Okay, enough of that! Now I'm getting sick to my stomach!

The problem that many of us are facing is that we are stuck with what we've got. We have already invested so much in Microsoft products that it would be extremely difficult to switch to something else. In addition, Windows NT 4.0 SP6a is a reasonably reliable operating system, and Office 2000 suite is exceptional.

However, every once in a while I get a little whimsical thinking back to good old days, when I used to run our multi-billion dollar company on two large VAX machines. That's ALL of our applications, every single one of them. Plus hundreds of users, over fifty printers and fax machines and numerous other things. In fact, we ran payroll, accounting, order processing, delivery scheduling, human resources, printing, communications and everything else on those two machines!

To top it all off, we ran for over ten years on these VAX machines without a major operating system upgrade! Yes, there were problems, but constant retraining, reinstalls, service packs, hot fixes and weekly major security alerts were not among them. And compared to clustering in OpenVMS (the operating system for VAX and Alpha hardware), "clustering" in Windows 2000 is a complete joke!

And now I need over 150 servers running Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2000! The really sickening thing is I'll bet I could run everything on a dozen or so Unix or Linux servers, or, again, two big Alpha (the successor to VAX) systems. (It's really too bad that Digital Equipment Corporation, which made best hardware and operating systems on planet, could not market their way out of a paper bag).

I think that's what is annoying is and many of our peers most. The constant need to spend an outrageous amount of time to keep up with new releases from Microsoft.

I know it doesn't fit into Microsoft's hostile "do it our way and pay us for privilege" business model, but we would much prefer a different approach to MCSE certification model. Instead of constantly rolling it forward constantly, invalidating certifications of those who cannot keep up, why not just append operating system to certification?

Why not just make a "MCSE Win4.0" and an "MCSE Win2000"? To me as a manager, it would be far more valuable than current catch-all scheme. Look at it this way, I could scan a resume for "MCSE Win3.1", "MCSE Win4.0" or "MCSE Win95". Wouldn't that make it easier for me as a manager? You bet!

However, it wouldn't help Microsoft's bottom line, would it?

Fortunately, I am not in business of helping Microsoft's profit margin. In fact, on my list of worries, that wouldn't even be in top million! My job, and job of each and every person in our company, is to support our users by giving them tools which enable them to do their jobs.

To do that, we will get certified on Windows 2000, and probably Windows XP after that. However, we will do it on our schedule, fitting training and testing time around our jobs and personal lives. In meantime, we will take a closer look at other alternatives to Windows and Office, because, well, well really don't like this situation. We may, or we may not, change to those alternatives, but before this we were not even looking ... now we are.

Additional Information

The Certification Debate http://internet-tips.net/Careers/certifications.htm There is a huge debate out there in computer world - to certify or not to certify. Here's my two cents.

Microsoft's Licensing Model (Sigh) http://internet-tips.net/Microsoft/licensing.htm You would think that Microsoft would want to make it easy to give them money, wouldn't you? Think again.

What's Up With Microsoft? http://internet-tips.net/Microsoft/whatsup.htm Microsoft stock has been going down all through 2000. Here's an opinion as to why.

I'll bet that graphic comes down very fast.

I had a similar problem some time ago. I run several webrings and one of problems that constantly occurs is ring member sites link directly to graphics on my own host. They do this even though rules of ring clearly state this is not allowed.

This left me with a dilemma. I didn't want to damage beauty of ring by putting out a "stop stealing" graphic, but since I am paying for my own bandwidth I wanted to reduce load. I also didn't want to remove image as I don't like 404 errors (I get an email for each and every one).

After repeated emails to ring member site didn't work I was left with choice of removing images or removing site from ring. The later option would still have left bandwidth being stolen (since ring member probably would not remove graphic).

What I wound up doing is creating a very optimal graphic with just 2 colors. The barest minimum graphic. It still looked okay, but was clearly not best graphic for ring. The file size of image was less than 1k which removed over 1mb a month from my bandwidth usage.

I know none of this is ideal solution. It can be a royal pain to examine server logs, send email and change image names. However, if you've got a big offender it can significantly reduce your bandwidth utilization.

Additional Information

Bandwidth stealing http://www.internet-tips.net/Legal/Bandwidth.htm Bandwidth stealing is linking to images or scripts from another site without permission, thus using that sites bandwidth without compensation.

How to tell if your bandwidth is being stolen http://www.internet-tips.net/Legal/Bandwidthhow.htm Want to find out if someone is stealing your bandwidth? Here are some ways you can tell.

Sins of internet- Bandwidth Stealing http://www.internet-tips.net/Legal/sins_bandwidth.htm This sin costs hosts millions of dollars a year - and often you don't even know that you did it!

Htaccess file - Redirect http://www.internet-tips.net/Webmaster/htaccess_redirect.htm You can redirect visitors to other pages using redirect function of htaccess.

HTML tag reference guide - http://www.internet-tips.net/HTML/META_httpequiv_refresh.htm