You should be more pissed off at your phone guy than Microsoft. Small Business Server 2003 is a package that's intended to be used in a certain way. It's considerably cheaper to buy everything included this way than to buy all of the parts separately, but it's subject to significant restrictions as to how you can use it. That's the deal. Shouldn't your phone guy have looked into that when he bought it on your behalf? I'm no Microsoft apologist but that's the way they choose to sell it and they are entitled to do that. If you don't want to agree to their terms, use something else.
Dude,
If you win the lottery have some fun. Buy a Ferrari, hang out on a tropical island for a while, do whatever you want. You don't have to go back into full-time education if your're rich.
Bush's cretinous outpourings may be taken seriously in the US but Blair's toadying is treated with a healthy degree of scepticism in the UK. I'm an atheist myself and as a UK citizen, I reserve my right to call you a goddamned fucking arsehole with impunity.
What do people here think about RMX as a step in the right direction? Filtering seems to me to be a bizarre solution because you still receive all the crap you don't want before you deal with it.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether our broadcasting organisation broke a few rules or took a few liberties with our female party guests -- it did. But you can't hold a whole publicly-funded organisation responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals.
For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole publicly-funded broadcasting system? And if the whole publicly-funded broadcasting system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our broadcasting institutions in general? I put it to you... isn't this an indictment of our entire British society?
Well, you can do what you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the entire United Kingdom!
Gentlemen...!
The BBC is not a "government agency". It's independent which is why the government of the day always gets het up about it not being objective in its political reportage (they'd love to be able to pull the propaganda strings). It is funded in a weird and anachronsitic way by a kind of tax on televisions, but that way it's kept free from commercial pressures. More or less.
'The UK's broadband boom is likely to falter unless more progress is made towards combating digital piracy'.
The UK's broadband "boom" is hamstrung by BT. Most people in the UK think "broadband" is ADSL supplied by BT. In most areas they're right because there's no alternative.
BT will not configure one of their exchanges until they have an arbitrarily large number of preregistrations. For those lucky enough to be within range of one of the configured exchanges, actually getting connected is a bureaucratic nightmare.
You can't order ADSL unless you have a BT analogue line to put it on. Without a phone number to put in their internal systems, they can't tell you whether they'd be able to connect you if you have a line installed. You order the line, they connect it to the exchange and allocate it a number. Only then can they tell you whether it will support ADSL. If not, they cancel the order and take the line out again.
The customer care for the BT "Business" ADSL range of packages is inpired. They'll happily sell you a routed ADSL connection with NAT or No-NAT options and a four-port hub in the router but when you call the support lines to report a fault they say "we don't support ADSL in networked configurations"
Slashdot Mirror
You should be more pissed off at your phone guy than Microsoft. Small Business Server 2003 is a package that's intended to be used in a certain way. It's considerably cheaper to buy everything included this way than to buy all of the parts separately, but it's subject to significant restrictions as to how you can use it. That's the deal. Shouldn't your phone guy have looked into that when he bought it on your behalf? I'm no Microsoft apologist but that's the way they choose to sell it and they are entitled to do that. If you don't want to agree to their terms, use something else.
I stand corrected. (Fingers crossed).
Dude, If you win the lottery have some fun. Buy a Ferrari, hang out on a tropical island for a while, do whatever you want. You don't have to go back into full-time education if your're rich.
Oh, the sales people where I work just LOVE free software. What's the percentage mark-up you can charge on nothing?
Bush's cretinous outpourings may be taken seriously in the US but Blair's toadying is treated with a healthy degree of scepticism in the UK. I'm an atheist myself and as a UK citizen, I reserve my right to call you a goddamned fucking arsehole with impunity.
What do people here think about RMX as a step in the right direction? Filtering seems to me to be a bizarre solution because you still receive all the crap you don't want before you deal with it.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether our broadcasting organisation broke a few rules or took a few liberties with our female party guests -- it did. But you can't hold a whole publicly-funded organisation responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole publicly-funded broadcasting system? And if the whole publicly-funded broadcasting system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our broadcasting institutions in general? I put it to you ... isn't this an indictment of our entire British society?
Well, you can do what you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the entire United Kingdom!
Gentlemen...!
The BBC is not a "government agency". It's independent which is why the government of the day always gets het up about it not being objective in its political reportage (they'd love to be able to pull the propaganda strings). It is funded in a weird and anachronsitic way by a kind of tax on televisions, but that way it's kept free from commercial pressures. More or less.
'The UK's broadband boom is likely to falter unless more progress is made towards combating digital piracy'.
The UK's broadband "boom" is hamstrung by BT. Most people in the UK think "broadband" is ADSL supplied by BT. In most areas they're right because there's no alternative.
BT will not configure one of their exchanges until they have an arbitrarily large number of preregistrations. For those lucky enough to be within range of one of the configured exchanges, actually getting connected is a bureaucratic nightmare.
You can't order ADSL unless you have a BT analogue line to put it on. Without a phone number to put in their internal systems, they can't tell you whether they'd be able to connect you if you have a line installed. You order the line, they connect it to the exchange and allocate it a number. Only then can they tell you whether it will support ADSL. If not, they cancel the order and take the line out again.
The customer care for the BT "Business" ADSL range of packages is inpired. They'll happily sell you a routed ADSL connection with NAT or No-NAT options and a four-port hub in the router but when you call the support lines to report a fault they say "we don't support ADSL in networked configurations"
Ed Byrne: "'It's like rain on your wedding day,'... that's not ironic. Not unless you're marrying the god of clement weather."
This is a global problem. How would you deal with spam that originates outside the jurisdiction of this law?