you can say about Fedora's installer is that you only have to use it once.
+
+### GNOME 3.18
+
+Once you get past Anaconda, Fedora 23 will land you in what might well be one of the nicest, and certainly one of the newest, GNOME desktops around.
+
+Fedora 23 ships with the just-released GNOME 3.18, which is one of the best GNOME releases to date and features dozens of new features, better Wayland support and a new option to update your firmware through GNOME Software. Regrettably it also, as all GNOME releases seem to, has a few steps backward.
+
+The first thing you'll likely notice when you set up Fedora 23 Workstation is the new Google Drive integration in GNOME 3.18. Google Drive joins Facebook and Microsoft in the GNOME online accounts panel (along with what I like to hope is the more popular option for Linux users, ownCloud). The new Google Drive support makes all your Google documents into first class citizens on the GNOME desktop.
+
+To set up Drive all you need to do is follow the prompts to sign in to Google and authorize GNOME to access your account. In about 10 seconds you'll have complete access to everything in your Drive within the GNOME Files app (AKA, Nautilus). Your Google Drive account is displayed as a network share in the file browser sidebar. Interacting with your Google Drive documents is no different than local documents. You can set your documents to open in any application you like (by default they'll open in the web editor) and creating new files and folders in Drive is just like it is for ordinary drives. Like the ownCloud integration, Google Drive in GNOME, "just works".
+
+There's still no Google Drive client for Linux, but for GNOME users anyway, GNOME's integration is good enough that you won't miss it. If you're not a Google Drive user there's nothing to see here other than the possibility that now that Drive support is done perhaps the GNOME team can move on to integrating other online sync services.
+
+Support for Drive isn't the only thing new in the Files app, although it is the only thing that's new and good. The other change, while relatively minor, is yet another step backward for usability in GNOME. The file copy dialog has been moved to a tiny icon at the top right of the file browser window. An indicator circle animates large file copy operations and clicking the icon reveals more details and a drop down that looks roughly like the file copy dialog you'd see in most other applications. It works quite well enough *if you know it's there*. If you don't know, well, good luck finding any feedback on what your machine is doing when you drag and drop files.
+
+For example, if you're backing up say your photo folder with many gigabytes of data to an external drive you might accidentally copy it 3, perhaps even 4, times before you realized that, despite the totally absence of feedback, something is in fact happening. Don't ask me how I know this, just know that you will not suffer the same because now you know -- look for the tiny icon. At least GNOME is getting closer to its goal of making the command line look downright discoverable.
+
+This release will also send you hunting for your network drives since those no longer appear in the sidebar by default, to, in the words of GNOME's announcement, "reduce clutter". Instead those drives now require an extra click on the new "Other Locations" menu item which will reveal all that unsightly clutter should you actually need to access those cluttered drives.
+
+There is one other actual improvement of note in the UI of GNOME 3.18, which is that you can now search by typing in open and save dialogs. One step forward, two back.
+
+Most of the other big changes in Fedora 23 and GNOME 3.18 are less visible, though more welcome.
+
+Fedora has long been an early adopter of Wayland and Fedora 23 is no different, offering considerably more support than any other distro to date. In fact the Wayland support is getting close enough to feature complete that it appears Fedora 24 may boot to Wayland by default. By and large you won't notice much difference should you try out Wayland in Fedora 23 (just logout of your current session and select Wayland from the menu that drops down from the gear icon at the lower right side of the login dialog). The lack of noticeable difference is a good thing since you really shouldn't need to know what your display manager is up to, but there are some new features available if you need them.
+
+The most notable thing Wayland can do right now is run DPI-independent monitors. That is, if you have a normal resolution display and something more like a 4K display, Wayland can handle that scenario. Not having a high-res monitor I haven't been able to test this one, but the GNOME forums are full of success reports. Other new Wayland-specific features include trackpad support for gestures like pinch-to-zoom, twirling to rotate and four-finger swipes to switch workspaces. All of these gestures were previously available if you've got a touch screen, but they're now available to supported trackpads under Wayland. That said, I wasn't able to get them working in Fedora 23.
+
+Fedora 23 does support GNOME 3.18's new "automatic brightness" support, which taps your laptop's integrated light sensor to automatically dim and brighten the screen based on the lighting around you. It saves fiddling with the brightness buttons and can help cut down on power use since it will dim without you having to remember anything. However, if you're really trying to eke the last bit out of your battery you'll probably want to disable automatic screen brightness in the power settings, since it tends to err on the brighter side. Most of the time though this feature works well.
+
+There are quite a few notable updates for GNOME's stock applications, as well as two brand new applications -- Calendar and GNOME To Do. Possibly the best part though is that GNOME Software now supports firmware updates via fwupd. That means you don't need any proprietary tools or original install DVDs just to update your firmware, provided of course that the firmware you need is available via the Linux Vendor Firmware Service.
+
+As a side note, Ubuntu users, take a good look at GNOME software, it's in your future. Canonical has decided to abandon its homegrown software center in favor of GNOME software for Ubuntu 16.04. First Upstart gave way to systemd, then Unity 8 moved to Qt, then the scrollbars went to stock GNOME and now the Ubuntu Software Center is abandoned in favor of GNOME Software... makes you wonder about Mir.
+
+GNOME 3.18 adds two new default apps to the ever-increasing GNOME app suite, Calendar and GNOME To Do. The lack of a good GUI calendar app for Linux has always been puzzling. There's Evolution of course, but until now there hasn't really been a nice simple stand alone Calendar app. GNOME Calendar is that app. Or rather, it's close to being that app. If you stick with the integrated GNOME online accounts -- Google Calendar, ownCloud, etc -- Calendar works as expected. Regrettably I have not been able to get it working with any of my CalDav servers, including my primary calendar which resides on Fastmail's CalDav servers.
+
+The other newcomer is GNOME To Do (not to be confused with the older, independent application launcher, GNOME-Do), which is, as the name suggests, a to do list manager. GNOME To Do is still a "technical preview" in GNOME 3.18, but it has most of what you'd want in a task manager application. You can enter new tasks, group them, add colors and priorities, and attach notes to them. Tasks also integrate and sync with, for example, Gmail's Tasks. It was perfectly stable in my testing (including syncing with Gmail), but bear in mind that it is still a preview release -- you might not want to trust your entire life schedule to it just yet.
+
+I should also note that while Fedora mentions both new GNOME apps in its release notes, in the case of the live CD I used to install Fedora 23, neither were installed by default. They're both in the repos though and thanks to GNOME's helpful ability to search for apps not installed yet they're easy enough to install on your own.
+
+The last big update of note in Fedora 23's GNOME desktop is support for what might be the biggest change coming soon in the GNOME world: the Xdg project. Xdg is a new effort designed to help developers build and distribute Linux applications. Ultimately Xdg wants to be a kind of one-package-to-rule-them-all, that developers can use to package apps across distros. Xdg will also add some much stricter application sandboxing.
+
+In Fedora 23 Xdg is not much more than an outline. None of the apps that ship in Fedora's repos are packaged this way yet, but Xdg does indeed look to be part of the GNOME roadmap, which likely means Fedora will be an early adopter as Xdg expands.
+
+## Kernel
+
+Like the recently released [Ubuntu 15.10](arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/ubuntu-15-10-review-wily-werewolf-leaves-scary-experimentation-for-next-year/), Fedora 23 ships with Linux Kernel 4.2. The biggest news in 4.2 is support for recent Radeon GPUs and Intel's new Broxton chips, though let's face it Fedora running on mobile chips is about as likely as this being the year of the Linux desktop.
+
+On the more useful side there are some new encryption options for ext4 disks and the new live kernel patching features. The encryption features should make using [whole disk encryption a bit faster](https://lwn.net/Articles/639427/).
+
+Other under the hood changes in Fedora 23 include some improvements for Fedora's new DNF package manager, which replaced Yum a few releases ago (Yum is aliased to DNF now). With this release DNF takes over from `fedup`, becoming the new way to perform system upgrade. Aside from the welcome unification of purpose -- that Fedora had to build a separate tool for system upgrades says something about Yum -- DNF's new upgrade support hooks into systemd's support for offline updates and allows you to easily roll back updates if necessary.
+
+## Server
+
+Fedora 23 Server includes everything found in the Workstation release (minus the desktop itself) and layers in some great tools for sysadmins, most notably Cockpit. Cockpit is Fedora's effort to bring the tools of the sysadmin into an interface anyone can use. Want to deploy a Docker container? Search for what you want, click install, done.
+
+Cockpit also feels a bit like a covert effort to build a more secure web since it makes deploying secure servers something that anyone with a bit of Linux experience can figure out. Cockpit is really just a graphical interface layered on top of all the, let's face it, often inscrutable tools, sysadmins already use. Cockpit adds a welcome layer of abstraction and while it isn't a substitute for experience, it can point you in the right direction.
+
+Fedora 23 Server beefs up Cockpit security with support for SSH key authentication and the ability to configure user accounts with authorized keys.
+
+In this release Fedora rolekit gains the ability to deploy [Server Roles as containerized applications](https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Containerized_Server_Roles). This allows better isolation of roles from the rest of the system and paves the way for roles to migrate into cloud-based systems like Fedora's Project Atomic.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+Fedora 23 is such a strong release it highlights what feels like Fedora's Achilles heel -- there's no Long Term Support release.
+
+If you want an LTS release in the Red Hat world it's RHEL you're after (or CentOS and other derivatives). Fedora is a bleeding edge and as such Fedora 23 will, as always, be supported for 12 months after which you'll need upgrade.
+
+The good news is that DNF's new upgrade tools with transactional updates and rollbacks temper the missing LTS release a bit. After all, if updating is simple and you can roll back if something goes wrong then there's less risk to updating. Still, what if you do need to rollback because something went wrong? What if that something isn't something you can quickly fix?
+
+The lack of an LTS release isn't likely to stop desktop users, but it does make Fedora feel like a riskier bet on the server. In the end though, that's probably how Red Hat likes things, if you want stable RHEL is there, if you want the latest and greatest, Fedora 23 delivers.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora24.html b/ars-technica/published/fedora24.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bdd70fe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora24.html
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+
Earlier this year the Fedora project released Fedora 24. Fedora 24 is very near the best Linux distro release I've used, certainly the best release I've tested this year. That said, it, like many Fedora releases before it, it got off to rocky start.
+
Long time Fedora users are more than likely conservative when it comes to system upgrades. Historically, new Fedora releases tend to be rough around the edges. The wise Fedora user gives a new Fedora release a couple of months to let the kinks work out and the updates flow in. Giving a new Fedora release time before updating also means all the latest packages in RPM Fusion have been updated as well. Suffice to say that being the first to jump on a Fedora upgrade -- which come every eight or so months -- can be risky.
+
Patience will, however, reward you with a really great Linux distro. And far more valuable than updated apps, waiting means you can skip catastrophic bugs like the one that completely broke Fedora 24 on Skylake systems after a kernel update. Fedora 24 shipped with Linux kernel 4.5 and managed to miss kernel 4.6 by about two weeks, which is a shame because no less than Linus Torvalds himself called kernel 4.6 "a fairly big release - more commits than we've had in a while." In other words, potentially something worth waiting a few weeks to ship.
+
The Fedora project elected to not postpone their release though. To be fair, the whole "let's wait a bit" logic is a slippery slope, but in this case Fedora seems to have erred on the wrong side and updating to Fedora 24 has been fraught with problems for many users, particularly those with Skylake chips. And the problems go above and beyond the problems that already plague Linux on Skylake.
+
It's been almost two months since Fedora 24 was released and at this point most of the bugs have been worked out. In fact I did most of my Fedora testing on the Dell XPS 13 I reviewed early for Ars and found Fedora 24 to be a far smoother experience than Ubuntu 16.04. That said, if you have a Skylake chip, proceed cautiously.
+
Fedora 24: A GNOME 3.20 Showcase
+
Fedora 24 ships with a slew of desktop options, everything from the very lightweight LXDE to the flagship offering: GNOME 3.20. Because Fedora is closely tied to GNOME, I've done the majority of my testing on GNOME 3.20, which includes a host of new features, including a revamped Software app, images editing in Photos, and my personal favorite, GNOME Maps. There's also the beginning of what might eventually (finally) be a decent GUI Calendar app for Linux.
+
+[image="fedora-desktop.jpg" caption="The default GNOME 3.20 desktop in Fedora 24"]
+
+
The first thing you'll want to do with a fresh install is grab the updates that have come since the installer was packaged, which means your first stop will be GNOME Software. The good news in GNOME 3.20 is that the Software app is a lot more stable than it used to be in Fedora (previous releases crashed constantly for me) and it now supports Flatpak apps. More on those in a minute. For now let's just say that Flatpaks are the least stable aspect of GNOME Software in 3.20. Still, if you enjoy graphical software installers, GNOME Software has one of the nicest interfaces you'll find among Linux desktops.
+
+[image='fedora-software.jpg' caption='GNOME Software in Fedora 24']
+
+[image='fedora-software-2.jpg' caption='Searching and installing applications via GNOME Software in Fedora 24']
+
+
Also note that as of installing Fedora 24 you can now update to future releases directly within the Software app. Yes, the magic eight ball says Fedora updates might possibly be a bit less painful going forward. I'll let you know for sure when Fedora 25 rolls around.
+
Also new in Software is the ability to install device firmware, provided your device supports it.
+
Once Fedora 24 is up-to-date and the 4.6 kernel is installed, it's worth checking out the rest of the GNOME suite of apps. The GNOME development team has been hard at work putting together a suite of basic applications that will fit the 80 percent use case and take GNOME beyond just a desktop and window manager to be a full-featured, unified ecosystem.
+
Apps like GNOME Photos, GNOME Calendar, GNOME Videos, GNOME Software go along way to simplifying the first-time user experience. GNOME 3.20 sees some big updates for several of these apps, in particular Photos and Maps. Photos started life as a very basic viewer with minimal features. Basically you could browse your photos and upload them to any online accounts you had set up through GNOME. With 3.20, GNOME Photos gains its first image editing capabilities.
+
+
[image='fedora-photos.jpg' caption='GNOME Photos organizer looks a lot like Shotwell.']
+
+
[image='fedora-photos-edit.jpg' caption='Basic editing features in GNOME Photos.']
+
+
GNOME Photos can now crop, rotate and perform some basic color adjustments to your photos. There's a new "enhance" option (which will sharpen and denoise) and of course there's some Instagram-style filters.
+
One thing I really liked about Photos is that all edits are are non-destructive. The original photo is preserved and always available should you change your mind about your edits. Another nice feature is the option to resize photos before emailing. For the love of bandwidth, please use this feature.
+
GNOME Photos is still not quite as capable as Shotwell when it comes to editing, which is probably why Fedora sticks with Shotwell as the default image app in Fedora 24, but Photos is getting there. If you're looking for a fast, simple way to organize, share and make basic edits to your photos, GNOME Photos is worth a try. Shotwell is still definitely more powerful, but Photos is faster and has a simpler interface.
+
+
[image="fedora-maps.jpg" caption="Changes to the MapQuest TOS briefly eliminated maps from Maps, but that's since been fixed and everything is working again, including a new feature, contributing to OpenStreetMap from Maps."]
+
+
Another new GNOME app that's worth a look is GNOME Calendar. If all you want is a calendar, not a complete all-in-one monstrosity of email, notes, todos, calendars and kitchen sinks there really aren't any good Linux apps out there. The one solution most will point to is Thunderbird, but it's all but abandoned at this point. Evolution works, but it's serious overkill if all you need is a calendar. GNOME Calendar has been looking like a great solution since it was quietly released a few years ago, but it still only really supports calendars hosted on Google or ownCloud (presumably NextCloud as well). It didn't make this release, but the good news is that support for calendar files like .ics are coming in GNOME 3.22.
+
One thing that hasn't changed much in this release is the GNOME Shell environment, which has a couple new features but by and large looks and behaves just like the last couple of releases. This time around GNOME gains a new set of multimedia controls that live in the little applet that comes up when you click the clock in the menu bar.
+
Fedora opts for a very stock GNOME installation, with no customization at all that I could see, beyond the wallpaper. The result is a very usable --albeit somewhat RAM hungry -- desktop. But while GNOME is certainly no lightweight, Fedora 24 with GNOME 3.20 worked reasonably well on a Chromebook with only 4GB of RAM.
+
The standard set of GNOME apps has also been updated to the latest versions, including LibreOffice, which is now at version 5.1, Shotwell, which is at v.23 and Firefox 48.
+
Fedora 24 and Flatpaks
+
Fedora's repos remain as they always have been, generally complete, not on the scale of Debian, but 95% of what most users will want are there, with a few curious exceptions like VLC (which is in the EPEL repos) and Chromium (which is in the RPM Fusion repos) but neither are available in any of the repos that ship with a new release of Fedora.
+
However, the number of packages in a distro's repos might not matter much in the near future. Thanks to Flatpak and Snap packages, both of which enjoy preliminary support in Fedora 24, you're not limited to installing just the packages available via repos. Just what is a Flatpak app and how is it different from a good old RPM package?
+
The big difference is that Flatpak apps are self-contained packages that ship all their dependencies in a single container. This neatly solves dependency conflicts. With RPM (or Deb) apps if one app requires someusefullib-1.0 and another app needs someusefullib-2.0 you have a problem. With Flatpaks that will never come up because both versions of someusefullib can be installed in each app's respective sandbox container.
+
There is a potential way to eat up more disk space with this method. After all, what happens when two apps require the exact same dependency? Installing it twice would be wasteful, but linking the two would ruin the self-contained part of the process. Right now that is indeed a problem for both Flatpak and Ubuntu's Snap packages, which also work in Fedora 24. For example the Snap version of LibreOffice is nearly four times the size of the distro package. The same is true of Gimp. This is, as they say, a known issue. Unfortunately, from what I can tell the solution means bundling fewer dependencies (and relying on the underlying system to provide the non-bundled dependencies), which puts Flatpak/Snap app right back with RPM for Deb packages.
+
It's still early days for both technologies though and frankly the increased disk size is the least of Flatpak and Snap's problems. Getting either system installed and working is still disappointingly complex and involves adding gpg keys, which is pretty much the usability kiss of death. There is support for Flatpak in GNOME Software, which will solve much of the usability problem, but it was a bit buggy in my experience (in some cases Flatpak apps would not install). Still, assuming that the user experience is improved, which, granted, may be a huge assumption to make, containerized apps have much to recommend them -- it's sort of like enabling the AUR for every distro.
+
And that's a big part of the appeal -- Flatpaks put the actual app developers in control. There's no need to restrict your app to using older versions of dependencies that ship with a distro when you can just bundle the latest and greatest as part of your package. In that sense Flatpaks are most appealing for seldom updated distros like Debian, but have much less to offer rolling distros like Arch.
+
If you want to be cynical, Flatpak and Snaps are just the latest effort in a long line of attempts to create a cross-distro, write-once, run-anywhere system for Linux. Past efforts include systems like AppImage and of course the current hotness driving the development of Flatpaks -- Docker and friends. Docker (and similar efforts with smaller publicity departments) have changed the way apps are deployed on servers, but it's still unclear whether the same sort of system will succeed on the desktop. Which is to say that there turn out to be more challenges to overcome on the desktop. To pick one small example, Flatpak apps do not seem to take advantage of the new improved font rendering in Fedora 24, which leaves them looking out of place in the same way that a Qt app often looks out of place in a GTK-based desktop (or vice versa).
+
There are also some issues that come with the restricted sandboxing. Flatpak-based apps often have trouble passing data to other applications. The Flatpak version of LibreOffice would not open links in Firefox in my testing, presumably because it's not allowed to pass data to other apps.
+
As it stands I've been playing with Snap and Flatpaks, but I can't recommend them for anyone but the Linux enthusiast who wants to experiment. Setting them up is complicated and frankly the apps available aren't apps you really want. Most distros ship with the current stable version of apps like LibreOffice, Inkscape and Gimp anyway -- Fedora 24 does anyway -- and for now I suggest sticking with those versions.
+
The Kernel, Wayland and Fedora Polish
+
Fedora 24 will install with kernel 4.5 by default. The aforementioned 4.6 update is, however, available and is well worth updating. Several other important low level tools have been updated as well, including GCC, which moves to version 6 and glibc which will update to version 2.23.
+
In addition, the hinting was changed from ‘medium', the Fedora 23 default, to ‘slight'. A change that is consistent with the hinting on Ubuntu and other distributions and that is generally considered the best default choice.
+
Fedora 24 continues to improve support for the next-generation display server, Wayland. Wayland is still not the default for Fedora 24, but it worked well enough that I would not be surprised to see it the default option for Fedora 25. That said there are still some quirks (like the inability to reliably get screenshots working, which is a deal breaker for me).
+
Fedora has also put considerable effort into polishing up the UI with some new font rendering that looks very good. Almost as good as Ubuntu, which has long had the best fonts and default font rendering settings of any Linux distro I've tested. Much of the work on fonts in Fedora 24 comes from upstream GNOME developers, who've been improving Cantarell, the default GNOME font. Much of the work has been making sure that Cantarell works well on a variety of resolution and screen sizes. Since the improvements are mainly happening at the GNOME level, other distros should benefit from this work as well.
+
It has always been possible to get great font rendering on nearly any distro using tools like Infinality, which allow fine-grained control over hinting and smoothing, but with Fedora 24 I no longer feel the need to do anything additional to the fonts. They're quite nice out of the box, especially on a high resolution display.
+
It's worth noting that the font improvements should apply to any Qt apps as well thanks to the QGnomePlatform. Often, because KDE-specific apps use a different toolkit (Qt) than GNOME apps (GTK) they look very out of place in a GNOME environment. The QGnomePlatform is a new project designed to overcome that out-of-place look by synchronizing settings between GNOME and newer Qt tools. That means that in Fedora 24, when you change the font settings using something like GNOME Tweak Tool, the change will also apply to Qt-5 based applications. The plan is for QGnomePlatform to expand to include other settings as well, but for now it just applies to fonts, and it just applies to Qt-5 apps, apps using older versions of Qt will not be affected (it also does not seem to work with Flatpak or Snap packages).
+
Another nice touch in this release is that the DNF package manager is now considered complete. I've been very impressed with DNF, especially the little touches that move it beyond most package managers. For example, if you type a command that's not found DNF will step in, and, if the application is available in the repos, it will ask if you'd like to install it.
+
+
[image='fedora-dnf.jpg' caption='A sampling of dnf's various "command not found" handlers.']
+
+
It's a small thing, but as someone who sets up a lot of Linux machines it's incredibly helpful and saves not just a small step, but the frustration of needing to take that small step. It's also worth noting that Fedora's GNOME setup will do something similar when you search for an application that's not installed, directing you to the Software app to install that application.
+
Conclusion
+
Fedora 24 is one of the best Linux distro releases you're likely to see this year. And there's also two other releases that I did not have room to cover in depth here -- the Server and Cloud variants of Fedora 24, which pack in a ton of new features specific to those environments. The cloud platform especially continues to churn out the container-related features, with some new tools for OpenShift Origin, Fedora's Platform as a Service system built around Google's around Kubernetes project. Check out Fedora Magazine's release announcment for more on everything that's new in Server and Cloud.
+
As always Fedora WorkStation also comes in a variety of "Spins" which are pre-packaged setups for specific use cases. There's prepacked spins of all the major desktops, including Xfce, KDE, MATE, Cinnamon and LXDE (you can also get alternative desktops in one go by downloading the DVD installer). Spins aren't just for desktops though. For example there's an astronomy spin, a design suite spin, robotics-focused spin, a security spin and several more. None of these spins have anything you can't set up yourself, but if you don't want to put in the time and effort Fedora can handle that for you.
+
If Fedora has a downfall it's the release cycle: 8 months is not a long time.
+
Given the hiccups involved in this update, updating again in 8 or 9 months sounds daunting. There is the rolling version of Fedora, Rawhide, which is not quite as unstable as it once was (thanks to DNF's default --skip-broken setting), but it's still a rougher release than Fedora proper.
+
In the end, despite how much I enjoyed using Fedora 24 for a couple of months, it hasn't convinced me to give up Arch. That's not a totally fair comparison since much of what I like about Arch is that it's a rolling release, but I would be more inclined to embrace Fedora if it had either a long term support type of release that would last several years, or a rolling release that dealt out updates as they were ready. As it stands Fedora sits somewhere in the middle and ends up with an often awkward update process happening all too frequently. It's possible that the new tools in DNF (and GNOME Software) will make things easier on the update front, but for now that's far from certain.
+
Still, if you're okay with the frequency of Fedora updates and want a release-oriented distro I would not hesitate to recommend Fedora 24. Even with a couple of issues, it's leaps and bounds beyond anything else I've tested this year, including Ubuntu 16.04 and Mint 18 -- just make sure you take it for a test drive before you jump in with both feet.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora24.txt b/ars-technica/published/fedora24.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1b2170d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora24.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+Earlier this year the Fedora project released Fedora 24. Fedora 24 is very near the best Linux distro release I've used, certainly the best release I've tested this year. That said, it, like many Fedora releases before it, it got off to rocky start.
+
+Long time Fedora users are more than likely conservative when it comes to system upgrades. Historically, new Fedora releases tend to be rough around the edges. The wise Fedora user gives a new Fedora release a couple of months to let the kinks work out and the updates flow in. Giving a new Fedora release time before updating also means all the latest packages in RPM Fusion have been updated as well. Suffice to say that being the first to jump on a Fedora upgrade -- which come every eight or so months -- can be risky.
+
+Patience will, however, reward you with a really great Linux distro. And far more valuable than updated apps, waiting means you can skip catastrophic bugs like the one that completely broke Fedora 24 on Skylake systems after a kernel update. Fedora 24 shipped with Linux kernel 4.5 and managed to miss kernel 4.6 by about two weeks, which is a shame because no less than Linus Torvalds himself called kernel 4.6 "a fairly big release - more commits than we've had in a while." In other words, potentially something worth waiting a few weeks to ship.
+
+The Fedora project elected to not postpone their release though. To be fair, the whole "let's wait a bit" logic is a slippery slope, but in this case Fedora seems to have erred on the wrong side and updating to Fedora 24 has been fraught with problems for many users, particularly those with [Skylake chips](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1353103). And the problems go above and beyond the problems that already plague Linux on Skylake.
+
+It's been almost two months since Fedora 24 was released and at this point most of the bugs have been worked out. In fact I did most of my Fedora testing on the [Dell XPS 13](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/06/the-xps-13-de-dell-continues-to-build-a-reliable-linux-lineage/) I reviewed early for Ars and found Fedora 24 to be a far smoother experience than Ubuntu 16.04. That said, if you have a Skylake chip, proceed cautiously.
+
+## Fedora 24: A GNOME 3.20 Showcase
+
+Fedora 24 ships with a slew of desktop options, everything from the very lightweight LXDE to the flagship offering: GNOME 3.20. Because Fedora is closely tied to GNOME, I've done the majority of my testing on GNOME 3.20, which includes a host of new features, including a revamped Software app, images editing in Photos, and my personal favorite, GNOME Maps. There's also the beginning of what might eventually (finally) be a decent GUI Calendar app for Linux.
+
+[image="fedora-desktop.jpg" caption="The default GNOME 3.20 desktop in Fedora 24"]
+
+The first thing you'll want to do with a fresh install is grab the updates that have come since the installer was packaged, which means your first stop will be GNOME Software. The good news in GNOME 3.20 is that the Software app is a lot more stable than it used to be in Fedora (previous releases crashed constantly for me) and it now supports Flatpak apps. More on those in a minute. For now let's just say that Flatpaks are the least stable aspect of GNOME Software in 3.20. Still, if you enjoy graphical software installers, GNOME Software has one of the nicest interfaces you'll find among Linux desktops.
+
+[image="fedora-software.jpg" caption="GNOME Software in Fedora 24"]
+
+
+[image="fedora-software-2.jpg" caption="Searching and installing applications via GNOME Software in Fedora 24"]
+
+Also note that as of installing Fedora 24 you can now update to future releases directly within the Software app. Yes, the magic eight ball says Fedora updates might possibly be a bit less painful going forward. I'll let you know for sure when Fedora 25 rolls around.
+
+Also new in Software is the ability to install device firmware, provided your device supports it.
+
+Once Fedora 24 is up-to-date and the 4.6 kernel is installed, it's worth checking out the rest of the GNOME suite of apps. The GNOME development team has been hard at work putting together a suite of basic applications that will fit the 80 percent use case and take GNOME beyond just a desktop and window manager to be a full-featured, unified ecosystem.
+
+Apps like GNOME Photos, GNOME Calendar, GNOME Videos, GNOME Software go along way to simplifying the first-time user experience. GNOME 3.20 sees some big updates for several of these apps, in particular Photos and Maps. Photos started life as a very basic viewer with minimal features. Basically you could browse your photos and upload them to any online accounts you had set up through GNOME. With 3.20, GNOME Photos gains its first image editing capabilities.
+
+[image="fedora-photos.jpg" caption="GNOME Photos organizer looks a lot like Shotwell."]
+
+[image="fedora-photos-edit.jpg" caption="Basic editing features in GNOME Photos."]
+
+GNOME Photos can now crop, rotate and perform some basic color adjustments to your photos. There's a new "enhance" option (which will sharpen and denoise) and of course there's some Instagram-style filters.
+
+One thing I really liked about Photos is that all edits are are non-destructive. The original photo is preserved and always available should you change your mind about your edits. Another nice feature is the option to resize photos before emailing. For the love of bandwidth, please use this feature.
+
+GNOME Photos is still not quite as capable as Shotwell when it comes to editing, which is probably why Fedora sticks with Shotwell as the default image app in Fedora 24, but Photos is getting there. If you're looking for a fast, simple way to organize, share and make basic edits to your photos, GNOME Photos is worth a try. Shotwell is still definitely more powerful, but Photos is faster and has a simpler interface.
+
+[image="fedora-maps.jpg" caption="Changes to the MapQuest TOS briefly eliminated maps from Maps, but that's since been fixed and everything is working again, including a new feature, contributing to OpenStreetMap from Maps."]
+
+Another new GNOME app that's worth a look is GNOME Calendar. If all you want is a calendar, not a complete all-in-one monstrosity of email, notes, todos, calendars and kitchen sinks there really aren't any good Linux apps out there. The one solution most will point to is Thunderbird, but it's all but abandoned at this point. Evolution works, but it's serious overkill if all you need is a calendar. GNOME Calendar has been looking like a great solution since it was quietly released a few years ago, but it still only really supports calendars hosted on Google or ownCloud (presumably NextCloud as well). It didn't make this release, but the good news is that support for calendar files like .ics are coming in GNOME 3.22.
+
+One thing that hasn't changed much in this release is the GNOME Shell environment, which has a couple new features but by and large looks and behaves just like the last couple of releases. This time around GNOME gains a new set of multimedia controls that live in the little applet that comes up when you click the clock in the menu bar.
+
+Fedora opts for a very stock GNOME installation, with no customization at all that I could see, beyond the wallpaper. The result is a very usable --albeit somewhat RAM hungry -- desktop. But while GNOME is certainly no lightweight, Fedora 24 with GNOME 3.20 worked reasonably well on a Chromebook with only 4GB of RAM.
+
+The standard set of GNOME apps has also been updated to the latest versions, including LibreOffice, which is now at version 5.1, Shotwell, which is at v.23 and Firefox 48.
+
+## Fedora 24 and Flatpaks
+
+Fedora's repos remain as they always have been, generally complete, not on the scale of Debian, but 95% of what most users will want are there, with a few curious exceptions like VLC (which is in the [EPEL repos](https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL)) and Chromium (which is in the RPM Fusion repos) but neither are available in any of the repos that ship with a new release of Fedora.
+
+However, the number of packages in a distro's repos might not matter much in the near future. Thanks to Flatpak and Snap packages, both of which enjoy preliminary support in Fedora 24, you're not limited to installing just the packages available via repos. Just what is a Flatpak app and how is it different from a good old RPM package?
+
+The big difference is that Flatpak apps are self-contained packages that ship all their dependencies in a single container. This neatly solves dependency conflicts. With RPM (or Deb) apps if one app requires someusefullib-1.0 and another app needs someusefullib-2.0 you have a problem. With Flatpaks that will never come up because both versions of someusefullib can be installed in each app's respective sandbox container.
+
+There is a potential way to eat up more disk space with this method. After all, what happens when two apps require the exact same dependency? Installing it twice would be wasteful, but linking the two would ruin the self-contained part of the process. Right now that is indeed a problem for both Flatpak and Ubuntu's Snap packages, which also work in Fedora 24. For example the Snap version of LibreOffice is nearly four times the size of the distro package. The same is true of Gimp. This is, as they say, a known issue. Unfortunately, from what I can tell the solution means bundling fewer dependencies (and relying on the underlying system to provide the non-bundled dependencies), which puts Flatpak/Snap app right back with RPM for Deb packages.
+
+It's still early days for both technologies though and frankly the increased disk size is the least of Flatpak and Snap's problems. Getting either system installed and working is still disappointingly complex and involves adding gpg keys, which is pretty much the usability kiss of death. There is support for Flatpak in GNOME Software, which will solve much of the usability problem, but it was a bit buggy in my experience (in some cases Flatpak apps would not install). Still, assuming that the user experience is improved, which, granted, may be a huge assumption to make, containerized apps have much to recommend them -- it's sort of like enabling the AUR for every distro.
+
+And that's a big part of the appeal -- Flatpaks put the actual app developers in control. There's no need to restrict your app to using older versions of dependencies that ship with a distro when you can just bundle the latest and greatest as part of your package. In that sense Flatpaks are most appealing for seldom updated distros like Debian, but have much less to offer rolling distros like Arch.
+
+If you want to be cynical, Flatpak and Snaps are just the latest effort in a long line of attempts to create a cross-distro, write-once, run-anywhere system for Linux. Past efforts include systems like AppImage and of course the current hotness driving the development of Flatpaks -- Docker and friends. Docker (and similar efforts with smaller publicity departments) have changed the way apps are deployed on servers, but it's still unclear whether the same sort of system will succeed on the desktop. Which is to say that there turn out to be more challenges to overcome on the desktop. To pick one small example, Flatpak apps do not seem to take advantage of the new improved font rendering in Fedora 24, which leaves them looking out of place in the same way that a Qt app often looks out of place in a GTK-based desktop (or vice versa).
+
+There are also some issues that come with the restricted sandboxing. Flatpak-based apps often have trouble passing data to other applications. The Flatpak version of LibreOffice would not open links in Firefox in my testing, presumably because it's not allowed to pass data to other apps.
+
+As it stands I've been playing with Snap and Flatpaks, but I can't recommend them for anyone but the Linux enthusiast who wants to experiment. Setting them up is complicated and frankly the apps available aren't apps you really want. Most distros ship with the current stable version of apps like LibreOffice, Inkscape and Gimp anyway -- Fedora 24 does anyway -- and for now I suggest sticking with those versions.
+
+## The Kernel, Wayland and Fedora Polish
+
+Fedora 24 will install with kernel 4.5 by default. The aforementioned 4.6 update is, however, available and is well worth updating. Several other important low level tools have been updated as well, including GCC, which moves to version 6 and glibc which will update to version 2.23.
+
+In addition, the hinting was changed from ‘medium', the Fedora 23 default, to ‘slight'. A change that is consistent with the hinting on Ubuntu and other distributions and that is generally considered the best default choice.
+
+Fedora 24 continues to improve support for the next-generation display server, Wayland. Wayland is still not the default for Fedora 24, but it worked well enough that I would not be surprised to see it the default option for Fedora 25. That said there are still some quirks (like the inability to reliably get screenshots working, which is a deal breaker for me).
+
+Fedora has also put considerable effort into polishing up the UI with some new font rendering that looks very good. Almost as good as Ubuntu, which has long had the best fonts and default font rendering settings of any Linux distro I've tested. Much of the work on fonts in Fedora 24 comes from upstream GNOME developers, who've been improving Cantarell, the default GNOME font. Much of the work has been making sure that Cantarell works well on a variety of resolution and screen sizes. Since the improvements are mainly happening at the GNOME level, other distros should benefit from this work as well.
+
+It has always been possible to get great font rendering on nearly any distro using tools like [Infinality](http://infinality.net/), which allow fine-grained control over hinting and smoothing, but with Fedora 24 I no longer feel the need to do anything additional to the fonts. They're quite nice out of the box, especially on a high resolution display.
+
+It's worth noting that the font improvements should apply to any Qt apps as well thanks to the QGnomePlatform. Often, because KDE-specific apps use a different toolkit (Qt) than GNOME apps (GTK) they look very out of place in a GNOME environment. The QGnomePlatform is a new project designed to overcome that out-of-place look by synchronizing settings between GNOME and newer Qt tools. That means that in Fedora 24, when you change the font settings using something like GNOME Tweak Tool, the change will also apply to Qt-5 based applications. The plan is for QGnomePlatform to expand to include other settings as well, but for now it just applies to fonts, and it just applies to Qt-5 apps, apps using older versions of Qt will not be affected (it also does not seem to work with Flatpak or Snap packages).
+
+Another nice touch in this release is that the DNF package manager is now considered complete. I've been very impressed with DNF, especially the little touches that move it beyond most package managers. For example, if you type a command that's not found DNF will step in, and, if the application is available in the repos, it will ask if you'd like to install it.
+
+[image="fedora-dnf.jpg" caption="A sampling of dnf's various 'command not found' handlers."]
+
+It's a small thing, but as someone who sets up a lot of Linux machines it's incredibly helpful and saves not just a small step, but the frustration of needing to take that small step. It's also worth noting that Fedora's GNOME setup will do something similar when you search for an application that's not installed, directing you to the Software app to install that application.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+Fedora 24 is one of the best Linux distro releases you're likely to see this year. And there's also two other releases that I did not have room to cover in depth here -- the Server and Cloud variants of Fedora 24, which pack in a ton of new features specific to those environments. The cloud platform especially continues to churn out the container-related features, with some new tools for OpenShift Origin, Fedora's Platform as a Service system built around Google's around Kubernetes project. Check out Fedora Magazine's [release announcment](https://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-24-released/) for more on everything that's new in Server and Cloud.
+
+As always Fedora WorkStation also comes in a variety of "Spins" which are pre-packaged setups for specific use cases. There's prepacked [spins of all the major desktops](https://spins.fedoraproject.org/), including Xfce, KDE, MATE, Cinnamon and LXDE (you can also get alternative desktops in one go by downloading the DVD installer). Spins aren't just for desktops though. For example there's an astronomy spin, a design suite spin, robotics-focused spin, a security spin and [several more](https://labs.fedoraproject.org/). None of these spins have anything you can't set up yourself, but if you don't want to put in the time and effort Fedora can handle that for you.
+
+If Fedora has a downfall it's the release cycle: 8 months is not a long time.
+
+Given the hiccups involved in this update, updating again in 8 or 9 months sounds daunting. There is the rolling version of Fedora, Rawhide, which is not quite as unstable as it once was (thanks to DNF's default `--skip-broken` setting), but it's still a rougher release than Fedora proper.
+
+In the end, despite how much I enjoyed using Fedora 24 for a couple of months, it hasn't convinced me to give up Arch. That's not a totally fair comparison since much of what I like about Arch is that it's a rolling release, but I would be more inclined to embrace Fedora if it had either a long term support type of release that would last several years, or a rolling release that dealt out updates as they were ready. As it stands Fedora sits somewhere in the middle and ends up with an often awkward update process happening all too frequently. It's possible that the new tools in DNF (and GNOME Software) will make things easier on the update front, but for now that's far from certain.
+
+Still, if you're okay with the frequency of Fedora updates and want a release-oriented distro I would not hesitate to recommend Fedora 24. Even with a couple of issues, it's leaps and bounds beyond anything else I've tested this year, including Ubuntu 16.04 and Mint 18 -- just make sure you take it for a test drive before you jump in with both feet.
+
+
+
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora25.txt b/ars-technica/published/fedora25.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a2353c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora25.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+The Fedora project has released Fedora 25, a major update for the Linux distribution.
+
+For the past several releases Fedora has been pursuing what it calls Fedora Next. Essentially Fedora Next took a step back and looked at how Fedora is used and came up with editions specifically tailored to those use cases. The most notable of these are Fedora WorkStation and Fedora Server, which are the desktop/laptop and server versions respectively.
+
+Previous Fedora releases also had a "cloud" edition, but that's now been replaced by Fedora Atomic. Fedora Cloud, aside from having a meaningless name, didn't quite pan out. Since "cloud" is just a word for "someone else's server", it doesn't make much sense to release a "cloud" distro.
+
+What does make sense is to package up a version of Fedora specifically tailored for running container-based systems that uses a stable base system and the latest and greatest package. Using it is a bit like checking Fedora out from a Git repo. More on that in a minute.
+
+Interesting as Fedora Atomic is, much of the headlining news in Fedora 25 is in the WorkStation edition and can be summed up in a single word: Wayland.
+
+Yes, after being pushed back from release after release, Fedora 25 defaults to using Wayland (assuming you have a supported graphics card). This is perhaps the biggest change to come in the Linux world since the move to systemd, but unlike systemd the switch to Wayland was so seamless I had to logout and double check that I was in fact using Wayland.
+
+I called Fedora 24, released earlier this year, "the year’s best Linux distro" but one that I would have a hard time recommending thanks to some ugly kernel-related bugs. Well, Fedora 25 is here with an updated kernel, the bugs appear to be gone and I have no problem recommending it. Not only is Fedora 25 a great release, the updated GNOME 3.22 running on top of Wayland is slick and very stable in my testing.
+
+## Wayland, New Kernel, and Updates
+
+The biggest change in this release is undoubtedly the move to Wayland as the default, erm, protocol, replacing the venerable X Server. Wayland's goal is to be easier to develop and maintain and, to a lesser degree, to get rid of the X's confusing clutter of accumulated bits that have been bolted on over the years.
+
+Wayland is not, strictly speaking, a display server like X. Wayland is a protocol for a compositor to talk through. To make things more confusing the compositor can be a Wayland client itself. It could also be an X application, some input device or a standalone display server. Wayland doesn't actually do much and that's by design. As the Wayland FAQ puts it, "the compositor sends input events to the clients. The clients render locally and then communicate video memory buffers and information about updates to those buffers back to the compositor."
+
+[image="fedora25-desktop.jpg" caption="The stock Fedora 25 desktop with GNOME 3.22"]
+
+What's perhaps most remarkable for a change that's so low-level, and in fact one that's taking a lot of X functionality and moving lower down into the stack, is how unlikely you are to notice it. In my experience so far -- about two weeks of use as I write this -- the transition to Wayland has been totally transparent. Even better, GNOME 3.22 feels considerably smoother with Wayland. It's difficult to describe without seeing it, but little moments of tearing that used to happen under X are gone and common tasks like dragging windows are much smoother.
+
+To be clear there are still plenty of things that don't work with Wayland. In fact there likely will always be legacy system elements that don't know what to make of Wayland and will never be updated. For that situation there's XWayland, which is a plugin for Wayland compositors that runs a real X server inside Wayland. XWayland is a big part of why you're unlikely to notice the move to Wayland.
+
+There are also some things to bear in mind about using Wayland with GNOME, more than a few GNOME hacks won't work anymore. For example desktop icons, which aren't really a GNOME 3.x thing, though you could use Gnome Tweak Tools if you can get them, are not supported in Wayland and never will be. I've also been unable to find a clipboard manager that works properly under Wayland.
+
+The other problem I've run into is that neither of the tint-shifting applications I use work with Wayland. Neither f.lux nor redshift do anything when running under Wayland. Judging by posts from around the web, video playback is sometimes an issue too, though I have not actually experienced this problem. In terms of hardware support and Wayland, I would definitely suggest sticking with kernel 4.8.x or newer, which is exactly what Fedora 25 ships with.
+
+The other major gripe I have with Wayland is that it doesn't appear to support fractional scaling for HiDPI screens. It works great at 2X, which covers most screens, but there are those where 1X is too small, but 2X is too much. If you have a screen that works best at 1.5X, you might want to stick with X for now.
+
+Those are, however, relatively minor issues. The biggest caveat to all the good news in Wayland is that Nvidia's proprietary driver does not support Wayland. The open source Nouveau drivers do, but those drivers can be a noticeable step down depending on your system and what you're trying to do. In my experience the Nouveau drivers are also a little buggy, though to be clear I haven't tested them with Wayland.
+
+Along with Wayland Fedora 25 brings Linux kernel 4.8.6, which means any lingering [Skylake bugs](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1353103) should be fixed. I tested Fedora 25 on the [Dell XPS 13](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/06/the-xps-13-de-dell-continues-to-build-a-reliable-linux-lineage/) I reviewed earlier for Ars and found Fedora 25 worked flawlessly.
+
+I should also note that for the first time I was able to update from Fedora 24 to 25 using the GNOME Software system upgrade tool without any issues at all. That's a first for me in over ten years of using Fedora (to be fair most of that time I didn't even try because it was flat out hopeless) and goes a long way to making Fedora a distro that's friendly to less sophisticated users.
+
+In the past updating Fedora meant you'd need a few days to troubleshoot all the things that broke. It was a pain point that the project has been aware of and working on for some time. The nicely named FedUp tool arrived around Fedora 23, which helped some. Then the dnf upgrade tools came along in Fedora 24 and now there's a completely graphical upgrade path via GNOME software and perhaps most surprising, it just works.
+
+The only caveat I would add is that, like I imagine many Linux users do, I maintain an install of Fedora primarily to get a rough idea of what's coming in future CentOS releases. Which is to say that while Fedora gets a partition on my drive, I have not heavily customized it and don't have a ton of RPM Fusion repos installed, which could make for more problematic updates. Still, judging by comments sections, forums and posts around the web, my experience is not uncommon for the move from Fedora 24 to Fedora 25. That's not to say you're guaranteed a smooth upgrade though. The real problem for most people seems to be with conflicting dependencies, often related to packages installed via RPM Fusion or other less-than-official repositories.
+
+My long standing criticism of Fedora is that major updates come too frequently for how terrible the updating process has been historically. Now that that seems to be changing and updates are smooth (and even have a nice GUI via GNOME Software) Fedora could start to find a wider audience.
+
+## The Little Things
+
+Fedora 25 has plenty of other little changes beyond the move to Wayland by default. For example, shocking as it sounds, Fedora 25 ships with MP3 support straight out of the box. Look for a lot of distros to start doing this since in the United States the patents covering the MP3 codecs expired earlier this year.There's no encoding support yet, which could be related to fact that two of the patents are still valid until April of next year, but it's a start.
+
+In a bid to make Fedora a bit easier for newcomers to try out, Fedora 25 ships with a revamped Fedora Media Writer in the repos (curiously, it's not installed by default). Media Writer gives you a nice GUI to grab the latest Fedora release (or any of the official spins) and write it to a USB stick. It's a step up from the more simplistic tools in previous versions. I actually tried to use Media Writer back in Fedora 24 and it wrote to the wrong USB stick. Fortunately I didn't have anything of value on that stick and to this day I'm not 100% sure it was Media Writer's fault and not user error, but in either case I was leery of testing it again. This time, to be extra safe I made sure that my thumb drive was the only drive plugged in and it worked as advertised, grabbing the MATE spin and burning it to disk with a mere two clicks.
+
+[image="fedora25-live-writer.jpg" caption="Fedora's Media Writer is a very slick and easy way to get a bootable USB stick with Fedora (or any other distro) in couple of clicks."]
+
+Fedora used to position itself as the distro for developers. This meant in part that Fedora was looking for users who would contribute back to the community, but it also meant that Fedora shipped the latest stable version of most programming languages and was quick to adopt new ones. This release follows in that tradition; developers can look forward to a version bump for PHP (to version 7.0), Node JS to 6.5, Ruby on Rails 5.0, and new support for the Rust language with a Rust Compiler (Cargo) installed by default.
+
+## GNOME 3.22
+
+GNOME 3.22 arrived a bit ahead of Fedora 25, but Fedora remains the single best showcase for the GNOME desktop and, with Wayland under the hood, this is doubly true for Fedora 25. You'd be hard pressed to find a slicker, more polished looking desktop than GNOME 3.22 running on Wayland in Fedora 25.
+
+GNOME 3.20 made Wayland perfectly usable, though the GNOME team reports that 3.22 is "even more polished", with support for display rotation and Wacom tablets, among other things.
+
+Perhaps the best news for GNOME fans in this release is that GNOME 3.22 has reached a new development stability plateau. This means, for example, that GNOME shell's extension API is now considered stable, which in turn means that any shell extension you rely on will continue to work as-is when you update. Yes it's come to this: GNOME 3.22's headlining feature is that the tools you rely on to turn GNOME into a workable desktop no longer break with every new release.
+
+It's not entirely fair to make fun of GNOME 3's previous ever-shifting updates, it has been a perfectly usable desktop for several year's worth of releases now. Perhaps not a good choice for those who like to configure and tweak every setting, but workable nonetheless.
+
+[image="fedora25-software.jpg" caption="GNOME's Software app has seen a slight redesign and now offers a little more info about Flatpak apps. Still odd that it wastes a featured app spotlight on a web browser that's installed by default anyway."]
+
+This release also brings improved support for Flatpak apps in GNOME Software. Flatpak apps are designed to improve the software installation process in GNOME and Linux in general by making it easier for developers to package, and users to install, software across distributions. With Flatpaks you don't need to worry about dependency conflicts or even if your distro of choice has the app you want. Flatpaks also offer improved security and stability by sandboxing applications.
+
+With GNOME 3.22 you can add Flatpak repos, and then browse and install apps from those repos without ever needing to drop into the command line. The Software app also now shows a bit more information about Flatpak apps -- like source information and the sandboxing status.
+
+GNOME's Nautilus File Manager, nee Files, also gets some attention in this release, including a new tool for bulk renaming files. Just select the files you'd like to rename and then you can apply bulk renaming features, like adding a prefix, suffix or even using a completely custom template.
+
+[image="fedora25-files-rename.jpg" caption="The new file renaming dialog in GNOME 3.22 Files app (right click a selection or press F2)."]
+
+There's also a new integrated file compression utility that means you can now double click a .zip file and it just extracts the contents to a folder without opening File Roller. That should make working with compressed files much more familiar for mac and windows users making the switch to GNOME.
+
+[image="fedora25-files-compress.jpg" caption="Creating archives via the new compress feature in Files. Just right-click your selected files and chose 'compress'."]
+
+Also worth mentioning, GNOME Maps has been fixed and now uses Mapbox map tiles.
+
+## Fedora Spins
+
+While GNOME has long been Fedora's flagship desktop (and Fedora serves as GNOME's showcase distro), it's far from the only option. The Fedora installer offers up all the usual suspects like KDE, XFCE, Cinnamon, and more. There are also tailored spins for most of the major desktops.
+
+The notable Spin for Fedora 25 is the MATE Compiz Spin, which bundles MATE Desktop with Compiz Fusion, and brings a lot more GTK+ 3 to MATE in this release. That makes for an overall more polished MATE and means that if you've ever had problems getting MATE to look good on HiDPI screens, you might want to try again because MATE 1.16 works quite well.
+
+Other spins like KDE, XFCE and Cinnamon have significant upgrades with Fedora 25. The Fedora Spins site has [full details](https://spins.fedoraproject.org/) and release notes for each.
+
+
+## Fedora Next Next
+
+Not to be confused with Spins, Fedora Next, Fedora's reorganization that began several releases ago, consists of three "editions". As mentioned above, Fedora has rearranged the components of Fedora Next. Fedora Cloud has taken a backseat in the Fedora Next roster; Fedora Atomic edition is the replacement. The Cloud Base image continues to be available for those who'd like to build on a more traditional rpm-based foundation, but the future is looking like Atomic.
+
+Unless you've been living under a rock you know the new hotness in Linux server deployment is containers, and containerization is the whole point of Atomic.
+
+Fedora Atomic takes the Fedora 25 base and functions a bit like Git -- you check out a particular point and that's your OS. Updates come every two weeks, which makes it sort of a rolling distro with snapshots (major releases come every six months). Fedora also notes that Atomic can be run as a desktop if you'd like something lightweight and highly reconfigurable, or presumably, if your love of containers runs that deep.
+
+To go along with Fedora Atomic's move into the limelight, the Fedora Project has been hard at work on the other end of the container equation with expanded Docker support and a very cool looking tool that simplifies the process of building out images from the base using RPM-like tools. So the workflow becomes Fedora Atomic for your base, checked out identically across all your machines and then the expanded docker support gets your containerized apps installed and running.
+
+The other major edition in the Fedora Next triumvirate, Fedora Server, does not have a ton of new stuff in this release -- for that you'll have to wait for Fedora 26, which will be an experimental release that ships with a lot more apps already in containers.
+
+There is one thing worth mentioning here though, namely the new SELinux management tool that's part of the updated Fedora Cockpit suite of server management tools. The SELinux Troubleshooter module is, frankly, the first thing I've ever used that didn't leaving me bashing my head into my keyboard after five minutes of working with SELinux. The standout feature is simple, when SELinux encounters a denial, Cockpit lets you know.
+
+The SELinux Troubleshooter does take a lot of sysadmin voodoo out of SELinux though, even I can sort of figure it out now. If your job depends on the befuddlement mere mortals get when trying to use SELinux, don't update Cockpit to Fedora 25.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+Fedora 24 was very close to my favorite distro of the year and with Fedora 25 I think it's safe to say that the Fedora Project has finally nailed it. I still run a very minimal Arch install (with Openbox) on my main machine, but everywhere else -- family and friends who want to upgrade, clients looking for a stable system and so on -- I've been recommending Fedora 25.
+
+That said, Wayland is new and there are bugs out there in addition to the less-than-complete application support mentioned here. Just because I haven't run into any show stopping bugs in my month or so of testing, doesn't mean they aren't there so do proceed with caution. I strongly recommend researching your specific hardware to see what other people have experienced.
+
+The only remaining problem I have with Fedora is the release cycle, however, with the upgrade situation much better than it used to be, hopefully upgrading won't be the pain it once was in Fedora land.
+
+In general though, I have no qualms recommending both Fedora and Wayland, provided you have the hardware that works with the latter.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/fedora25review.html b/ars-technica/published/fedora25review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c8926f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/fedora25review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+
The Fedora project has released Fedora 25, a major update for the Linux distribution.
+
For the past several releases Fedora has been pursuing what it calls Fedora Next. Essentially Fedora Next took a step back and looked at how Fedora is used and came up with editions specifically tailored to those use cases. The most notable of these are Fedora WorkStation and Fedora Server, which are the desktop/laptop and server versions respectively.
+
Previous Fedora releases also had a "cloud" edition, but that's now been replaced by Fedora Atomic. Fedora Cloud, aside from having a meaningless name, didn't quite pan out. Since "cloud" is just a word for "someone else's server", it doesn't make much sense to release a "cloud" distro.
+
What does make sense is to package up a version of Fedora specifically tailored for running container-based systems that uses a stable base system and the latest and greatest package. Using it is a bit like checking Fedora out from a Git repo. More on that in a minute.
+
Interesting as Fedora Atomic is, much of the headlining news in Fedora 25 is in the WorkStation edition and can be summed up in a single word: Wayland.
+
Yes, after being pushed back from release after release, Fedora 25 defaults to using Wayland (assuming you have a supported graphics card). This is perhaps the biggest change to come in the Linux world since the move to systemd, but unlike systemd the switch to Wayland was so seamless I had to logout and double check that I was in fact using Wayland.
+
I called Fedora 24, released earlier this year, "the year’s best Linux distro" but one that I would have a hard time recommending thanks to some ugly kernel-related bugs. Well, Fedora 25 is here with an updated kernel, the bugs appear to be gone and I have no problem recommending it. Not only is Fedora 25 a great release, the updated GNOME 3.22 running on top of Wayland is slick and very stable in my testing.
+
Wayland, New Kernel, and Updates
+
The biggest change in this release is undoubtedly the move to Wayland as the default, erm, protocol, replacing the venerable X Server. Wayland's goal is to be easier to develop and maintain and, to a lesser degree, to get rid of the X's confusing clutter of accumulated bits that have been bolted on over the years.
+
Wayland is not, strictly speaking, a display server like X. Wayland is a protocol for a compositor to talk through. To make things more confusing the compositor can be a Wayland client itself. It could also be an X application, some input device or a standalone display server. Wayland doesn't actually do much and that's by design. As the Wayland FAQ puts it, "the compositor sends input events to the clients. The clients render locally and then communicate video memory buffers and information about updates to those buffers back to the compositor."
What's perhaps most remarkable for a change that's so low-level, and in fact one that's taking a lot of X functionality and moving lower down into the stack, is how unlikely you are to notice it. In my experience so far -- about two weeks of use as I write this -- the transition to Wayland has been totally transparent. Even better, GNOME 3.22 feels considerably smoother with Wayland. It's difficult to describe without seeing it, but little moments of tearing that used to happen under X are gone and common tasks like dragging windows are much smoother.
+
To be clear there are still plenty of things that don't work with Wayland. In fact there likely will always be legacy system elements that don't know what to make of Wayland and will never be updated. For that situation there's XWayland, which is a plugin for Wayland compositors that runs a real X server inside Wayland. XWayland is a big part of why you're unlikely to notice the move to Wayland.
+
There are also some things to bear in mind about using Wayland with GNOME, more than a few GNOME hacks won't work anymore. For example desktop icons, which aren't really a GNOME 3.x thing, though you could use Gnome Tweak Tools if you can get them, are not supported in Wayland and never will be. I've also been unable to find a clipboard manager that works properly under Wayland.
+
The other problem I've run into is that neither of the tint-shifting applications I use work with Wayland. Neither f.lux nor redshift do anything when running under Wayland. Judging by posts from around the web, video playback is sometimes an issue too, though I have not actually experienced this problem. In terms of hardware support and Wayland, I would definitely suggest sticking with kernel 4.8.x or newer, which is exactly what Fedora 25 ships with.
+
The other major gripe I have with Wayland is that it doesn't appear to support fractional scaling for HiDPI screens. It works great at 2X, which covers most screens, but there are those where 1X is too small, but 2X is too much. If you have a screen that works best at 1.5X, you might want to stick with X for now.
+
Those are, however, relatively minor issues. The biggest caveat to all the good news in Wayland is that Nvidia's proprietary driver does not support Wayland. The open source Nouveau drivers do, but those drivers can be a noticeable step down depending on your system and what you're trying to do. In my experience the Nouveau drivers are also a little buggy, though to be clear I haven't tested them with Wayland.
+
Along with Wayland Fedora 25 brings Linux kernel 4.8.6, which means any lingering Skylake bugs should be fixed. I tested Fedora 25 on the Dell XPS 13 I reviewed earlier for Ars and found Fedora 25 worked flawlessly.
+
I should also note that for the first time I was able to update from Fedora 24 to 25 using the GNOME Software system upgrade tool without any issues at all. That's a first for me in over ten years of using Fedora (to be fair most of that time I didn't even try because it was flat out hopeless) and goes a long way to making Fedora a distro that's friendly to less sophisticated users.
+
In the past updating Fedora meant you'd need a few days to troubleshoot all the things that broke. It was a pain point that the project has been aware of and working on for some time. The nicely named FedUp tool arrived around Fedora 23, which helped some. Then the dnf upgrade tools came along in Fedora 24 and now there's a completely graphical upgrade path via GNOME software and perhaps most surprising, it just works.
+
The only caveat I would add is that, like I imagine many Linux users do, I maintain an install of Fedora primarily to get a rough idea of what's coming in future CentOS releases. Which is to say that while Fedora gets a partition on my drive, I have not heavily customized it and don't have a ton of RPM Fusion repos installed, which could make for more problematic updates. Still, judging by comments sections, forums and posts around the web, my experience is not uncommon for the move from Fedora 24 to Fedora 25. That's not to say you're guaranteed a smooth upgrade though. The real problem for most people seems to be with conflicting dependencies, often related to packages installed via RPM Fusion or other less-than-official repositories.
+
My long standing criticism of Fedora is that major updates come too frequently for how terrible the updating process has been historically. Now that that seems to be changing and updates are smooth (and even have a nice GUI via GNOME Software) Fedora could start to find a wider audience.
+
The Little Things
+
Fedora 25 has plenty of other little changes beyond the move to Wayland by default. For example, shocking as it sounds, Fedora 25 ships with MP3 support straight out of the box. Look for a lot of distros to start doing this since in the United States the patents covering the MP3 codecs expired earlier this year.There's no encoding support yet, which could be related to fact that two of the patents are still valid until April of next year, but it's a start.
+
In a bid to make Fedora a bit easier for newcomers to try out, Fedora 25 ships with a revamped Fedora Media Writer in the repos (curiously, it's not installed by default). Media Writer gives you a nice GUI to grab the latest Fedora release (or any of the official spins) and write it to a USB stick. It's a step up from the more simplistic tools in previous versions. I actually tried to use Media Writer back in Fedora 24 and it wrote to the wrong USB stick. Fortunately I didn't have anything of value on that stick and to this day I'm not 100% sure it was Media Writer's fault and not user error, but in either case I was leery of testing it again. This time, to be extra safe I made sure that my thumb drive was the only drive plugged in and it worked as advertised, grabbing the MATE spin and burning it to disk with a mere two clicks.
+
+[image"fedora25-live-writer.jpg" caption"Fedora's Media Writer is a very slick and easy way to get a bootable USB stick with Fedora (or any other distro) in couple of clicks."]
+
+
Fedora used to position itself as the distro for developers. This meant in part that Fedora was looking for users who would contribute back to the community, but it also meant that Fedora shipped the latest stable version of most programming languages and was quick to adopt new ones. This release follows in that tradition; developers can look forward to a version bump for PHP (to version 7.0), Node JS to 6.5, Ruby on Rails 5.0, and new support for the Rust language with a Rust Compiler (Cargo) installed by default.
+
GNOME 3.22
+
GNOME 3.22 arrived a bit ahead of Fedora 25, but Fedora remains the single best showcase for the GNOME desktop and, with Wayland under the hood, this is doubly true for Fedora 25. You'd be hard pressed to find a slicker, more polished looking desktop than GNOME 3.22 running on Wayland in Fedora 25.
+
GNOME 3.20 made Wayland perfectly usable, though the GNOME team reports that 3.22 is "even more polished", with support for display rotation and Wacom tablets, among other things.
+
Perhaps the best news for GNOME fans in this release is that GNOME 3.22 has reached a new development stability plateau. This means, for example, that GNOME shell's extension API is now considered stable, which in turn means that any shell extension you rely on will continue to work as-is when you update. Yes it's come to this: GNOME 3.22's headlining feature is that the tools you rely on to turn GNOME into a workable desktop no longer break with every new release.
+
It's not entirely fair to make fun of GNOME 3's previous ever-shifting updates, it has been a perfectly usable desktop for several year's worth of releases now. Perhaps not a good choice for those who like to configure and tweak every setting, but workable nonetheless.
+
+[image"fedora25-software.jpg" caption"GNOME's Software app has seen a slight redesign and now offers a little more info about Flatpak apps. Still odd that it wastes a featured app spotlight on a web browser that's installed by default anyway."]
+
+
This release also brings improved support for Flatpak apps in GNOME Software. Flatpak apps are designed to improve the software installation process in GNOME and Linux in general by making it easier for developers to package, and users to install, software across distributions. With Flatpaks you don't need to worry about dependency conflicts or even if your distro of choice has the app you want. Flatpaks also offer improved security and stability by sandboxing applications.
+
With GNOME 3.22 you can add Flatpak repos, and then browse and install apps from those repos without ever needing to drop into the command line. The Software app also now shows a bit more information about Flatpak apps -- like source information and the sandboxing status.
+
GNOME's Nautilus File Manager, nee Files, also gets some attention in this release, including a new tool for bulk renaming files. Just select the files you'd like to rename and then you can apply bulk renaming features, like adding a prefix, suffix or even using a completely custom template.
+
+[image"fedora25-files-rename.jpg" caption"The new file renaming dialog in GNOME 3.22 Files app (right click a selection or press F2)."]
+
+
There's also a new integrated file compression utility that means you can now double click a .zip file and it just extracts the contents to a folder without opening File Roller. That should make working with compressed files much more familiar for mac and windows users making the switch to GNOME.
+
+[image"fedora25-files-compress.jpg" caption"Creating archives via the new compress feature in Files. Just right-click your selected files and chose 'compress'."]
+
+
Also worth mentioning, GNOME Maps has been fixed and now uses Mapbox map tiles.
+
Fedora Spins
+
While GNOME has long been Fedora's flagship desktop (and Fedora serves as GNOME's showcase distro), it's far from the only option. The Fedora installer offers up all the usual suspects like KDE, XFCE, Cinnamon, and more. There are also tailored spins for most of the major desktops.
+
The notable Spin for Fedora 25 is the MATE Compiz Spin, which bundles MATE Desktop with Compiz Fusion, and brings a lot more GTK+ 3 to MATE in this release. That makes for an overall more polished MATE and means that if you've ever had problems getting MATE to look good on HiDPI screens, you might want to try again because MATE 1.16 works quite well.
+
Other spins like KDE, XFCE and Cinnamon have significant upgrades with Fedora 25. The Fedora Spins site has full details and release notes for each.
+
Fedora Next Next
+
Not to be confused with Spins, Fedora Next, Fedora's reorganization that began several releases ago, consists of three "editions". As mentioned above, Fedora has rearranged the components of Fedora Next. Fedora Cloud has taken a backseat in the Fedora Next roster; Fedora Atomic edition is the replacement. The Cloud Base image continues to be available for those who'd like to build on a more traditional rpm-based foundation, but the future is looking like Atomic.
+
Unless you've been living under a rock you know the new hotness in Linux server deployment is containers, and containerization is the whole point of Atomic.
+
Fedora Atomic takes the Fedora 25 base and functions a bit like Git -- you check out a particular point and that's your OS. Updates come every two weeks, which makes it sort of a rolling distro with snapshots (major releases come every six months). Fedora also notes that Atomic can be run as a desktop if you'd like something lightweight and highly reconfigurable, or presumably, if your love of containers runs that deep.
+
To go along with Fedora Atomic's move into the limelight, the Fedora Project has been hard at work on the other end of the container equation with expanded Docker support and a very cool looking tool that simplifies the process of building out images from the base using RPM-like tools. So the workflow becomes Fedora Atomic for your base, checked out identically across all your machines and then the expanded docker support gets your containerized apps installed and running.
+
The other major edition in the Fedora Next triumvirate, Fedora Server, does not have a ton of new stuff in this release -- for that you'll have to wait for Fedora 26, which will be an experimental release that ships with a lot more apps already in containers.
+
There is one thing worth mentioning here though, namely the new SELinux management tool that's part of the updated Fedora Cockpit suite of server management tools. The SELinux Troubleshooter module is, frankly, the first thing I've ever used that didn't leaving me bashing my head into my keyboard after five minutes of working with SELinux. The standout feature is simple, when SELinux encounters a denial, Cockpit lets you know.
+
The SELinux Troubleshooter does take a lot of sysadmin voodoo out of SELinux though, even I can sort of figure it out now. If your job depends on the befuddlement mere mortals get when trying to use SELinux, don't update Cockpit to Fedora 25.
+
Conclusion
+
Fedora 24 was very close to my favorite distro of the year and with Fedora 25 I think it's safe to say that the Fedora Project has finally nailed it. I still run a very minimal Arch install (with Openbox) on my main machine, but everywhere else -- family and friends who want to upgrade, clients looking for a stable system and so on -- I've been recommending Fedora 25.
+
That said, Wayland is new and there are bugs out there in addition to the less-than-complete application support mentioned here. Just because I haven't run into any show stopping bugs in my month or so of testing, doesn't mean they aren't there so do proceed with caution. I strongly recommend researching your specific hardware to see what other people have experienced.
+
The only remaining problem I have with Fedora is the release cycle, however, with the upgrade situation much better than it used to be, hopefully upgrading won't be the pain it once was in Fedora land.
+
In general though, I have no qualms recommending both Fedora and Wayland, provided you have the hardware that works with the latter.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/free-software-notes.txt b/ars-technica/published/free-software-notes.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1f17928
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/free-software-notes.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+
+
+Creative commons gets a lot of recognition, but when you say "creative commons" what do you mean? There's so many different licenses it's hard to know. Whereas with open source you know you have the right to copy, the right to etc
+
+
+
+I help VCs with open source, most companies have a mixed model. AMA recommendations system, for a time A was the only company that had that recommendation system and so they couldn't open source it, but no everyone has that so you might as well open source it, then you get community based improvements.
+
+The GPL if creating a hook, but there's no requirement to support open source.
+
+The GPL is there to protect that. There are economic reasons that choose the licesnce. BSD is a good licence for creating a standard, works with propreitary software, easy to compile. GPL
+Busybox, embedded companies added it to their products, they added 100 commands. They were each other's biggest competitor, but they could work together on busybox. Users tend to become development partners.
+
+There was, before open source, a reasonably large history of educational use only software, distributed.
+
+The central myths of American business revolve around hard-nosed businessmen chasing better bottom lines and extolling the virtues of selfishness. Free software belies these myths, or at least operates outside them to a considerable degree. The largest single contributors to projects across GitHub are Perens' assessment of the economic paradigm of open source
+
+I couldn't help but be struck by the parallels to ecology. Open source as a whole has often been called an ecosystem, but it seems that, as with nature, there are ecosystems within ecosystems. Considering an open source project as an ecosystem means thinking in terms of generosity.
+
+
+It may be that free software is more of an ecosystem.
+
+
+
+
+A good example of exactly that is what might be the original open source success story -- the Apache web server.
+Instead Beanbooks the software suffered a fate that may well await Redis and MondoDB -- neglect and obscurity.
+
+
+## What does work
+
+The Apache web server grew out of the Apache Group, which later became the Apache Foundation we know today. The Group came before the software. At the time (1994-5) working on open source software was something of a novelty. The founders of the Apache Group knew that to wrangle code contributions from volunteers spread across the globe without an organizational ties would be difficult. This was the first problem they [set out to solve](http://mockus.us/papers/apache.pdf), and the solution at the time was the Apache Group.
+
+Only after the community structure had been established did the developers move on to writing code.
+
+As System76's experience with Beanbooks illustrates, this lesson -- that the community is more important than the code -- is one that open source software projects .
+
+Apache went on to become the poster child of successful open source software projects, eventually becoming the most widely used server on the web, displacing Microsoft's IIS to the point that today it's a mere footnote in the evolution of web servers. gg
+
+
+
+
+These licenses are not open source at all. In fact, these licenses are the reason open source software licenses exist.
+
+The first attempts to define free software, and give it a coherent legal structure, came about because companies were taking software, using it and not giving anything back to the creators. Yes, the reasons MongoDB, Redis and others give for not sticking with open source, are the same reasons that drove Richard Stallman to create copyleft licensing in the first place.
+
+
+
+edis has recently created something called the “Commons Clause”, which takes the Apache license and makes it a non-Open-Source license. And they still call it the Apache license. This is a problem. Someone creating yet another non-Open-Source paradigm is not a problem, if they do it correctly.
+
+Redis doesn’t deny that it’s not an Open Source license any longer once their clause is added.
+
+It’s a bad idea to add a any text whatsoever to an Open Source license, and still call that license by it’s old name. Once the Commons Clause is added, it’s no longer the Apache license, and calling it so confuses people about what is Open Source and what isn’t. Hopefully that’s not meant deliberately. Now stop it. Take the license and the clause together, and title it the Redis license or another name of your choice that doesn’t confuse people that it’s an Open Source license. “Commons” is the name of an Apache project, so that is probably a bad choice for the name of the overall license.
+
+You’ll note that I worked on the Business Source License with MariaDB. They paid a day’s consulting fee. I made it very clear that they were not to tell people it was Open Source, and I made changes that made the license less ambiguous and confusing than their previous version. Please follow that example.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+It's worth asking, given it's success as a company thus far, what is Redis worried about? What is MongoDB worried about?
+
+There is an elephant in the cloud. The elephant's name is Amazon AWS.
+
+You might be wondering, how is this different than say the license that governs Microsoft Windows? Well, you can look at the code. You can even modify it. It seems to fit the letter of the law, but it only seems that way. If there are restrictions on what you can build, then what you have is not open source software. the Redis tk license is the definition of a proprietary license -- it restricts what you can do with the code.
+
+
+
+
+It's hard for MongoDB to compete with a service that offers MongoDB and every other infrastructure tool on the internet. License of the sort that MongoDB is suggesting would allow their software to be called open source, but limit how that software could be sold.
+
+
+
+
+
+For MongoDB this isn't a rhetorical question.
+
+Redis, MongoDB, Confluent and others have changed from open source licenses to proprietary licenses in recent months. The new licenses limit what you can do with the software, making it no longer open source software.
+
+Every good story starts with conflict.
+
+
+Redis and MongoDB claim that open source licenses, specifically the GPL, are making it possible for other companies to take their ideas, wrap them in a cloud service and sell them without contributing anything back to the source project.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+The differences in the license: "My sense is that it's not philosophical... we're going to iterate until we get it right."
+
+There has been only one official release of the license, "We've been continually evolving the license, updating the language"
+
+Monitizing open source with support contracts has never been a great business model". Critics of this statement might point to Red Hat, but then for every Red Hat there are countless examples of those for whom this model did not work out. Ever heard of Yellow Dog linux?
+
+On why the SSPL: "I think we can do better... I want to see more investment in open source products. VC's intesting in open source products.
+
+On other's with MongoDB's model: "MongoDB is unique. I would like us to not be unique."
+
+Legally the AGPL covers us, but the SSPL clarifies that in language that will hopefully discourage the bad actors.
+
+Did you know about AWS DocumentDB before the license change. At first he said no comment, then he said no we did not. But if it wasn't Amazon, it would be someone.
+
+
+
+"""
+
+
+"""
+
+Database guru Mark Callaghan put it this way: "I can speak from experience that 'new license' == 'must speak to lawyers'. They tend to be busy and figuring out a new license takes a long time." In other words, you've just created a legal problem, when before all you were trying to solve was a technical one. It's simply not worth the bother.
+
+Redis Labs modules making them no longer free and open source, GNU/Linux distributions such as Debian and Fedora are no longer able to ship Redis Labs' versions of the affected modules to their users.
+
+As a result, we have begun working together to create a set of module repositories forked from prior to the license change. We will maintain changes to these modules under their original open-source licenses, applying only free and open fixes and updates."
+
+They're looking for help with this project.
+
+The Common Clause sub-license forbids you from selling software it covers. It also states you may not host or offer consulting or support services as "a product or service whose value derives, entirely or substantially, from the functionality of the software." This is expressly designed to prevent cloud companies from profiting by using the licensed programs.
+
+As Redis Labs' co-founder and CTO Yiftach Shoolman said in an email, the company did this "for two reasons -- to limit the monetization of these advanced capabilities by cloud service providers like AWS and to help enterprise developers whose companies do not work with AGPL licenses."
+
+Be that as it
+
+Recently several open source projects have run into what they see as a serious problem. Free software
+
+
+MongoDB is building a “better database for the next generation of applications,” co-founder and CTO Eliot Horowitz told TechCrunch. We aimed to “build something that makes developers way more productive.”
+
+
+
+
+Still, there is something to bear in mind
+
+one that perhaps even the givers did not understand the significance of, but it was a gift nonetheless.
+
+There is almost nothing in our daily lives that Free Software has not made possible and which would not disappear if that gift had never been given.
+
+
+That might seem like overstating the case somewhat, but consider for a moment what is built on free software and what would disappear without it. Ninety-eight percent of servers of the internet run Linux, an OS kernel, a piece of Free Software which is built on hundreds, possibly thousands of other bits of code, all free software.
+
+
+
+Agree. Private enterprise has been profiting on open-source, mostly without giving back, for as long as we’ve had open source. That’s not new. It’s literally how the GPL came about.
+
+data portability will be the next big issue with users of cloud computing. Use MongoDB and you can move your data to any cloud provider that offers MongoDB. Use Amazon DocumentDB and you are now married to Amazon in the most Catholic of ways. There is a MongoDB API, but because of the license changes that API is pinned to a specific version of MongoDB. In other words you can get your data out, but it might not be a form that's easy to get into MongoDB running on say, Digitalocean or Azure or Google.
+
+The way to avoid this provider lockin is the make sure you chose cloud provider services that stick with mainstream open source projects as a base, perhaps adding whatever user-friendly management on top of that, but under the hood your data is stored in an open source software package. Postgresql make a good example here. Half a dozen cloud providers offer managed Postgresql in some form. If I spin up an AWS tk DB instance of postgres and two years from now decide that's no longer the best option for my company, I can dump that data out, move it to any cloud provider -- or my own bare metal server -- and import it back into a postgres database without a hitch.
+
+Cloud providers vary in how much they seem okay with this data portability from AWS's more or less pure disdain to Azoure and Google which have turned not competeing with their customers and supporting open standards into something of an pitch.
+
+---
+
+Carl at system76
+
+The usefulness of open source is that you can connect it anything.
+
+beanbooks,
+
+I'm epathetic to their cause, but there should a way to do that without wrecking OSD.
+
+Our concern was that someone would wrap up the software and we would lose all that investment. We wanted patent protection for a few years. It ended up hurting us, hurting the platform and we shouldn't have had those concerns, we should have AGPLed from the beinnning. If it was good enught hat godaddy wanted it,
+
+You have to be good enough and stay ahead without needing a licence to protect you. If you can't stay ahead, the license won't help.
+
+Licenses that are more restrictive. You have to move fast and compete.
+
+If generosity isn't built into open source it isn't going to work.
+
+MS has the same problem with piracy, solutions to that led to open source. you don't have to use unlicensed ms software.
+
+If you come up with a solution for one thing, you try to protect the brand, OSI doesn't like that, but it's easier than touching the software. Mongo always comes with the Mongo trademark. o
+
+The best conversation is an open minded conversation between OSI and mongo.
+
+Open hardware is quiet a bit different, there's less copying of specific designs. It's less of an issue than backend code which has no face at all.
+
+There is always a risk of being commodity. It depends on the bottom line, who can more efficiently deliver that infrastructure.
+
+Differentiation is not what you've done today, but how rapidly you can advance. -- not quote: You have a head start, but where are you going. -- the only way to be successful is to stay ahead, I don't think the license has anything to do with it.
+
+---
+
+Bruce Perens:
+
+In The Cathedral and the Bazaar [16], Eric Raymond attempted to explain Open Source as a gift economy, a phenomenon of computer programmers having the leisure to do creative work not connected to their employment, and an artistic motivation to have their work appreciated. Raymond explains excellently how programmers behave within their own private subculture. The motivations he explored dominated during the genesis of Open Source and continue to be effective within a critically important group of Open Source contributors today.
+
+Raymond edited The Cathedral and the Bazaar, then a year old, to replace the words Free Software with Open Source.
+
+Neither Microsoft software nor Linux and Open Source can help you differentiate your business for long, because they are available to everyone. They differentiate against each other, they just don't differentiate your business. One or the other can save you money or make you more efficient, but in general they don't make your business more attractive to your customer.
+
+The companies that join Open Source collaborations are seeking to use the software in a non-differentiating, cost-center role. It's not important to these companies that Open Source does not in itself produce a profit. Their profit-centers are things other than software, and software is for them an enabling technology. In order to continue to operate their profit-centers, they must make some investment in their cost centers. In the case of differentiating software, they have little choice but to make use of the in-house or contract development paradigm, because they need to prevent their differentiators from falling into the hands of their competitors. For their non-differentiators, they have the choice of the retail or Open Source paradigms. But which is more efficient?
+
+
+Eric Raymond proposed that the volunteer's motivation is mainly intangible, and that a particularly important motivator is participation in a community of respect in which developers are recognized by their peers for the quality and innovation in their work. The FLOSS study surveyed Open Source developers regarding their motivation, found that many of them are motivated by technical curiosity and the desire to learn. I feel that their motivation is similar to that of an artist: just as a painter wants people to appreciate his paintings, a programmer wants to have users who appreciate his software.
+
+
+---
+
+Free software was the gift that made the world as we know it possible. It was an astounding gift to give, one that perhaps even the givers did not understand the significance of, but it was a gift nonetheless.
+
+There is almost nothing in our daily lives that Free Software has not made possible and which would not disappear if that gift had never been given.
+
+Free Software did not have to happen, arguably it should not have happened. The historical forces aligned against it were significant. And it did not happen randomly, it grew out of particular people, with particular beliefs, and today, in this world built on free software, we have lost sight of those beliefs, and if we do not regain our vision of them, our understanding of where Free Software came from, where it is leading us, and how we can keep it going, we risk losing all that we have built.
+
+That might seem like overstating the case somewhat, but consider for a moment what is built on free software and what would disappear without it. Ninety-eight percent of servers of the internet run Linux, an OS kernel, a piece of Free Software which is built on hundreds, possibly thousands of other bits of code, all free software.
+
+
+
+This notion of free software as a commons though requires some clarification lest someone trot out the tired old "tragedy of the commons" analysis, which has, in most fields of analysis, been long since abandoned.
+
+The notion that free softwareo
+
+The “Commons Clause” is a nonfree license because it forbids selling copies of the program, and even running the program as part of implementing any commercial service. Adding insult to injury, it also twists the words “commons” and “sell.”
+
+We urge people to reject programs under this license and to develop free replacements. Where a previous version was available as free software, continuing development of that version is an option.
+
+
+
+
+“The Lord God in a particular way desired that the earth be common possession of all, and produce fruit for all; but greed produced property rights”
+
+In fact this hostility of the church to the private property, sustained by the franciscans (led for example by Duns Scoto and William of Occam) , was oposed by the scholastics, with Thomas Aquinas using the argument using by Aristotle in the “Politics”:
+“What is common to a very large number of people gets minimal care. For all are especially concerned with their own things, and less with the common ones, or only to the extent that they concern one”
+
+It seems to me that Mr. Garrett Hardin attributed to himself the “Tragedy of the Commons” but this is a very old argument in societies where the market forces has detroyed the real communities, and the view of the world is that of individual people grabbing as much as possible of the common pie, as was the case in the ancient Greece
+
+
+There are thousands of text and quotes around the injustice of private property (or property rights), for example San Ambrosius in the IV century said:
+“The Lord God in a particular way desired that the earth be common possession of all, and produce fruit for all; but greed produced property rights”
+
+In fact this hostility of the church to the private property, sustained by the franciscans (led for example by Duns Scoto and William of Occam) , was oposed by the scholastics, with Thomas Aquinas using the argument using by Aristotle in the “Politics”:
+“What is common to a very large number of people gets minimal care. For all are especially concerned with their own things, and less with the common ones, or only to the extent that they concern one”
+
+It seems to me that Mr. Garrett Hardin attributed to himself the “Tragedy of the Commons” but this is a very old argument in societies where the market forces has detroyed the real communities, and the view of the world is that of individual people grabbing as much as possible of the common pie, as was the case in the ancient Greece
+
+
+In this layer, however, both community and resource boundaries are multiplied. Every single community that forms around specific instances or projects
+of free software counts as a different commons, with its particular (even though
+in some cases similar) rules, boundaries and systems of governance. In other
+words, each group of people who not only use a certain free software, but also
+help to support or develop it (in the expanded sense outlined previously), can be
+seen as a commons in itself.
+
+Also bear in mind that there is no reason for free software occupies the position it does.
+
+The historical forces aligned against it were significant. And it did not happen randomly, it grew out of particular people, with particular beliefs, and today, in this world built on free software, we have lost sight of those beliefs, and if we do not regain our vision of them, our understanding of where Free Software came from, where it is leading us, and how we can keep it going, we risk losing all that we have built.
+
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/free-software.txt b/ars-technica/published/free-software.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c11bb5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/free-software.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+Free and open source software enables the world as we know it. From web servers to kiosks to the big data algorithms mining your Facebook feed, nearly every computer system you interact with runs, at least in part, on free software. Free software has given rise to a galaxy of startups and enabled the [largest software acquisition](https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/10/ibm-buys-red-hat-with-eye-on-cloud-dominance/) in the history of the world.
+
+Free software is a gift. It's the gift that made the world as we know it possible. It's an astounding gift to give. So astounding in fact that it made businesses unaccustomed to this kind of generosity uncomfortable. They weren't unwilling to use free software, it was too radical and by extension, too political. It had to be renamed "open source."
+
+Once that happened open source software took over the world.
+
+Recently though there's been a disturbance in the open source force.
+
+Redis Labs, MongoDB, and Confluent all changed their software licenses in recent months, moving away from open source licenses to more restrictive terms that limit what can be done with the software, making it no longer open source software.
+
+The problem, argue Redis Labs, MongoDB and others, is hosted software services. Also known as, "the cloud." Also known as Amazon AWS.
+
+## Cloud Burst
+
+MongoDB the company is built around the open source "NoSQL" database of the same name. MongoDB's database is useful for storing unstructured data, for example images, which it can handle just as well as it handles more traditional data types. Data is stored in JSON-like documents rather than the columns and rows of a relational database. Since there's no structured tables there's no "structured query language" for working with the data, hence the term "NoSQL."
+
+MongoDB is not the only NoSQL database out there, but it's one of the most widely used. According to industry aggregator, DB Engines, MongoDB is the [fifth most popular database](https://db-engines.com/en/ranking), with everyone from Google to Code Academy to Foursquare using MongoDB.
+
+MongoDB is also leading the charge to create a new kind of open source license, which CTO Eliot Horowitz believes is necessary to protect open source software businesses as computing moves into the new world of the cloud.
+
+The cloud, argue Horowitz and others, requires the open source community to re-think and possibly update open source licenses to "deal with new challenges in a new environment." The challenges are, essentially, AWS, Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure, which are all capable of taking open source software, wrapping it up as a service and reselling it. The problem with AWS or Azure wrapping up MongoDB and offering it as part of a software as a service (SaaS), is that it then competes with MongoDB's own cloud-based SaaS -- MongoDB Atlas. What's threatened then is not MongoDB's source code, but MongoDB's own SaaS derived from that source code, and which is the company's chief source of revenue.
+
+To combat the potential threat to its bottom line, MongoDB has moved from the Gnu Public License (GPL) to what it calls the Server Side Public License, or SSPL. The SSPL says, in essence, you can do anything you want with this software, except use it to build something that competes with MongoDB Atlas.
+
+MongoDB has submitted the SSPL to the Open Source Initiative (OSI), the organization that oversees and approves new open source licenses, but the approval process is still in the early review stages. That said, judging by discussion on the mailing lists, and the wording of the license, the SSPL is unlikely to ever be approved by the OSI, at least as it's currently written.
+
+Part of MongoDB's problem is that it's not the first open source business to run into this situation. In fact, part of this problem -- companies taking software, using it as they please and contributing nothing back -- is the reason open source software exists at all.
+
+Open source licenses vary, but the gist is generally, you can take this code and do what you want with it, but you can’t make the code proprietary, and if you use it in another project, then that project can’t be proprietary either. These licenses were written this way to prevent companies from taking open source code, using it in their own code and not sharing any of it back to the original project.
+
+Horowitz argues that wrapping a piece of code in a SaaS offering is the modern equivalent of using it in an application.
+
+It is a novel argument, but it's in defense of a very old problem that goes well beyond licensing. It's a problem that goes all the back to the beginning of free software -- how do you make money off software if you give it away for free?
+
+One traditional answer has been that you sell services around your open source software. But for Horowitz that's not good enough. "Monetizing open source with support contracts has never been a great business model," he tells Ars. Red Hat would likely disagree, but Horowitz believes that more protective licenses would bring more venture capital investment and spawn more software businesses based on the open model MongoDB has used. "We're unique," he says, "I want us to be less unique."
+
+He may be correct. A more protective license could induce more venture capital investment because there's (arguably) a greater likelihood of return on their investment. But if that capital did come, it wouldn't be investing in open source because that kind of restriction on the software means it no longer fits the definition of open source.
+
+Quite a few open source advocates have already made the counter argument that the current set of licenses are fine, it's the business models that need work.
+
+Bruce Perens, co-author of the original [open source definition](https://opensource.org/docs/osd), says the SSPL is incompatible with the OSI's open source definition number nine, which says that the "license must not restrict other software." Since the SSPL forces any SaaS software that is aggregated with the covered software, but not a derivative of it, to nevertheless be open source, it fails this test. "I wrote number nine into the OSD to prohibit exactly this sort of conduct," says Perens, "the text is really clear."
+
+MongoDB is not the only one complaining that the cloud is raining on its profits.
+
+Redis Labs, another data storage company, was the first to sound the alarm about cloud providers threatening its business and may have the better solution. Redis Labs initially changed its license to include something called the Common Clause sub-license, which forbids anyone from selling any software it covers. Software licensed with the Common Clause is not, by anyone's definition, open source, which the company Labs acknowledged. It has never described those portions of its software as open source.
+
+As this article was wrapping up Redis Labs made yet another licensing change, in essence dropping all pretense of being open source software and adopting a homegrown proprietary license for some of its modules. To be clear, most of Redis is governed by the Apache 2.0 License, but some modules are not, namely RedisJSON, RedisSearch, RedisGraph, RedisML and RedisBloom.
+
+The license that applies to these modules says that while users can view and modify the code, use it in their applications, it restricts which types of applications they can build. With this new license you are not free to build anything you want. You cannot build database products, a caching engine, a processing engine, a search engine, an indexing engine or any kinds of ML or AI derived serving engine. You cannot in other words use Redis Labs' code to compete with Redis Labs. This violates one of the core tenants of open source licensing -- that there be no restrictions on derivative software.
+
+This is the same sort of protection MongoDB also wants, but MongoDB wants to retain the open source label.
+
+Unfortunately for MongoDB it doesn't make sense to simultaneously say that you are open source, and that only you should profit from your open source software. There *is* a business model where than does make sense: proprietary software.
+
+## Lessons from history
+
+Why does MongoDB want to be open source at all? After all there is no shortage of very successful proprietary software, so why not embrace that path and move on?
+
+Horowitz tells me he believes "that open source results in better systems software, especially databases," going on to cite security and community as advantages of remaining open source. While he's right about both of those things, those are often cited as reasons to use open source software, more eyes on the software means fewer bugs, in theory anyway.
+
+But looking at the working of the OSD, it's clear that Horowitz is missing one key component that's built into to every open source license -- generosity. Open source does not limit what you can do with the software, ever. And that may well be the reason for its success. Generosity of this kind is how you get community, the cornerstone on which any successful open source project is built. By allowing the widest possible range of users to use your software you get the biggest possible community. More eyes on bugs, more people fixing them. That community is what turns into momentum. That momentum becomes market share. Market share sometimes becomes profit, but that's not a promise of open source.
+
+As Bruce Perens puts it, "we have to draw a line between open source... and the right to make money with open source. The open source definition allows, but does not support your right to make money. We're not going to change the rules because you can make money better that way."
+
+Just because you build it and they come, does not mean massive profit.
+
+In fact, if you build it and they come and then you take it away, it might be worse than if you'd never built it.
+
+Redis Labs' move away from open source comes after it reaped all the benefits of open source -- community support, wide adoption and code contributions from a widespread sources. To put it bluntly, Redis Labs angered the community.
+
+When free software developers get mad, they get forking, and there is indeed a fork of Redis, [GoodFORM](https://goodformcode.com/). GoodFORM takes the re-licensed Redis modules as they were prior to the license change, and will maintain them for Debian, Fedora and other Linux distros that cannot ship proprietary software.
+
+The unintended consequence of Redis Labs' new license is that anyone wanting to use a full and open source version of Redis will have to use GoodFORM, not Redis.
+
+Individual developers might not much care, but large companies looking to use open source software aren't so cavalier. For them it usually comes down to a choice, either use clearly open source software with an OSI approved license, or call the lawyers. And no one ever wants to call the lawyers just to install a piece of software.
+
+Perens tells Ars that this was one of the key motivations behind the intimal open source definition (originally written for the Debian project). "The open source definition means that you shouldn't need a lawyer just to be a user," says Perns. "And one of the ways we do that is minimizing the legal load."
+
+Redis Labs' new license puts companies in the position of needing a lawyer, and GoodFORM becomes the more logical choice. This also may hint at why MongoDB wants to remain open source.
+
+Other open source projects which have changed to closed source licenses have not fared well. The Xfree86 project was the defacto standard for running X Windows for most of the 1990s, up through the early 2000s. In 2004 Xfree86 began shipping code that the Free Software Foundation felt was counter to the GPL. The downstream operating systems using Xfree86 decided that was unacceptable and a fork, X.org, was born. Today X.org occupies the place Xfree86 once did and Xfree86 is abandoned.
+
+Other examples are easy to find, LibreOffice forked from OpenOffice, MariaDB came out of license changes in MySQL, Wireshark came out of Ethereal, the list goes on, but the key thing to note is not just that the forks happened, but that they took with them the developers, the community, the momentum that sustains open source software over the long haul. Lose the goodwill of the open source community and it can be vicious in exacting its revenge. It's also efficient in doing so, Xfree86 was effectively dead six months after X.org began, OpenOffice disappeared into irrelevancy similarly quickly.
+
+The overwhelming lesson of open source history is that once you are open source, it's very unlikely you will change that and survive.
+
+## What makes open source work: generosity
+
+If open source history teaches that there is no going back, it's worth considering why.
+
+After years of using Quickbooks to appease accountants, I got fed up with it. I looked around for some open source accounting software and stumbled across something that fit my needs, [Beanbooks](https://beansbooks.com/opencode), a little project spun out of Linux computer manufacturer System76.
+
+System76's Beanbooks is a perfect example of what Perens sees as an ideal open source software scenario. In The emerging economic paradigm of Open Source Perens argues that a company's non-differentiating software is its best scenario for open source software. That is, open source the infrastructure of the business, not the core.
+
+To put it another way, Beanbooks was not System76's profit center, but it is an enabling technology for System76's profit center -- building Linux-based computers.
+
+However, despite being a perfect candidate for an open source license, Beanbooks is not open source. Why?
+
+System76 sells a hosted version of [Beanbooks](https://beansbooks.com/opencode), a SaaS, and at the time the company was worried that a larger company would come along, take the GPL code, essentially clone Beanbooks and get all the profit from System76's investment.
+
+System76 founder Carl Richell says he can empathize with MongoDB and Redis Labs, but he has already been down the worry-about-someone-stealing-your-code-for-competing-SaaS road and regrets it. "Our concern was that someone would wrap up the software and we would lose all our investment." He says System76 wanted something like patent protection for a few years, but that "ended up hurting us, hurting the platform, and we shouldn't have had those concerns."
+
+While the SaaS version of Beanbooks looks to be fine, the available code does not get updates and is, from a free software perspective, fairly useless. The Github page is a ghost town. There's no development, no community.
+
+Beanbooks the service carries on, but it does so without a community contributing ideas, code and everything else vibrant open source projects have. Richell thinks Beanbooks might have avoided its fate if it had a GPL or similar license from the beginning.
+
+"If it was good enough that someone wanted it that's great," says Richell. The key to success for Ritchell isn't the open source software, it's the innovation. "Differentiation is not what you've done today, but how rapidly you can advance," he says. As the software developer you have a head start, and, hopefully, a vision of where you are going, those are your differentiators, to use Perens' terms.
+
+"The only way to be successful is to stay ahead," says Richell, "I don't think the license has anything to do with it."
+
+## What the future looks like
+
+Everyone loves an underdog, and Redis Labs and MongoDB want to portray themselves as the open source underdogs waging a heroic battle against the forces of evil in the form of AWS. But are they?
+
+Redis Labs and MongoDB both look like very healthy companies. Redis Labs just raised $60 million dollars in funding and, based on the companies doing the funding, looks poised for a successful IPO. MongoDB's IPO last year was, by all accounts, a huge success. It's stock IPOed at $24 and has steadily climbed ever since then. Today it trades at at around $100 a share. Just before this article went to press one of MongoDB's biggest users, Lyft, did defect to Amazon, but after a slight stock drop, MongoDB's stock was right back up where it was before Lyft defected.
+
+Neither company is hurting. At least not yet. The fallout from their license changes remains to be seen, but given that much of the development of MongoDB comes from employees, it will likely be fine regardless of whether it's open source or not. The fate of either is unimportant to the fate of the larger open source paradigm.
+
+The open source paradigm doesn't work for everyone. As Perens put it in a conversation we had as I was wrapping this up, "you can use any license you want as long as you don't call it open source, that's your freedom. But we have certain rights that come with open source it doesn't make sense to give these up to protect a business model."
+
+Through all the conversations I had with developers and founders, one line kept coming back to me. System76 founder Carl Richell told me: "if generosity isn't built into open source, it isn't going to work."
+
+Generosity in this case is the right to use the software for any purpose.
+
+This has always been the basic litmus test for new open licenses -- is the license limiting the generosity of the software? What got open source where it is today is that it could be used anywhere, with anything. Need to combine open source and proprietary software? No problem. Need to re-write that open source library so it can interface with your proprietary code? No problem. Want to take that open source library, wrap it up as a service and sell it? No problem. Because in the end, that's what open source is: freedom through generosity. And as Perens points out, that's what it is even when that model doesn't work for a particular business.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/galago-pro-review.html b/ars-technica/published/galago-pro-review.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..224194f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/galago-pro-review.html
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+
Wiping the default operating system from your laptop and plugging in a USB stick with your favorite distro's live CD has long been one of the great rites of passage of the Linux world. Some of us get a little, dare I say giddy, every time we wipe that other OS away and see that first flash of GRUB. Of course rites of passage are supposed to be one time events. Once you've wiped Windows or OS X a time or two most of no longer have that giddiness -- it becomes one more annoyance, a kind of tax on Linux users.
+
In recent years the PC industry has finally spawned a few manufacturers offering up machines with Linux pre-installed and at this point I have tested most of them. Dell's XPS and Precision lines both have Linux-friendly offerings and dedicated Linux manufacturers like System76 have long offered decent hardware with Linux pre-installed. In all my testing of various models from four different manufacturers I've yet to encounter a driver problem, which is the real benefit of a machine with Linux pre-installed. To be fair, I could say the same for the Lenovo x240 that serves as my daily driver.
+
Still, finding the perfect Linux laptop has always been something of a Goldilocks problem -- this one is too big, this one is too underpowered, this one has too little RAM, this one lacks a big SSD and so on. Generally speaking if you want power and storage you're going to end up with something too big to comfortable throw in a bag and carry all day -- the Dell Precision 7520 and the System76 Oryx Pro are good examples of this.
+
Alternately you could go for the more portable Dell XPS 13 or System76 Lemur, which both offer a more svelte, lightweight machine that's easier on your shoulders, but is generally lacking in RAM and drive space.
+
What Linux users like myself have long wanted is a laptop with roughly the form factor and weight of a Macbook pro, but with the option to get 32GB of RAM or three TB of storage. A laptop that is both reasonably lightweight and powerful.
+
And that my fellow Linux users, is exactly what System76 has managed to deliver with its new Galago Pro laptop.
+
It's not perfect, but this is a very clever, very well designed piece of hardware with some very impressive specs.
+
The model I tested featured the faster 7th Gen Intel i7-7500U (also available with an i5 for slightly less), 250 GB Samsung 960 EVO NVMe, 8GB RAM (Dual Channel DDR4 at 2133MHz), a 250GB Samsung 960 EVO NVMe SSD and a 13.3″ 3K HiDPI screen with an Intel HD Graphics 620 card. As tested the Galago Pro would set you back $1,328.
+
Hardware and Design.
+
The Galago Pro features an all-aluminium body that looks and feels a bit like a Macbook Pro, but without the wrist-cutting sharp edges of the Macbook Pro. It's a slick piece of hardware and it's light, weighing in at a mere 2.87lbs. In fact it's difficult to convey just how amazingly light this thing is. Technically it's heavier than the XPS 13 actually, but it's also considerably larger which makes it seem lighter. My Lenovo x240 isn't exactly a beast, but after carting around the Galago Pro for a few weeks the Lenovo started to seem a bit more brick-like.
+
Around the outside of the Galago Pro you'll find the usual array of ports, including one USB-C with Thunderbolt, two USB 3.1 ports, an SD Card Reader, and, for additional displays there's an HDMI as well as MiniDP/USB-C. System76 also bucks a current trend by including an actual Ethernet port, which also features a little door that holds the cable in place. If you're a regular user of hotel wifi you know how valuable an Ethernet jack can be. There's also a slot for a SIM card.
+
The keyboard is reminiscent of the Dell XPS 13 -- black chiclet keys surrounded by smooth a aluminum frame. The travel is okay, on par with the rest of the laptops out there that sport similar keyboards (like the Macbook Pro). I happen to prefer the spongier, closer-to-clakkity keyboards Lenovo uses, but judging by the market I am not in the majority there.
+
One place the Galago Pro differs significantly from both the XPS 13 line and Macbook Pros is the bezel that surrounds the Galago Pro's screen -- it's big. The display itself is more or less the same though, the 13.3-inch screen packs in 3200x1800 pixels. As with the Dell there are some Linux apps where the HiDPI screen is more of a hindrance than a help (I'm looking at you GiMP). Color wise the screen is quite nice and renders true blacks pretty well. It's also nicely backlit and it works out of the box in Ubuntu
+
The i7 That ships with the Galago Pro is the latest of the Kaby Lake versions and for that reason I strongly recommend ordering your Galago Pro with Ubuntu 17.04, which features a newer Linux kernel with much better support for Kaby Lake.
+
Another point that sometimes gets glossed over in reviews is that the Galago Pro is very user serviceable. I couldn't find any disassembly guides on System76's website, but a quick YouTube search will get you a couple videos. It's pretty simple, just lift up the keyboard, detach the cable, unscrew three screws and then flip it over and unscrew everything from the bottom and you'll have access to the insides. You can swap out both drives and the RAM if you decided to upgrade down the road.
+
So far so good, but like I said the Galago Pro is not perfect and its biggest failing is battery life. In normal use (wifi and Bluetooth on, screen at 80 percent brightness and using Vim for writing, Firefox for browsing the web and mpd for music I only got about 3.5 hours out of the battery. That was using the stock Ubuntu as shipped. When I wiped that, installed Arch Linux, just used Openbox with tint2 and installed TLP I managed to get one more hour out if it. Still not great, but better. Suffice to say that this is not an all day without a cord sort of laptop. On the plus side the charger and cord are quite small and light.
+
Another thing I disliked about the Galago Pro was the trackpad. It wasn't the worst I've ever used (pick any Chromebook to experience the worst trackpad ever), but I was plagued by jittery cursor movements and occasional moments where it would be totally unresponsive. Another downside -- the fan is pretty loud and it will kick in pretty much any time you spike the CPU to 100 percent.
+
None of the issues I experienced are what I would call deal breakers, except perhaps the battery, I really wish the battery life was closer to the Dell XPS 13, which pretty consistently lasted seven or eight hours in all my informal tests.
+
Software
+
As it has for some time, System76 is currently shipping the Galago Pro with either Ubuntu 16.04 LTS or the more recent 17.04. As mentioned above, I would strongly suggest you go with the latter as the updated kernel has better support for the hardware in the Galago Pro, though System76 includes its own repositories with additional software designed to make everything work smoothly.
+
Of course, as I noted when I reviewed Ubuntu 17.04, the Unity desktop that System76 is currently shipping is essentially abandonware.
+
Earlier this year, much to the surprise of the Linux community, Ubuntu abruptly announced it would no longer be working on Unity and would instead adopt the GNOME desktop going forward. That was the status of Ubuntu when I received the Galago Pro. Not long after however System76 announced their own Linux distro, dubbed Pop!_ OS, hereafter just Pop OS._
+
But one thing, don't call it a distro. System76 would like you to call it an operating system. I'm not being entirely sarcastic here either, System76 has a good reason not to call it a distro -- trademark issues. And I don't think calling it an OS or distro is going to matter. The fact is Pop OS contains quite a bit of Ubuntu branding within it, something that may end up raising the hackles of Ubuntu's lawyers. Maybe the Linux Mint devs can give System76 some advice on getting the Ubuntu branding out. Or perhaps, as Chris Fisher of Linux Action News fame suggests, Pop OS can become an official Ubuntu flavor.
+
Whatever its future, Pop OS right now is still in the alpha stage. I went ahead and grabbed a copy and installed it on the Galago Pro to see what it was like though. At the moment Pop OS is more or less a custom GNOME theme, with some extensions that make GNOME quite a bit more user-friendly, but not a lot beyond that. Because it's more or less just a GNOME theme with some extensions pre-installed it's perfectly stable. It's Ubuntu with some some different paint. And it's nice enough paint, but not something most System76 customers would probably have any trouble doing on their own.
+
When I first heard about Pop OS I thought the move made sense. System76 has always tied its brand very closely to Ubuntu and with the future of Ubuntu suddenly looking a bit uncertain it makes sense that System76 would want more control over their future. As it stands the shipping version of Unity that System76 will sell until Pop becomes the default will be "upgraded" to GNOME should users opt to upgrade to 17.10 when it comes out later this year. That's going to be a very confusing upgrade for anyone not expecting it.
+
Having now played with Pop a bit I'm less sure it's the right move. Developing and maintaining a distro is no small undertaking and in its current state there just isn't enough to differentiate it from Ubuntu or, for that matter, any other distro with a custom GNOME theme. Beyond that lies the real question -- who is System76's intended audience for Pop OS and what do they want in their desktop?
+
System76's marketing materials says that they're "focused on the professionals and makers that use their computers to create", which is alarmingly vague since probably the number one issue that plagues distros is a lack of focus. Perhaps I'm being too hard on an alpha release software. And don't get me wrong, I'm not rooting against Pop OS. I hope that System76 is able to put something together that entices more people to try a Linux machine, but right now? Right now let's just say it's an alpha release.
+
The good news for anyone who wants to run the distro of their choice on System76 hardware is that while there's no official support, you're pretty unlikely to need it. I didn't do a lot of distro testing with the Galago Pro, but I did install Arch so I could get some work done and had no problems with anything but the keyboard backlight, which to me is an unnecessary bit of battery drain anyway (which is to say I didn't even try to get it working, though I believe there is something in the AUR that mirrors the PPA System76 uses for its stock Ubuntu).
+
Beyond this machine though I have run Fedora, Mint, Xubuntu, OpenSUSE and Arch on three different System76 machines at this point and I have never once encountered a hardware problem, aside from the lack of HiDPI support in some desktops, which is hardly System76's fault (the company has even contributed considerable work back upstream to make HiDPI support better in Unity, an effort that now, alas, looks like wasted time). Suffice to say that if you want to run the distro of your choice you'll probably be fine.
+
The Future of System76 and the Galago Pro
+
The Galago Pro was my daily machine for about a month, in that time, while I had some issues as noted above (I don't like the trackpad or the keyboard) by and large it's the best stock Linux machine. The only place that the Dell XPS 13 blows it out of the water is in battery life. As someone who lives full time in an RV and relies on a very limited amount of solar power (300w) for all my energy needs that battery life is a deal breaker. That said, in nearly every other regard this is by far my favorite laptop and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it.
+
There's something that comes up in the comments of nearly every review of System76 hardware, the fact that the company doesn't build its own hardware, it orders everything from upstream hardware vendors, in the case of the Galago Pro that would be the Clevo N130BU (or N131BU). I've never quite understood what the issue is, but it certainly seems to rub some people the wrong way. Could you save a couple bucks by ordering the Clevo directly? Sure, but you'd have no support, no custom PPA to fix hardware issues and no community to get involved in. If you just want a dirt cheap Linux rig, try eBay.
+
What System76 offers is great Linux experience with a piece of hardware, maybe not the absolute cheapest hardware.
+
However, that is going to change. In addition to launching its own don't-call-it-a-distro OS, the company has announced that will soon begin what it calls "phase three" -- moving its product design and manufacturing in-house where it hopes to "build the Model S of computers". It's a bold move, starting up hardware manufacturing and an operating system at the same time, one that might well lead to over extending itself, after all, even Canonical has backed away from making its own desktop OS.
+
It's a massive dual undertaking that may well leave System76 looking fondly back at its self proclaimed "phase one", which has as its first line item the considerably less stressful: "drink beer and talk about open source." Still, if System76 manages to pull off building its own hardware line the Linux world stands to reap some potentially awesome benefits. In the mean time if you're looking for a lean, mean, if not all-day machine, the Galago Pro makes an excellent choice.
+
The Good
+
Trouble-free Linux on good, lightweight hardware
+Excellent screen with great resolution
+Plenty of RAM to handle whatever you throw at it
+
The Bad
+
Screen resolution is sometimes a problem with certain applications
+
The Ugly
+
battery life could be better, much better.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/galago-pro-review.txt b/ars-technica/published/galago-pro-review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0d8bc6f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/galago-pro-review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
+Wiping the default operating system from your laptop and plugging in a USB stick with your favorite distro's live CD has long been one of the great rites of passage of the Linux world. Some of us get a little, dare I say giddy, every time we wipe that other OS away and see that first flash of GRUB. Of course rites of passage are supposed to be one time events. Once you've wiped Windows or OS X a time or two most of no longer have that giddiness -- it becomes one more annoyance, a kind of tax on Linux users.
+
+In recent years the PC industry has finally spawned a few manufacturers offering up machines with Linux pre-installed and at this point I have tested most of them. Dell's XPS and Precision lines both have Linux-friendly offerings and dedicated Linux manufacturers like System76 have long offered decent hardware with Linux pre-installed. In all my testing of various models from four different manufacturers I've yet to encounter a driver problem, which is the real benefit of a machine with Linux pre-installed. To be fair, I could say the same for the Lenovo x240 that serves as my daily driver.
+
+Still, finding the perfect Linux laptop has always been something of a Goldilocks problem -- this one is too big, this one is too underpowered, this one has too little RAM, this one lacks a big SSD and so on. Generally speaking if you want power and storage you're going to end up with something too big to comfortable throw in a bag and carry all day -- the Dell Precision 7520 and the System76 Oryx Pro are good examples of this.
+
+Alternately you could go for the more portable Dell XPS 13 or System76 Lemur, which both offer a more svelte, lightweight machine that's easier on your shoulders, but is generally lacking in RAM and drive space.
+
+What Linux users like myself have long wanted is a laptop with roughly the form factor and weight of a Macbook pro, but with the option to get 32GB of RAM or three TB of storage. A laptop that is both reasonably lightweight and powerful.
+
+And that my fellow Linux users, is exactly what System76 has managed to deliver with its new Galago Pro laptop.
+
+It's not perfect, but this is a very clever, very well designed piece of hardware with some very impressive specs.
+
+The model I tested featured the faster 7th Gen Intel i7-7500U (also available with an i5 for slightly less), 250 GB Samsung 960 EVO NVMe, 8GB RAM (Dual Channel DDR4 at 2133MHz), a 250GB Samsung 960 EVO NVMe SSD and a 13.3″ 3K HiDPI screen with an Intel HD Graphics 620 card. As tested the Galago Pro would set you back $1,328.
+
+## Hardware and Design.
+
+The Galago Pro features an all-aluminium body that looks and feels a bit like a Macbook Pro, but without the wrist-cutting sharp edges of the Macbook Pro. It's a slick piece of hardware and it's light, weighing in at a mere 2.87lbs. In fact it's difficult to convey just how amazingly light this thing is. Technically it's heavier than the XPS 13 actually, but it's also considerably larger which makes it seem lighter. My Lenovo x240 isn't exactly a beast, but after carting around the Galago Pro for a few weeks the Lenovo started to seem a bit more brick-like.
+
+Around the outside of the Galago Pro you'll find the usual array of ports, including one USB-C with Thunderbolt, two USB 3.1 ports, an SD Card Reader, and, for additional displays there's an HDMI as well as MiniDP/USB-C. System76 also bucks a current trend by including an actual Ethernet port, which also features a little door that holds the cable in place. If you're a regular user of hotel wifi you know how valuable an Ethernet jack can be. There's also a slot for a SIM card.
+
+The keyboard is reminiscent of the Dell XPS 13 -- black chiclet keys surrounded by smooth a aluminum frame. The travel is okay, on par with the rest of the laptops out there that sport similar keyboards (like the Macbook Pro). I happen to prefer the spongier, closer-to-clakkity keyboards Lenovo uses, but judging by the market I am not in the majority there.
+
+One place the Galago Pro differs significantly from both the XPS 13 line and Macbook Pros is the bezel that surrounds the Galago Pro's screen -- it's big. The display itself is more or less the same though, the 13.3-inch screen packs in 3200x1800 pixels. As with the Dell there are some Linux apps where the HiDPI screen is more of a hindrance than a help (I'm looking at you GiMP). Color wise the screen is quite nice and renders true blacks pretty well. It's also nicely backlit and it works out of the box in Ubuntu
+
+The i7 That ships with the Galago Pro is the latest of the Kaby Lake versions and for that reason I strongly recommend ordering your Galago Pro with Ubuntu 17.04, which features a newer Linux kernel with much better support for Kaby Lake.
+
+Another point that sometimes gets glossed over in reviews is that the Galago Pro is very user serviceable. I couldn't find any disassembly guides on System76's website, but a quick YouTube search will get you a couple videos. It's pretty simple, just lift up the keyboard, detach the cable, unscrew three screws and then flip it over and unscrew everything from the bottom and you'll have access to the insides. You can swap out both drives and the RAM if you decided to upgrade down the road.
+
+So far so good, but like I said the Galago Pro is not perfect and its biggest failing is battery life. In normal use (wifi and Bluetooth on, screen at 80 percent brightness and using Vim for writing, Firefox for browsing the web and mpd for music I only got about 3.5 hours out of the battery. That was using the stock Ubuntu as shipped. When I wiped that, installed Arch Linux, just used Openbox with tint2 and installed TLP I managed to get one more hour out if it. Still not great, but better. Suffice to say that this is not an all day without a cord sort of laptop. On the plus side the charger and cord are quite small and light.
+
+Another thing I disliked about the Galago Pro was the trackpad. It wasn't the worst I've ever used (pick any Chromebook to experience the worst trackpad ever), but I was plagued by jittery cursor movements and occasional moments where it would be totally unresponsive. Another downside -- the fan is pretty loud and it will kick in pretty much any time you spike the CPU to 100 percent.
+
+None of the issues I experienced are what I would call deal breakers, except perhaps the battery, I really wish the battery life was closer to the Dell XPS 13, which pretty consistently lasted seven or eight hours in all my informal tests.
+
+## Software
+
+As it has for some time, System76 is currently shipping the Galago Pro with either Ubuntu 16.04 LTS or the more recent 17.04. As mentioned above, I would strongly suggest you go with the latter as the updated kernel has better support for the hardware in the Galago Pro, though System76 includes its own repositories with additional software designed to make everything work smoothly.
+
+Of course, as I noted when I reviewed Ubuntu 17.04, the Unity desktop that System76 is currently shipping is essentially abandonware.
+
+Earlier this year, much to the surprise of the Linux community, Ubuntu abruptly announced it would no longer be working on Unity and would instead adopt the GNOME desktop going forward. That was the status of Ubuntu when I received the Galago Pro. Not long after however System76 announced their own Linux distro, dubbed Pop!_ OS, hereafter just Pop OS._
+
+But one thing, don't call it a distro. System76 would like you to call it an operating system. I'm not being entirely sarcastic here either, System76 has a good reason not to call it a distro -- trademark issues. And I don't think calling it an OS or distro is going to matter. The fact is Pop OS contains quite a bit of Ubuntu branding within it, something that may end up raising the hackles of Ubuntu's lawyers. Maybe the Linux Mint devs can give System76 some advice on getting the Ubuntu branding out. Or perhaps, as Chris Fisher of Linux Action News fame suggests, Pop OS can become an official Ubuntu flavor.
+
+Whatever its future, Pop OS right now is still in the alpha stage. I went ahead and grabbed a copy and installed it on the Galago Pro to see what it was like though. At the moment Pop OS is more or less a custom GNOME theme, with some extensions that make GNOME quite a bit more user-friendly, but not a lot beyond that. Because it's more or less just a GNOME theme with some extensions pre-installed it's perfectly stable. It's Ubuntu with some some different paint. And it's nice enough paint, but not something most System76 customers would probably have any trouble doing on their own.
+
+When I first heard about Pop OS I thought the move made sense. System76 has always tied its brand very closely to Ubuntu and with the future of Ubuntu suddenly looking a bit uncertain it makes sense that System76 would want more control over their future. As it stands the shipping version of Unity that System76 will sell until Pop becomes the default will be "upgraded" to GNOME should users opt to upgrade to 17.10 when it comes out later this year. That's going to be a very confusing upgrade for anyone not expecting it.
+
+Having now played with Pop a bit I'm less sure it's the right move. Developing and maintaining a distro is no small undertaking and in its current state there just isn't enough to differentiate it from Ubuntu or, for that matter, any other distro with a custom GNOME theme. Beyond that lies the real question -- who is System76's intended audience for Pop OS and what do they want in their desktop?
+
+System76's marketing materials says that they're "focused on the professionals and makers that use their computers to create", which is alarmingly vague since probably the number one issue that plagues distros is a lack of focus. Perhaps I'm being too hard on an alpha release software. And don't get me wrong, I'm not rooting against Pop OS. I hope that System76 is able to put something together that entices more people to try a Linux machine, but right now? Right now let's just say it's an alpha release.
+
+The good news for anyone who wants to run the distro of their choice on System76 hardware is that while there's no official support, you're pretty unlikely to need it. I didn't do a lot of distro testing with the Galago Pro, but I did install Arch so I could get some work done and had no problems with anything but the keyboard backlight, which to me is an unnecessary bit of battery drain anyway (which is to say I didn't even try to get it working, though I believe there is something in the AUR that mirrors the PPA System76 uses for its stock Ubuntu).
+
+Beyond this machine though I have run Fedora, Mint, Xubuntu, OpenSUSE and Arch on three different System76 machines at this point and I have never once encountered a hardware problem, aside from the lack of HiDPI support in some desktops, which is hardly System76's fault (the company has even contributed considerable work back upstream to make HiDPI support better in Unity, an effort that now, alas, looks like wasted time). Suffice to say that if you want to run the distro of your choice you'll probably be fine.
+
+## The Future of System76 and the Galago Pro
+
+The Galago Pro was my daily machine for about a month, in that time, while I had some issues as noted above (I don't like the trackpad or the keyboard) by and large it's the best stock Linux machine. The only place that the Dell XPS 13 blows it out of the water is in battery life. As someone who lives full time in an RV and relies on a very limited amount of solar power (300w) for all my energy needs that battery life is a deal breaker. That said, in nearly every other regard this is by far my favorite laptop and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it.
+
+There's something that comes up in the comments of nearly every review of System76 hardware, the fact that the company doesn't build its own hardware, it orders everything from upstream hardware vendors, in the case of the Galago Pro that would be the Clevo N130BU (or N131BU). I've never quite understood what the issue is, but it certainly seems to rub some people the wrong way. Could you save a couple bucks by ordering the Clevo directly? Sure, but you'd have no support, no custom PPA to fix hardware issues and no community to get involved in. If you just want a dirt cheap Linux rig, try eBay.
+
+What System76 offers is great Linux experience with a piece of hardware, maybe not the absolute cheapest hardware.
+
+However, that is going to change. In addition to launching its own don't-call-it-a-distro OS, the company has announced that will soon begin what it calls "phase three" -- moving its product design and manufacturing in-house where it hopes to "build the Model S of computers". It's a bold move, starting up hardware manufacturing and an operating system at the same time, one that might well lead to over extending itself, after all, even Canonical has backed away from making its own desktop OS.
+
+It's a massive dual undertaking that may well leave System76 looking fondly back at its self proclaimed "phase one", which has as its first line item the considerably less stressful: "drink beer and talk about open source." Still, if System76 manages to pull off building its own hardware line the Linux world stands to reap some potentially awesome benefits. In the mean time if you're looking for a lean, mean, if not all-day machine, the Galago Pro makes an excellent choice.
+
+
+The Good
+
+ Trouble-free Linux on good, lightweight hardware
+ Excellent screen with great resolution
+ Plenty of RAM to handle whatever you throw at it
+
+The Bad
+
+ Screen resolution is sometimes a problem with certain applications
+
+The Ugly
+
+ battery life could be better, much better.
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/google-responsive.html b/ars-technica/published/google-responsive.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a6172df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/google-responsive.html
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+
Google has deprecated the desktop web. It's still here, but for Google it just got less important.
+
At least that's the implicit message in Google's recent mobile search update. The company is now judging how "mobile-friendly" a site is and using that to weight search results served to mobile devices.
+
This is the third update in Google's slow push for web developers to start building mobile-friendly sites. First Google announced that it would start calling out sites that used Flash and at the same time rewarding mobile-friendly sites. At first that was just a little label next to search results on mobile devices that told viewers the site was "Mobile-friendly".
+
Now mobile-friendliness has moved from visual alerts and promos to affecting actual page rankings.
+
Web developers were apparently confused enough by the change that Google posted a lengthy FAQ along with its announcement last week.
+
Here's what the company says: "the mobile-friendly update will boost the rankings of mobile-friendly pages... in mobile search results worldwide. (Conversely, pages designed for only large screens may see a significant decrease in rankings in mobile search results.)" In other words, sites that work on mobile will outrank sites that don't when all other things are equal.
+
So what does a site need to do in order for Google to consider it "mobile-friendly"?
+
The company's guidelines suggest that the site start by avoiding any content that requires Adobe's Flash Player. That will probably sound obvious to most developers at this point, but don't forget that old YouTube and other video embeds were probably done with <object> tags, which means Flash Player. Google suggests updating to the more modern iframe embed method that's the default on most video hosting sites today.
+
The other three main criteria in Google's definition of mobile-friendly are making the site readable without zooming and ensuring that content doesn't need to be scrolled horizontally (in other words the site scales to fit on mobile screens). The last one is something that will make anyone with man hands happy: sites need to place links far enough apart so that the desired link can be easily tapped. Fat fingers love white space.
+
There's been a trend sweeping the web design world by storm of several years now that does all these things a more. In fact if you follow web design at all you know that Google more or less just outlined the central principles of what's known as responsive web design. Responsive web design means building websites that function well across devices, even if they look a bit different on each device.
+
Technically responsive websites use CSS @media queries and some other techniques based on web standards behind the scenes, but Google doesn't really care how sites do it, just that they do it. A site could build out a separate mobile site, use responsive design, or some hybrid form of server side adaptive design -- all of those are considered mobile-friendly, but the guidelines themselves could have been lifted from the classic article that started it all, Responsive Web Design.
+
+[image="ars-mobile-friendly.png" caption="ArsTechnica gets Google's mobile-friendly seal of approval."]
+
+
Google has a mobile-friendly test page where you can see how your favorite sites do. Ars gets the mobile-friendly label, but's worth noting that the mobile-friendliness of a page is just that -- the page. While the Ars homepage comes through with flying colors, if I drop a Rick Astley video in this article using an object tag to embed it this page will not be considered mobile-friendly and might drop in search results. That means a lot of rick roll videos that were embedded back when the object tag was the main method could be dropping out of the rankings.
+
It's also worth asking, what if a page isn't mobile-friendly, but it's still useful? What if I the user am willing to suffer through the horror of scrolling and pinching my fingers to read tiny text in search of some obscure new information on the Voynich manuscript posted on forum pages that are not, alas, mobile-friendly?
+
Fear not my crypto-curious friend, according to Google mobile-friendliness is only one ranking signal among many. As Google puts it, "if a page with high quality content is not mobile-friendly, it could still rank high if it has great content for the query."
+
Still, if there's a page with great content that's desktop only and a page with great content that uses responsive design, the second page will presumably outrank the first.
+
The only real ray of hope in there for developers who still haven't embraced some form of responsive design is that this change only affects mobile search results. Desktop searches and rankings are unaffected. So if your site doesn't work on mobile you'll only lose, roughly speaking, 35 percent of your traffic.
+
Now if only Google would start warning me about sites that are just going to hide their content with a "download our app" ad banner that's so big I can't even close it on a mobile device. Surely that's not mobile-friendly?
diff --git a/ars-technica/published/google-responsive.txt b/ars-technica/published/google-responsive.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eee9c5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ars-technica/published/google-responsive.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+Google has deprecated the desktop web. It's still here, but for Google it just got less important.
+
+At least that's the implicit message in Google's recent [mobile search update](http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/04/faqs-april-21st-mobile-friendly.html). The company is now judging how "mobile-friendly" a site is and using that to weight search results served to mobile devices.
+
+This is the third update in Google's slow push for web developers to start building mobile-friendly sites. First Google announced that it would start calling out sites that used Flash and at the same time rewarding mobile-friendly sites. At first that was just a little label next to search results on mobile devices that told viewers the site was "Mobile-friendly".
+
+Now mobile-friendliness has moved from visual alerts and promos to affecting actual page rankings.
+
+Web developers were apparently confused enough by the change that Google posted a [lengthy FAQ](http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/04/faqs-april-21st-mobile-friendly.html) along with its announcement last week.
+
+Here's what the company says: "the mobile-friendly update will boost the rankings of mobile-friendly pages... in mobile search results worldwide. (Conversely, pages designed for only large screens may see a significant decrease in rankings in mobile search results.)" In other words, sites that work on mobile will outrank sites that don't when all other things are equal.
+
+So what does a site need to do in order for Google to consider it "mobile-friendly"?
+
+The company's guidelines suggest that the site start by avoiding any content that requires Adobe's Flash Player. That will probably sound obvious to most developers at this point, but don't forget that old YouTube and other video embeds were probably done with `