Yeah, I won't argue. But in 5 years I'll retire and collect $25K+/year plus full benefits for sitting on my ass doing nothing. At that point, no matter what road I go down, I'll always be $25K/year ahead, even if I get laid off from my future post-retirement gigs.
I can't up and quit now because I would have to wait until 62 to collect my state pension (if I go before 25 years service). That's 15 years of $25K pension out the window. Not small change.
p.s. It's Delaware. For those on the West Coast, there are shitloads of banks here all needing tech personnel still. All of you who are unemployed and spending up the credit cards, guess who is making big bucks cause of it? You won't make $100K+ a year but you can also buy a nice detached 3-4 bedroom house in the suburbs for $150K too... Decent 2 bedroom apartments in gated communities are all well under $1K/month. I squatted in a safe 1BR apartment two years ago saving money for a house down payment. Had a private entrance and inside washer/dryer. $585/month. Plus there is no sales tax here and you can register a car for $20/year no matter how much the car is worth (one time 2% tax on transfers though, but still, no sales tax on purchase)...
It's the old line, high risks, high rewards, low risks, little rewards.
I'm lucky. I got a programming job at a 2-year college in 1982. I grew through the ranks and am now in charge of a 25-person tech support team. (Management sucks, but that's for another/. story comment.)
My pay is around $50K and I sat by in my safe job while others I knew, many of them my students from my evening classes I taught, some my former employees, many friends, flew off and made huge bucks and taunted me endlessly about what a fool I was to stick in my "low pay" job.
I've also known a lot of them to use their income to buy $40K+ cars, huge houses, and saddle themselves with all sorts of debt.
As for foolish me, I will be able to retire in five years with a full state pension, medical benefits for life, and still be just 47 and able to do some of those high-risk high-return jobs later.
A bit of gloat? Yeah, perhaps. Human nature. Doesn't mean I don't feel bad for them nonetheless.
However, tech is still the future and the job market will turn around and the big rewards will return. So while it might be necessary to throw mail around and make $13/hour for a while, just don't fall behind in your tech skills. One day they'll pay off big again.
My advice, however, is next time around (or if you still have a fat job), squirrel away some cash for a rainy day, keep expenses down, and stay out of debt. Then next time a dry period blows through, you may just have enough saved to not have to work, go back to school and learn those new skills you've been wanting to get, and then come out the other side stronger and end up in the long run, much better than I am. Because everyone knows, intelligent risk taking, while it often has short-term losses, over the long run, pays off much better than the guy (like me) who plays it safe. No one gets rich playing it safe...
I'm waiting for the RIAA to demand that governments start charging a royalty to broadband subscribers because they might be using it to deprive labels of their
cash money and they should be compensated for their loss.
Mozilla does this pathetic obvious little nomark thing +5.
IE has done it for years. -1 Flamebait.
What is wrong with you people? Wait, don't answer that.
Maybe cause it's wrong info? (Then again, one can't count on moderators to have done that much research.)
According to comments in bug 112564, the standards say a browser SHOULD not refresh a page for forward/back history movement for no-cache pages, but all browsers do this except for Opera. Netscape was worried that banks come to expect this busted behavior because IE does it. Mozilla coders wanted it because it would follow standards and speed up the feel of the browser immensely. They ended up compromising and ignoring no-cache for http but following the IE method of refreshing for https pages.
Now, IE will remember relative scroll position in the page, which will get you close as long as the page content didn't change too much. So maybe that's what you are thinking about here. Mozilla never did that no matter what and that, I agree, was a horrible thing too. This fix just fixed both issues.
Speaking of this "fix", the fix created a lot of controversy. Apparently some sites like ole slashdot set their pages to no-cache, most likely to force a page refresh so as to get another ad impression. Ignoring it was debated for cases of moving back in history but Netscape objected to it because they claimed banks would worry about the security implications of ignoring no-cache directives.
The compromise was to ignore no-cache for speed purposes on http requests but don't ignore it for https requests.
When browsing slashdot, if you follow a link from far down in a long list of comments, when you follow the history back, your old scroll position will be remembered... No longer will it force a refresh and throw you back to the top of the thread.
That *was* my addiction. When Robotron 2084 came out, I spent hours at a local deli playing it. I knew I hit gold when I rolled the wave number from 256 to 1 and started over again. I could play for hours on a single quarter (much to the shopkeeper's chagrin...)
This is common knowledge any more. Start with this
one.
It focuses mainly on education, but my position is, anyone of reasonable intelligence will not be stupid due to lack of education. They are smart enough to figure out how to avail themselves of educational opportunities despite the socio-economic class of their parents. The reverse, however, is not true, as you point out. A stupid spoiled brat who has wealthy parents will most likely get plenty of the best education available, graduate, and still be stupid.
Education is also closely linked to population. The more education people have, the more economic options they generally have, and the fewer children they are likely to want or need. In the areas of the world where fertility is lowest - Europe, Japan, China, the former Soviet Bloc, and North America - education levels are correspondingly highest.
We got this thing called the internet. Doesn't take much intelligence to plug in some good keywords and find a whole raft of information on this topic...
btw, why are you so anal about the word "stupid" anyway. Do you prefer a more P.C. term which basically says the same thing?
Who said anything about slavery, and besides, what does it have to do with my argument? Many american slaves did their best to get educated despite being forbidden to, holding secret schools to learn to read for example. They understood that they needed an education to get ahead and did what they could despite the threat. They combined intelligence and made the best of their environment and hence made "invaluable contributions to humankind." Contrast that to some white trailer trash whose only concern is that their kids drop out of school as soon as they turn 16 and get a minimum wage job so they can help pay the rent on the lot.
As for fireman, I certainly don't think that they will hire an idiot just because they weigh 200 pounds. Or are you saying that fire departments are full of big bruiser idiots and that it doesn't take any intelligence to be a fireman? I don't know what planet you're from, but believe it or not, there are college degrees offered in fire protection. It takes a lot more than muscle to be a fireman...
This seems a horrible waste of resources. And what do they hope to gain or prove by this?
I'd be more impressed if they steered the bot so it began reading out loud the DeCSS code and other forbidden code over and over. Then it really would be about free speech...
Being fit to survive is not as important these days as being smart. Our next big steps in advancement will require intelligence, not brawn.
But this is also a problem. Educated and intelligent people have few children. Stupid people breed like mad. They not only pass along stupid in their genes, their environment sucks (no decent home fostering of learning so the kids have double strikes against them).
Isn't it ironic that the federal government sues Microsoft for abusing monopoly powers, but then turns around and buys their software?
Do you realize how much buying power the federal government has? The solution is in their own hands. Refuse to do business with Microsoft until they satisfy the feds that they are no longer abusing their monopoly, and they will cease to be a monopoly. Refuse to do business with people that do business with.doc files and push for docs in html or xml format.
Maybe you can use that as partial justification...
My cable modem speed right now is 5,000Mb/sec down, and 1000Mb/sec up. This saturday I get transitioned to "the new improved" Comcast Internet where my download will be capped at 1500Mb/sec and upload a pitiful 128Kb/sec.
Basically, they can already give me faster speeds but they are artificially capping it. So why would an article that says they could provide even more speed make me hopeful?
They lie, lie like mad. Tell me I've opted in when
it's sent to an address only used on a web page, for example... Like this piece I got today...
Lie #1)
You are receiving this e-mail because you have opted-in to receive special offers from Hi-Speed Media or one of it's marketing partners.
It was sent to an e-mail address lifted from a web site I maintain that is
only used in mailto tags and never ever anywhere else.
Lie #2)
If you feel you have received this e-mail in error or do not wish to
receive additional special offers, please scroll down to unsubscribe.
http://www.summitvacation.pwi.net/removeme.htm
OK, we know this is bullshit too. But for shits and giggles I went to
that address using "links", a trusty, safe, text-only browser.
On that page...
I AM SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE I MAY HAVE CAUSED YOU
WE ARE COMPLETELY AGAINST UNWANTED SPAM !
YOU HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND WE ARE SORRY!
I mean, they don't even go to the trouble of collecting the e-mail address
to "remove" and then ignore the request. What a blatant lie. I'd love to
know what advance tech they have that can figure out the e-mail address to
remove with no params, codes, or other identifying data.
And for those that think the original spam had the e-mail address as a
param to the web page, it doesn't. It's just the simple link. And I viewed
the original spam using pine, no web bugs or anything else like that in
there to pass my info off via referer info.
Hmm, wait, there's more lies than you can shake a stick at...
I AM SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE I MAY HAVE CAUSED YOU
Liar
WE ARE COMPLETELY AGAINST UNWANTED SPAM !
Liar
YOU HAVE BEEN REMOVED
Liar
AND WE ARE SORRY!
Liar
With scum like this out there, legitimate companies have a real concern about their image. What I don't get is, it's in their best interest to do whatever they can to get rid of anything besides double-opt-in lists. Spam has poisoned using e-mail as a marketing vehicle, wanted or not.
Besides, even legitimate companies lie. I NEVER check the "send me info" but I still often get sales pitches from companies I've dealt with in the past.
Re:There's already standards, no one uses them
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 2
There are already open messaging standards and API, but that's not going to make either Microsoft or AOL open up their system.
RFC? I didn't know.
I find it ironic that Microsoft is calling for AOL to open up their network in the interest of open standards and communication. Amazing how "open friendly" they can be when they aren't #1 in an area.
I wonder if they are willing to open up a lot of the domain controller interfaces for the Samba team so they don't have to waste so much time reverse engineering it, "in the interest of open standards.":-)
The IM world is a damn mess...
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
This is a perfect example why open standards and RFCs have stopped this mess from occuring in other areas.
Instant Messaging should be decentralized. This is what happens when commercial interests drive communication "standards" over the net.
Remember pre-popular-internet when mail programs wouldn't talk to each other? Exchange, cc:mail, lotus notes, and a host of others? Remember early online services that didn't permit access to content outside their worlds? MSN, AOL, Compuserve, Genie, etc...?
There should be an RFC, each ISP or provider should host their own IM server, their customers connect to it using the client of their choice, and outsiders send messages in for instant delivery based on a standard naming convention.
But we'll never get there now, it's too late. I'm just thankful the rest of the net isn't in this mess.
2: With their setup, you would probably have greate aggergate bandwith. Fire wire: 400Mb/s (bits) and, we are talking about potentially reading and writing at about 60MB/s (a bit over 400Mb/s eh?), but to really use it as a NAS, you would have to have either gigabit enet, or a 5 or so 100Mb enet ports to that server, and a nice managed switch to hook it all to.
This idea is for a home, not corporate environment. You'd only have a handful of clients, and probably never more than one reading from the mess at once. Also, it's mainly for a digital data store for movies and mp3s and pr0n. That data is only accessed mainly one at a time. Can it despool fast enough to drive your vid player?
As for backup, I was talking about rsync, not software mirroring. Adding data to this jungle would not be done at high volumes. Move a DVD or two during the day and download your 3GB newsgroup limit and you're talking about 10 gigs to go to the primary unit and then 10 gigs over to the backup unit overnight or something.
Maxtor now has a 160 gig external firewire drive. You can chain 62 of these puppies." Screw terabyte, think petabyte.
I figure this is the easiest way to add as you grow without having to break open the case and try to figure out how to add another damn drive in there. For backup, just have two systems with identical capacities and rsync between the two nightly.
RAID is nice, but for home use, it's not as nice as a nightly mirror. Why? I've seen RAID controllers fail and take out an entire RAID set. RAID also doesn't deal with the "Holy shit, I just accidently type `rm * ~` instead of `rm *~` problem."
The main improvement over current cellular data services is that everyone in a cell shares a slice of bandwidth used for data. Since most data is bursty, this is much more efficient.
So you share a "cell" but each person sharing still pays for minutes at the voice rate. And that is in addition to a $30/month fee just to play. Wonderful.
This will fail, then they will be crying the blues that there is no money to be made in wireless data service....
Methinks the bean counters never took a simple economics class and learned about price/demand curves, elasticity, etc.. Free clue: People don't generally NEED this.
When proposing how to spend Ed Tech monies, it's important to keep the institution's goals and best interests in mind. Education you may think? No, it's grand openings and tour opportunities.
There is nothing more important than providing a platform for University and politicians to come together to pat each other on the back and show off. Therefore, all proposals must meet this primary objective. If it fills a room up, all the better.
Therefore, Weave's the good and the bad list for spending ed tech money.
THE BAD
Infrastructure: Forget bandwidth upgrades, replacing tired 10 Mbps hubs with switches, wireless, more disk for your SAN, and that fancy LTO tape robot you've had your eye on. (The robot may qualify if it is in a clear case where you can see it in operation. Something like an ADIC 100 is therefore just an ugly
little black box and not worthy).
Tech Training: "We are a learning institution. We will not send our techs out for training. We will cross-train internally." Besides, you can't touch or see training. Only possible exception is if it produces nice certifications that can hang on the wall and become a small part of a larger tour.
End-user Training: See above. It doesn't matter if the equipment purchased is used to its fullest. Let the IT department answer any end-user questions on the new stuff.
Tech staffing: Big no no. It doesn't matter if hundreds of computers are added all over campus, or older equipment is under massive migration to the latest, the tech support department will need to absorb the added duties. (All they do is play quake all day anyway). Besides, we don't want to look like we're using the money to grow a bureaucracy. Work smarter, not harder.
THE GOOD
Labs: Where x is the total amount of money available in ed tech money and y is the number of computers in a typical computer lab and z is the current price of a new PC, calculate n = x/y/z and purchase n computer labs. Infrastructure? Staffing? You didn't read "THE BAD" section, did you?
Multimedia lecture rooms: Smart boards, projectors, good. This is very likely to get approved. Board members can sit in a classroom and view a powerpoint presentation about how the money was spent. Make sure to annotate the presentation with notes scribbled on smart board and printed out so board members can take with them. Concerned about faculty training? See next bullet.
Faculty development lab: Throw a few computers, VCRs, presentation monitor, and a cabinet (glass) full of impressive software titles up, and take a tech from the help desk area to man this new lab. However, it's important to ensure faculty have no additional release time from normal classes to learn how to integrate technology into their courses. We wouldn't want to take them away from teaching students. Also, don't train that help desk guy. He's a computer geek, they just know this stuff naturally.
Get a cheesy portal product: Force all users to migrate off the UNIX or Microsoft mail servers they have been using for 10 years onto some new portal product like Campus Pipeline. Be sure the product, whatever it is, has two pricing options. One, some made up outrageous fee like $250,000 and the other, a free grant model where allowing them to put up advertising on your web pages and use cookies to track student browsing habits. You can then take credit for saving a quarter million dollars, despite it duplicating (or even losing) what functionality you already had.
I hope this helps. p.s. This is just a theoretical exercise. My employer is, of course, far more enlightened on these matters...
At home though, I have a 10 machine lab, most of which run Redhat on them. But still, if I want to get RHN, that's $240 per year. Like I told Redhat, I can get a Windows license cheaper than that, and that includes free use of the Windows update service.
You're going to run a 10 machine lab of Windows machines for less than $240 including upgrades to their latest OS, or are you talking about just buying one copy of Windows for all 10 machines?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I won't argue. But in 5 years I'll retire and collect $25K+/year plus full benefits for sitting on my ass doing nothing. At that point, no matter what road I go down, I'll always be $25K/year ahead, even if I get laid off from my future post-retirement gigs.
I can't up and quit now because I would have to wait until 62 to collect my state pension (if I go before 25 years service). That's 15 years of $25K pension out the window. Not small change.
p.s. It's Delaware. For those on the West Coast, there are shitloads of banks here all needing tech personnel still. All of you who are unemployed and spending up the credit cards, guess who is making big bucks cause of it? You won't make $100K+ a year but you can also buy a nice detached 3-4 bedroom house in the suburbs for $150K too... Decent 2 bedroom apartments in gated communities are all well under $1K/month. I squatted in a safe 1BR apartment two years ago saving money for a house down payment. Had a private entrance and inside washer/dryer. $585/month. Plus there is no sales tax here and you can register a car for $20/year no matter how much the car is worth (one time 2% tax on transfers though, but still, no sales tax on purchase)...
I'm lucky. I got a programming job at a 2-year college in 1982. I grew through the ranks and am now in charge of a 25-person tech support team. (Management sucks, but that's for another /. story comment.)
My pay is around $50K and I sat by in my safe job while others I knew, many of them my students from my evening classes I taught, some my former employees, many friends, flew off and made huge bucks and taunted me endlessly about what a fool I was to stick in my "low pay" job.
I've also known a lot of them to use their income to buy $40K+ cars, huge houses, and saddle themselves with all sorts of debt.
As for foolish me, I will be able to retire in five years with a full state pension, medical benefits for life, and still be just 47 and able to do some of those high-risk high-return jobs later.
A bit of gloat? Yeah, perhaps. Human nature. Doesn't mean I don't feel bad for them nonetheless.
However, tech is still the future and the job market will turn around and the big rewards will return. So while it might be necessary to throw mail around and make $13/hour for a while, just don't fall behind in your tech skills. One day they'll pay off big again.
My advice, however, is next time around (or if you still have a fat job), squirrel away some cash for a rainy day, keep expenses down, and stay out of debt. Then next time a dry period blows through, you may just have enough saved to not have to work, go back to school and learn those new skills you've been wanting to get, and then come out the other side stronger and end up in the long run, much better than I am. Because everyone knows, intelligent risk taking, while it often has short-term losses, over the long run, pays off much better than the guy (like me) who plays it safe. No one gets rich playing it safe...
Did you see all the athletes during the parade of nations carrying their own video cameras?
I'm waiting for the RIAA to demand that governments start charging a royalty to broadband subscribers because they might be using it to deprive labels of their cash money and they should be compensated for their loss.
Maybe cause it's wrong info? (Then again, one can't count on moderators to have done that much research.)
According to comments in bug 112564, the standards say a browser SHOULD not refresh a page for forward/back history movement for no-cache pages, but all browsers do this except for Opera. Netscape was worried that banks come to expect this busted behavior because IE does it. Mozilla coders wanted it because it would follow standards and speed up the feel of the browser immensely. They ended up compromising and ignoring no-cache for http but following the IE method of refreshing for https pages.
Now, IE will remember relative scroll position in the page, which will get you close as long as the page content didn't change too much. So maybe that's what you are thinking about here. Mozilla never did that no matter what and that, I agree, was a horrible thing too. This fix just fixed both issues.
The compromise was to ignore no-cache for speed purposes on http requests but don't ignore it for https requests.
The full gritty details is in big 112564.
When browsing slashdot, if you follow a link from far down in a long list of comments, when you follow the history back, your old scroll position will be remembered... No longer will it force a refresh and throw you back to the top of the thread.
That *was* my addiction. When Robotron 2084 came out, I spent hours at a local deli playing it. I knew I hit gold when I rolled the wave number from 256 to 1 and started over again. I could play for hours on a single quarter (much to the shopkeeper's chagrin...)
This is common knowledge any more. Start with this one.
It focuses mainly on education, but my position is, anyone of reasonable intelligence will not be stupid due to lack of education. They are smart enough to figure out how to avail themselves of educational opportunities despite the socio-economic class of their parents. The reverse, however, is not true, as you point out. A stupid spoiled brat who has wealthy parents will most likely get plenty of the best education available, graduate, and still be stupid.
There is also this one too.We got this thing called the internet. Doesn't take much intelligence to plug in some good keywords and find a whole raft of information on this topic...
btw, why are you so anal about the word "stupid" anyway. Do you prefer a more P.C. term which basically says the same thing?
As for fireman, I certainly don't think that they will hire an idiot just because they weigh 200 pounds. Or are you saying that fire departments are full of big bruiser idiots and that it doesn't take any intelligence to be a fireman? I don't know what planet you're from, but believe it or not, there are college degrees offered in fire protection. It takes a lot more than muscle to be a fireman...
I'd be more impressed if they steered the bot so it began reading out loud the DeCSS code and other forbidden code over and over. Then it really would be about free speech...
But this is also a problem. Educated and intelligent people have few children. Stupid people breed like mad. They not only pass along stupid in their genes, their environment sucks (no decent home fostering of learning so the kids have double strikes against them).
Do you realize how much buying power the federal government has? The solution is in their own hands. Refuse to do business with Microsoft until they satisfy the feds that they are no longer abusing their monopoly, and they will cease to be a monopoly. Refuse to do business with people that do business with .doc files and push for docs in html or xml format.
Maybe you can use that as partial justification...
Yes, I meant Kb/sec...
Basically, they can already give me faster speeds but they are artificially capping it. So why would an article that says they could provide even more speed make me hopeful?
Lie #1)
It was sent to an e-mail address lifted from a web site I maintain that is only used in mailto tags and never ever anywhere else.
Lie #2)
OK, we know this is bullshit too. But for shits and giggles I went to that address using "links", a trusty, safe, text-only browser.
On that page...
I mean, they don't even go to the trouble of collecting the e-mail address to "remove" and then ignore the request. What a blatant lie. I'd love to know what advance tech they have that can figure out the e-mail address to remove with no params, codes, or other identifying data.
And for those that think the original spam had the e-mail address as a param to the web page, it doesn't. It's just the simple link. And I viewed the original spam using pine, no web bugs or anything else like that in there to pass my info off via referer info.
Hmm, wait, there's more lies than you can shake a stick at...
Liar
Liar
Liar
Liar
With scum like this out there, legitimate companies have a real concern about their image. What I don't get is, it's in their best interest to do whatever they can to get rid of anything besides double-opt-in lists. Spam has poisoned using e-mail as a marketing vehicle, wanted or not.
Besides, even legitimate companies lie. I NEVER check the "send me info" but I still often get sales pitches from companies I've dealt with in the past.
RFC? I didn't know.
I find it ironic that Microsoft is calling for AOL to open up their network in the interest of open standards and communication. Amazing how "open friendly" they can be when they aren't #1 in an area.
I wonder if they are willing to open up a lot of the domain controller interfaces for the Samba team so they don't have to waste so much time reverse engineering it, "in the interest of open standards." :-)
Imagine incompatible e-mail clients, online services, DNS, news, etc...
Instant Messaging should be decentralized. This is what happens when commercial interests drive communication "standards" over the net.
Remember pre-popular-internet when mail programs wouldn't talk to each other? Exchange, cc:mail, lotus notes, and a host of others? Remember early online services that didn't permit access to content outside their worlds? MSN, AOL, Compuserve, Genie, etc...?
There should be an RFC, each ISP or provider should host their own IM server, their customers connect to it using the client of their choice, and outsiders send messages in for instant delivery based on a standard naming convention.
But we'll never get there now, it's too late. I'm just thankful the rest of the net isn't in this mess.
This idea is for a home, not corporate environment. You'd only have a handful of clients, and probably never more than one reading from the mess at once. Also, it's mainly for a digital data store for movies and mp3s and pr0n. That data is only accessed mainly one at a time. Can it despool fast enough to drive your vid player?
As for backup, I was talking about rsync, not software mirroring. Adding data to this jungle would not be done at high volumes. Move a DVD or two during the day and download your 3GB newsgroup limit and you're talking about 10 gigs to go to the primary unit and then 10 gigs over to the backup unit overnight or something.
Thanks for correcting my stupid math error. I have no idea why that warrants a Flamebait rating. :-(
Also, RAID isn't for people who make stupid mistakes. Sorry about your 'rm' debacle.
I know. Bingo. That's why one still has to have a decent backup system in any environment. Users (even administrators) make stupid mistakes.
I figure this is the easiest way to add as you grow without having to break open the case and try to figure out how to add another damn drive in there. For backup, just have two systems with identical capacities and rsync between the two nightly.
RAID is nice, but for home use, it's not as nice as a nightly mirror. Why? I've seen RAID controllers fail and take out an entire RAID set. RAID also doesn't deal with the "Holy shit, I just accidently type `rm * ~` instead of `rm *~` problem."
So you share a "cell" but each person sharing still pays for minutes at the voice rate. And that is in addition to a $30/month fee just to play. Wonderful.
This will fail, then they will be crying the blues that there is no money to be made in wireless data service....
Methinks the bean counters never took a simple economics class and learned about price/demand curves, elasticity, etc.. Free clue: People don't generally NEED this.
There is nothing more important than providing a platform for University and politicians to come together to pat each other on the back and show off. Therefore, all proposals must meet this primary objective. If it fills a room up, all the better.
Therefore, Weave's the good and the bad list for spending ed tech money.
THE BAD
THE GOOD
I hope this helps. p.s. This is just a theoretical exercise. My employer is, of course, far more enlightened on these matters...
I bet it's 1, 2, 3, and 4 this past year since all I seem to do is play D2, drink potions, and die anyway....
No offense teardrop.ca, but ah duh, did you expect any intelligent responses on this story?!
You're going to run a 10 machine lab of Windows machines for less than $240 including upgrades to their latest OS, or are you talking about just buying one copy of Windows for all 10 machines?