From: Richard B. 

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:52:51 -0500, "Geo."  wrote:

>Right now you probaby woudn't notice it because all your users were recently
>upgraded to P4 machines as your seti numbers so finely reflect  however
>prior to your upgrade I imagine it would have made a huge difference and
>when you get to the point where you are ready to upgrade again it may allow
>you to get a couple extra years out of your hardware. Think how much cheaper
>computers are 2 years later..

I am planning as best I can to get the most out of the
hardware...hyperthreading processors, dual monitor capable video, etc.
Right now the replacement schedule is roughly 3 years, beyond thatwith
other (and many unknown)  changes it would be gravy to go further but not
likely.


>I was thinking for the desktop because rolling out a new patch or new
>apps/config would be as simple as burning a bunch of CD's and then just
>booting them. Microsoft probably would never go this route because of the
>ease with which this could be copied however that's exactly the draw for me.
>Separate the OS from the machine and make it really easy to replace broken
>machines.

CD or some sort of RAM disk (the latter for speed) would be something.
Maybe with the latter some sort of electronic validation could be used?  It
would be an option and if the end users didn't like it then they just
wouldn't use it.

>Security and efficiency, just yesterday it was discovered that a bug in
>explorer could be exploited by including an EMF graphic in an email or
>possibly even a webpage. I don't know the extent of the exploitability yet
>but it's clear that the less shit you have loaded the less shit there is to
>exploit.

OIC, less *is* more.

>That's why we get directory services/SMS/SUS and cartoon
>interfaces full if wizards, popunder ads, and offers to sell us photo
>finishing services.

 Bobis dead. Long live Bob.

- Richard

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5