Do you mean like in Logan's Run where Jenny Agutter just materializes in front of Michael York in a flimsy disco slip and asks if he wants to have sex? Sign me up! I could go for that kind of "dating on demand".;')
Did I actually say anywhere in what I wrote that I am a geek? No. In fact I freely admit that I'm not. I'm an artist (music and photography) first and a Linux user second. A lot of people tend to THINK I'm a geek. But after having interacted with them for a very long time, I find that I don't really fit the mold. I don't share most geeky interests. I don't do a whole lot of things that geeks are interested in. Etc... But I understand geeks quite well.
Ahhh but you are wrong... She WOULD qualify because she has a scientific background. Biology and medicine are sciences. However, a music historian is not a scientist and so would not qualify. A musicologist however, might because musicology is more of a science.
They won't win any awards from Bruce Schneier, but netstat and nbtstat will give you a pretty good idea of who is connected to your machine that you don't expect to be connected. It won't show you stealthier scans. But if you're getting pegged by a worm or virus, and you notice which ports are being connected to, you have a pretty good chance of figuring out what hit you. Better than if you don't know how to use netstat and nbtstat... Keep in mind, this assumes that you're a "geek" who has his Windows box connected directly to the net with that "annoying firewall" turned off. I've met more than one "geek" who has done this. Until after they got hit with a nasty worm...
In the past when I was growing up (1980s), a geek was a guy or girl who was particularly obsessed with some unpopular but intellectual activity. It could have been computers. It could have been being on the A/V or stage crews. It could have been D&D. It could have been working in the library. Or it could have been chemistry or physics or astronomy. THAT was, is and always shall be the true geek. In fact geeks were also often synonymous with nerds. Typically geeks and nerds were not usually well liked or at best were given some kind of freak "mascot" status with the popular people.
Flash forward to the looney world of today and geekiness has been redefined. Geeks now have an edge. If they are female, maybe they wrap their slighlty overweight figures in goth clothes instead of the traditional sweater and ill fitting jeans. They use Manic Panic hair dye and shop at Hot Topic where they get their pseudo-fetish garb. They have "attitude" because they now know that the world is their oyster. The guys ditched the glasses for contacts and the pocket protectors for gadgets. They all listen to emo. Or at least, this is what the media wants you to believe.
Many of today's geeks as defined by and in the media (both self professed and knighted) aren't really geeks at all. They're still kids trying to fit in and choosing yet another fashion fad that tries, but fails, to be truly self-deprecating. And the interests of these so-called geeks are no longer unpopular. Video gaming? I think that pretty much knocks out the interest in popular music that used to be the hallmark of teen life. Role playing games? There are lots more people who are into them these days and they have that "edge" that the originals lacked. Graphic Novels? The only thing geeky about that activity is the interaction with the sneering comic book guy jackass who runs the store where they are sold.
Computers? Ahhhh yes. Computers. There are so many people who mistakenly assume that someone who can fix a minor problem or tweak a Windows box is a "computer geek". Ask one of these "geeks" how to tell if they are being scanned via the command prompt and you'd likely get a blank stare. People who can use Windows at even a moderately advanced level are not "geeks". They are simply people who have learned how to use a mainstream appliance. The number of e-mail addresses or IM clients one has does not make them a geek. It's a lot like calling people in the 80s who could actually set their VCR and Microwave oven clocks, "geeks". basic computer usage is no longer a qualifier to the title geek.
Gadgets? One of the BIGGEST mistaken assumptions by the masses and the media is the confusion between a geek and a "gadget guy". It's an easy one to make because most people are bewildered by gadgets and assume that mastery of these devices MUST be a geeky persuit. Of course, they are wrong. Ownership of a large screen television, two cell phones with bluetooth, a PDA, pager and home theater set up do not endow one with "geekiness". Tragically, the gadget guy is simply a conspicuous consumer with nothing better to do than attempt to master these machines and thereby appear "geeky" to the less perceptive. Most gadget guys tend to be office workers with little or not actual technical or scientific background at all. The true geek BUILDS his own A/V gear. He eschews the big box stores like Best Buy and prefers to scour the internet for circuit diagrams for the latest audio amp and then orders the parts to build it from Digikey. Do not think that because you can plug in a brand new SATA or IEEE1384 adapter card that you are a geek. The real geeks you went to school with would laugh their horkly little nasal passages away at the notion that one considers themselves a geek for using a PnP PCI card. No sir... back in the day, it was editing CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT and making sure you had enough free memory in the right spots. Today, as horrible as PnP can be, it's still child's play compared to what REAL geeks were do
1. No matter how many problems you point out that exist in Google's services, they are still far less than the flaws that have existed in systems like Yahoo and Hotmail for far longer 2. Whether you believe it or not, there is NO such thing as a "perfect" e-mail system. Google never made that claim and it's supporters certainly don't make that claim. What they do claim is that Google has the more innovative interface. And after using the lackluster offerings of both Yahoo and Hotmail, I have say I agree with them. 3. Although you might think it's "hip and cool" to be anti-Google just because Wired magazine told you to do so. It's not. It's lame. It's like someone trying to make it hip and cool to listen to Johnny Mathis tunes at a rave. Lame. 4. Yahoo offers nothing like Google. Yahoo started off as a so-so search engine and evolved into a so-so portal with e-mail and then threw in maps and other useless crap. Google started off as a damn precise search engine that actually caters to people with a brain (ie. those of us who use the proper search syntax) as opposed to the numb nuts who just type a phrase in and expect to get an exact response. They then exapnded their offerings as experiments and are still in the experimental phase. It's just that their betas outshine the "production" services of their competitors. 5. Google does more with less better than MS could ever dream of. They have a smaller staff and a much smaller financial value (not that it matters) but they produce products that, while not "perfect", are at least ten times better than what any of their competitors offer. 6. Finally. Fuck you. I'm sick of all the Google bashing. It's lame and so are you. The way you screwjobs act, you'd think there are people opening up churches to worship Google like people are doing with Microsoft. I have to wonder if all of the people on/. who complain about Google are just Yahoo, MSN and Microsoft twits. If you are a Microsoft employee, I shake my fist at thee...;P
I have the solution for you and it consists of a few simple steps:
1. Stop producing crap artists with guaranteed star power and invest long-term in less popular but more qualified artists that you are currently rejecting 2. Divorce yourself from the ClearChannel monopoly in the United States. It's not helping matters since they aren't exactly a hotbed of diversity in programming 3. Continue to offer your music on CD as well as non-DRMed cross-platform media files and watch your profits soar higher than you ever imagined even if there are people "sharing" the music
Once you wake up and smell reality, you might see that P2P isn't your worst enemy. It's your current "talent" and the people signing them. That is all.
Sites like digg.com and del.icio.us are just a passing fad. In fact I would argue that similar stuff has already been seen in the form of about.com. The only difference is that you're letting "the rabble" define portal catgories which guarantees a crappy experience. I'd be very surprised if these types of sites are even more than a blip on the radar in five years. about.com hasn't made much of an impact and they have been around for a lot longer.
The main problem with giving the masses control is that nobody does things the same way. This means that you lack any uniformity in the categorization process which pretty much kills the point of categorization: uniformity. Personally, I still don't get why people are so fired up for prepackaged "cool link" sites. Do you lack the intellect, imagination and interest to do some actual research yourself? It's not that hard. And actually, research is quite a fun hobby. The only thing that sites like these bring to the table is a travesty in the guise of a panacea for lame brains.
I get by with my trivial research needs (ie. research that doesn't need to be 100% authoritative or verified) very well with Google and Wikipedia thank you very much. And for the more important research there are texts at the public library and librarians who are willing to help you. The last place I'd go is something that aggregates popular content for lazy asses.
And you're also the same loudmouth dumbass I dealt with many times a Trolling4Dollars. Your the same guy who loaded up a bunch of credit cards to operate your PORN (not that I have anything against porn) "business" and who actually thinks that being in debt is a great thing. Oh and by the way... ninenine.com sucks. If you want you want good and REALLY FREE pron, check out Sublime Directory. Stick it up your craw NineNine. You and your whole neocon self righteousness.
Then you have no business commenting on things you don't know about. If you're a business user, why are you commenting on this? What input do you have in this discussion and WHY are you even reading this article? In other words what do YOU have to prove?
Keep in mind that we're talking about IT here. Not engineering. IT. Information Technology. AKA Computer Network Janitors. That's ALL we're talking about. Not paper pushers, suits, desk jockeys or any other computer user. JUST IT. The apps you mention have no place in an IT department. And if you are doing IT along with engineering duties, then your business needs to revamp it's approach to IT.
Suffice it to say that when my Linux using friends are scrambling to figure out how to get their machine to boot, figure out how to do simple things like change the screen resolution and griping about.config files, I'm always up and running without a glitch.
Apparently they don't know much about computers then. Do they? And neither do you...
Where I work there is only one application that matters that runs on Windows and it runs very well under Wine. So in my situation, there was no reason to stick with Windows. We don't use Exchange, so I don't need Outlook and even if we did, I'd use Evolution instead. Of course I'm also not an "underling" who would get fired for making such a decision. That IS a valid reason for sticking with Windows and it's not a technological one, it's political.
...on my desktop for about five years here at work now. To be honest, if you know what you're doing with computers, there's no reason to stick with Windows on your desktop in a Windows environment. For those apps that you HAVE to have, there is Wine and 'rdesktop'. When I need to do some Windows admin stuff, I just connect to one of our servers with 'rdesktop'. And I got most of the basic apps installed under Wine if there was no Linux equivalent. Linux gives you everything you need and more than Windows ever could. And of course uptime and reliability... we won't talk about that. Suffice it to say that when my Windows using co-workers are scrambling to apply critical updates, clean up worm/virus issues and griping about malware, I'm always up and running without a glitch.
...what's the truth here? Are Intel processors more powerful than Motorola/IBM? Has Apple been lying all this time regarding the performance of PPC vs. x86? Why did Jobs sell out to IBM? Remember how anti-Big Blue he used to be? What's going on? More to the point why did MS decide to flip-flop with the Xbox 360 (should have been called Xbox 180, but I'm sure they don't "get" the difference either) and go with a... PPC? So if Apple has been lying all this time and x86 is actually the better architecture, why did they lie to begin with? Was it a poor business decision that they wanted to cover up? Or is something else entirely going on?
Re:From TFA (and other materials on the subject)
on
HAARP Amping It Up
·
· Score: 1
And you know this because you personally tested and evaluated every aspect of what you stated... Right?;P Interesting prospect but it's likely "just a theory", so I don't know if we should believe it or not. Who's with me? Let's BURN THE WITCH!!!
I've been dying for DirecTV to make a PCI card that just plugs into the PC and pipes the video onto the PCI bus. (Or better yet PCIe) I don't seen why DRM should be handled by the OS if the PCI card still needs to use a smart card like the DirecTV boxes. Why wouldn't the cable folks use the same approach? They'd have their control of the content via an addressable smart card. And all they'd have to do is have the unlocked content stream from the card into the system. At that point the OS is just a "dumb" path for the signal to be displayed via a media player. Quite simple really. And then they don't need to trust MS to be their DRM provider...
A few years ago (admittedly my Linux knowledge wasn't what it is today) I set up a dual boot system for my girlfriend. Windows 98 and Redhat 7. It took me 6 hours to get Windows 98 installed and configured with all the apps she needed (MP3 ripper, VNC server, MP3 player, IE, Outlook Express and her dial-up connector). I also took the time to set up a custom Quick Launch bar with simple one click access to applications so it really worked a lot more like an applicance for her. It took me 6 DAYS to get Redhat configured to do the same things and a host of extra things that I couldn't afford to set up in Windows. However, when I tallied up the cost of software to do the same exact things in Windows, I was looking at about $6000 for software alone.
On top of that, the Redhat installation ticked along for four years solid with not a glitch other than an occasional fsck due to a power outage. The Windows installation needed to be fixed and re-installed at least 35 times in that same period of time. And Windows still didn't have all the functionality that the Redhat install did. She ditched Windows once it was no longer a work requirement. She's now my wife and we have several Linux boxes (she's no techie) and one XP box that only I use for the occasional video editing foray. (I've recently rediscovered Cinelerra and will likely be losing the XP box within the next year)
The point here is which would you rather have your admins doing? Spending all their time fixing ailing boxes with multiple occurences of downtime over the years? Or... spending a longer period of time getting it "right" and not having to do much with it due to the LACK of downtime for the box? I think Microsoft loses yet again.
Slashdot Mirror
dating on demand
Do you mean like in Logan's Run where Jenny Agutter just materializes in front of Michael York in a flimsy disco slip and asks if he wants to have sex? Sign me up! I could go for that kind of "dating on demand". ;')
Did I actually say anywhere in what I wrote that I am a geek? No. In fact I freely admit that I'm not. I'm an artist (music and photography) first and a Linux user second. A lot of people tend to THINK I'm a geek. But after having interacted with them for a very long time, I find that I don't really fit the mold. I don't share most geeky interests. I don't do a whole lot of things that geeks are interested in. Etc... But I understand geeks quite well.
Ahhh but you are wrong... She WOULD qualify because she has a scientific background. Biology and medicine are sciences. However, a music historian is not a scientist and so would not qualify. A musicologist however, might because musicology is more of a science.
They won't win any awards from Bruce Schneier, but netstat and nbtstat will give you a pretty good idea of who is connected to your machine that you don't expect to be connected. It won't show you stealthier scans. But if you're getting pegged by a worm or virus, and you notice which ports are being connected to, you have a pretty good chance of figuring out what hit you. Better than if you don't know how to use netstat and nbtstat... Keep in mind, this assumes that you're a "geek" who has his Windows box connected directly to the net with that "annoying firewall" turned off. I've met more than one "geek" who has done this. Until after they got hit with a nasty worm...
In the past when I was growing up (1980s), a geek was a guy or girl who was particularly obsessed with some unpopular but intellectual activity. It could have been computers. It could have been being on the A/V or stage crews. It could have been D&D. It could have been working in the library. Or it could have been chemistry or physics or astronomy. THAT was, is and always shall be the true geek. In fact geeks were also often synonymous with nerds. Typically geeks and nerds were not usually well liked or at best were given some kind of freak "mascot" status with the popular people.
Flash forward to the looney world of today and geekiness has been redefined. Geeks now have an edge. If they are female, maybe they wrap their slighlty overweight figures in goth clothes instead of the traditional sweater and ill fitting jeans. They use Manic Panic hair dye and shop at Hot Topic where they get their pseudo-fetish garb. They have "attitude" because they now know that the world is their oyster. The guys ditched the glasses for contacts and the pocket protectors for gadgets. They all listen to emo. Or at least, this is what the media wants you to believe.
Many of today's geeks as defined by and in the media (both self professed and knighted) aren't really geeks at all. They're still kids trying to fit in and choosing yet another fashion fad that tries, but fails, to be truly self-deprecating. And the interests of these so-called geeks are no longer unpopular. Video gaming? I think that pretty much knocks out the interest in popular music that used to be the hallmark of teen life. Role playing games? There are lots more people who are into them these days and they have that "edge" that the originals lacked. Graphic Novels? The only thing geeky about that activity is the interaction with the sneering comic book guy jackass who runs the store where they are sold.
Computers? Ahhhh yes. Computers. There are so many people who mistakenly assume that someone who can fix a minor problem or tweak a Windows box is a "computer geek". Ask one of these "geeks" how to tell if they are being scanned via the command prompt and you'd likely get a blank stare. People who can use Windows at even a moderately advanced level are not "geeks". They are simply people who have learned how to use a mainstream appliance. The number of e-mail addresses or IM clients one has does not make them a geek. It's a lot like calling people in the 80s who could actually set their VCR and Microwave oven clocks, "geeks". basic computer usage is no longer a qualifier to the title geek.
Gadgets? One of the BIGGEST mistaken assumptions by the masses and the media is the confusion between a geek and a "gadget guy". It's an easy one to make because most people are bewildered by gadgets and assume that mastery of these devices MUST be a geeky persuit. Of course, they are wrong. Ownership of a large screen television, two cell phones with bluetooth, a PDA, pager and home theater set up do not endow one with "geekiness". Tragically, the gadget guy is simply a conspicuous consumer with nothing better to do than attempt to master these machines and thereby appear "geeky" to the less perceptive. Most gadget guys tend to be office workers with little or not actual technical or scientific background at all. The true geek BUILDS his own A/V gear. He eschews the big box stores like Best Buy and prefers to scour the internet for circuit diagrams for the latest audio amp and then orders the parts to build it from Digikey. Do not think that because you can plug in a brand new SATA or IEEE1384 adapter card that you are a geek. The real geeks you went to school with would laugh their horkly little nasal passages away at the notion that one considers themselves a geek for using a PnP PCI card. No sir... back in the day, it was editing CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT and making sure you had enough free memory in the right spots. Today, as horrible as PnP can be, it's still child's play compared to what REAL geeks were do
If ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. ;P I'm such a kidder.
1. No matter how many problems you point out that exist in Google's services, they are still far less than the flaws that have existed in systems like Yahoo and Hotmail for far longer /. who complain about Google are just Yahoo, MSN and Microsoft twits. If you are a Microsoft employee, I shake my fist at thee... ;P
2. Whether you believe it or not, there is NO such thing as a "perfect" e-mail system. Google never made that claim and it's supporters certainly don't make that claim. What they do claim is that Google has the more innovative interface. And after using the lackluster offerings of both Yahoo and Hotmail, I have say I agree with them.
3. Although you might think it's "hip and cool" to be anti-Google just because Wired magazine told you to do so. It's not. It's lame. It's like someone trying to make it hip and cool to listen to Johnny Mathis tunes at a rave. Lame.
4. Yahoo offers nothing like Google. Yahoo started off as a so-so search engine and evolved into a so-so portal with e-mail and then threw in maps and other useless crap. Google started off as a damn precise search engine that actually caters to people with a brain (ie. those of us who use the proper search syntax) as opposed to the numb nuts who just type a phrase in and expect to get an exact response. They then exapnded their offerings as experiments and are still in the experimental phase. It's just that their betas outshine the "production" services of their competitors.
5. Google does more with less better than MS could ever dream of. They have a smaller staff and a much smaller financial value (not that it matters) but they produce products that, while not "perfect", are at least ten times better than what any of their competitors offer.
6. Finally. Fuck you. I'm sick of all the Google bashing. It's lame and so are you. The way you screwjobs act, you'd think there are people opening up churches to worship Google like people are doing with Microsoft. I have to wonder if all of the people on
1982 called. They want their attitude back. Oh... and turn in that "Where's the Beef" T-shirt while your at it. It makes you look silly.
I have the solution for you and it consists of a few simple steps:
1. Stop producing crap artists with guaranteed star power and invest long-term in less popular but more qualified artists that you are currently rejecting
2. Divorce yourself from the ClearChannel monopoly in the United States. It's not helping matters since they aren't exactly a hotbed of diversity in programming
3. Continue to offer your music on CD as well as non-DRMed cross-platform media files and watch your profits soar higher than you ever imagined even if there are people "sharing" the music
Once you wake up and smell reality, you might see that P2P isn't your worst enemy. It's your current "talent" and the people signing them. That is all.
Sites like digg.com and del.icio.us are just a passing fad. In fact I would argue that similar stuff has already been seen in the form of about.com. The only difference is that you're letting "the rabble" define portal catgories which guarantees a crappy experience. I'd be very surprised if these types of sites are even more than a blip on the radar in five years. about.com hasn't made much of an impact and they have been around for a lot longer.
The main problem with giving the masses control is that nobody does things the same way. This means that you lack any uniformity in the categorization process which pretty much kills the point of categorization: uniformity. Personally, I still don't get why people are so fired up for prepackaged "cool link" sites. Do you lack the intellect, imagination and interest to do some actual research yourself? It's not that hard. And actually, research is quite a fun hobby. The only thing that sites like these bring to the table is a travesty in the guise of a panacea for lame brains.
I get by with my trivial research needs (ie. research that doesn't need to be 100% authoritative or verified) very well with Google and Wikipedia thank you very much. And for the more important research there are texts at the public library and librarians who are willing to help you. The last place I'd go is something that aggregates popular content for lazy asses.
And you're also the same loudmouth dumbass I dealt with many times a Trolling4Dollars. Your the same guy who loaded up a bunch of credit cards to operate your PORN (not that I have anything against porn) "business" and who actually thinks that being in debt is a great thing. Oh and by the way... ninenine.com sucks. If you want you want good and REALLY FREE pron, check out Sublime Directory. Stick it up your craw NineNine. You and your whole neocon self righteousness.
Then you have no business commenting on things you don't know about. If you're a business user, why are you commenting on this? What input do you have in this discussion and WHY are you even reading this article? In other words what do YOU have to prove?
Poor assumption on my part... I assume that if someone really knows what they are doing, they MUST be either an IT worker or a hobbyist.
Keep in mind that we're talking about IT here. Not engineering. IT. Information Technology. AKA Computer Network Janitors. That's ALL we're talking about. Not paper pushers, suits, desk jockeys or any other computer user. JUST IT. The apps you mention have no place in an IT department. And if you are doing IT along with engineering duties, then your business needs to revamp it's approach to IT.
Someone finally calls Slashdot on their "Slashdot Effect" for what it really is: a DDoS. Whoohoo!!! Let the flamewar begin!!!
So all your IT co-workers run with minimum priveleges? How do they actually do any work?
Apparently they don't know much about computers then. Do they? And neither do you...
Where I work there is only one application that matters that runs on Windows and it runs very well under Wine. So in my situation, there was no reason to stick with Windows. We don't use Exchange, so I don't need Outlook and even if we did, I'd use Evolution instead. Of course I'm also not an "underling" who would get fired for making such a decision. That IS a valid reason for sticking with Windows and it's not a technological one, it's political.
...on my desktop for about five years here at work now. To be honest, if you know what you're doing with computers, there's no reason to stick with Windows on your desktop in a Windows environment. For those apps that you HAVE to have, there is Wine and 'rdesktop'. When I need to do some Windows admin stuff, I just connect to one of our servers with 'rdesktop'. And I got most of the basic apps installed under Wine if there was no Linux equivalent. Linux gives you everything you need and more than Windows ever could. And of course uptime and reliability... we won't talk about that. Suffice it to say that when my Windows using co-workers are scrambling to apply critical updates, clean up worm/virus issues and griping about malware, I'm always up and running without a glitch.
...what's the truth here? Are Intel processors more powerful than Motorola/IBM? Has Apple been lying all this time regarding the performance of PPC vs. x86? Why did Jobs sell out to IBM? Remember how anti-Big Blue he used to be? What's going on? More to the point why did MS decide to flip-flop with the Xbox 360 (should have been called Xbox 180, but I'm sure they don't "get" the difference either) and go with a... PPC? So if Apple has been lying all this time and x86 is actually the better architecture, why did they lie to begin with? Was it a poor business decision that they wanted to cover up? Or is something else entirely going on?
And you know this because you personally tested and evaluated every aspect of what you stated... Right? ;P Interesting prospect but it's likely "just a theory", so I don't know if we should believe it or not. Who's with me? Let's BURN THE WITCH!!!
Please do.
I've been dying for DirecTV to make a PCI card that just plugs into the PC and pipes the video onto the PCI bus. (Or better yet PCIe) I don't seen why DRM should be handled by the OS if the PCI card still needs to use a smart card like the DirecTV boxes. Why wouldn't the cable folks use the same approach? They'd have their control of the content via an addressable smart card. And all they'd have to do is have the unlocked content stream from the card into the system. At that point the OS is just a "dumb" path for the signal to be displayed via a media player. Quite simple really. And then they don't need to trust MS to be their DRM provider...
A few years ago (admittedly my Linux knowledge wasn't what it is today) I set up a dual boot system for my girlfriend. Windows 98 and Redhat 7. It took me 6 hours to get Windows 98 installed and configured with all the apps she needed (MP3 ripper, VNC server, MP3 player, IE, Outlook Express and her dial-up connector). I also took the time to set up a custom Quick Launch bar with simple one click access to applications so it really worked a lot more like an applicance for her. It took me 6 DAYS to get Redhat configured to do the same things and a host of extra things that I couldn't afford to set up in Windows. However, when I tallied up the cost of software to do the same exact things in Windows, I was looking at about $6000 for software alone.
On top of that, the Redhat installation ticked along for four years solid with not a glitch other than an occasional fsck due to a power outage. The Windows installation needed to be fixed and re-installed at least 35 times in that same period of time. And Windows still didn't have all the functionality that the Redhat install did. She ditched Windows once it was no longer a work requirement. She's now my wife and we have several Linux boxes (she's no techie) and one XP box that only I use for the occasional video editing foray. (I've recently rediscovered Cinelerra and will likely be losing the XP box within the next year)
The point here is which would you rather have your admins doing? Spending all their time fixing ailing boxes with multiple occurences of downtime over the years? Or... spending a longer period of time getting it "right" and not having to do much with it due to the LACK of downtime for the box? I think Microsoft loses yet again.
Cliff Clavin? I can see it now. "So dis guy der sez, 'forsooth!!..."