CHARLES ANGELICH -> DAVID DRUMMOND wrote:

 CA>>> I thought you said you and the wife _had_ no floppies? ;-)

 DD>> It was many moons ago...

 CA> Did she have to wear a patch for awhile or was she hypnotized
 CA> to break the habit?

None of the above, the USB drive proved to be far more effective than the
floppies were.

 DD>>>>>> Files are moved via networks, or those little USB
 DD>>>>>> memory drive thingies.

 CA>>> No person I know in the real world has a working intranet
 CA>>> in their homes and no one I know in the real world owns
 CA>>> one of those "little USB memory drive thingies".

 DD>> Intranet? Computers have been sold with LAN cards for quite
 DD>> a few years now as standard (or can be purchased even here
 DD>> for less than AUS$30.00) How do you share you Internet feed
 DD>> between machines in the home?

 CA> Last time I checked I was connected to a router that was
 CA> connected to the broadband 'modem'. How do you share your
 CA> internet feed?

Via the LAN within our home. The router is just one device on that LAN - 
all of the computers on the network have Internet access.

 DD>> I'm not sure that I'd call a simple peer to peer home LAN
 DD>> as an Intranet.

 CA> Let's not go there - long story.

 DD>> Nearly everyone I know here with a computer owns one of
 DD>> those USB memory drive thingies - perhaps technology here
 DD>> is cheaper than I thought...

 CA> Possibly. CDs are quite inexpensive here. The 'thingies' at
 CA> dollar(s) per meg seemed less than a bargain to me. When/if
 CA> they get a 512meg'r down to say $10 I will reconsider - maybe.

CDs are just so slow to burn plus require "special" software and
hardware to be installed on the machine in order to write the data to the
media. The USB drives are just "recognised" by all 2000/XP/2003
machines. The USB drive is more efficient when just copying files to
another location too.

-- 

regards

David

---