If the hardware came with Vista (as opposed to being upgraded to it from something else), consider trying Vista first before removing it. I know a lot of people love to hate Vista, but personally I've found it to be extremely reliable - far more reliable than WinXP ever was. I've had zero crashes or other problems with Vista in over 2 years of using it on two PCs which are up 24/7 and see some rather heavy use at times. From reading lots of Vista horror stories, I think my main keys to success were to start with Vista rather than trying to upgrade to it, and to build PCs with enough horsepower to handle it. Depending on the hardware, it's possible that your church's machines might run just fine with Vista.

It's not that suprising when considering how many companies still have WinXP as their main OS. For example, the company I work for has about 20K employees worldwide, and WinXP remains our OS platform. Thus, the people that your or I know who aren't using WinXP are probably a tiny fraction when compared to these large corporate install bases.

I have some flying experience, but understanding a stall or how to recover from one is more about understanding the physics of flight. In a stall, the aircraft wings reach point where they are no longer able to produce lift at the current flying speed. At this point, the plane will begin to drop, losing altitude until this condition is corrected. Additional forward thrust from increasing the throttle doesn't necessarily help. Since the aircraft is dropping at this point, it is likely already gaining speed, albeit in a downward direction. To break out of the stall, it is necessary to correct the wings angle of attack so that they are able to again provide lift. To do this, the nose of the plane must be dropped, which requires moving the yoke forward. Once the angle of attack is corrected, and the wings are again able to provide lift, the plane can then be brought back under control, and the pilot can begin to pull the aircraft back toward level flight, etc.

Over my last 3 computers, the only things to fail have been the fans.

In the early-to-mid-90's, I puchased several hundred 3.5 floppies for the purpose of archiving files and back-ups (which were a pain). Those were the last floppies I ever purchased.

Soon after they came out in the mid-90's, I switched to Zip disks. I used those for a few years and never once suffered the dreaded click-of-death. Whenever I needed a floppy disk (usually for a driver install or boot disk), I simply re-used one of those old disks.

After that I moved to using CD-burners, DVD-burners and more recently flash or external HDs. At this point, I'm not even sure what to do with my box full of hundreds of old floppies. The last few computers I built don't even have a floppy drive. I keep saying I'll get around to re-archiving them on a newer format someday, but I've been saying that for well over a decade...

will that count as fraud, waste, or just business-as-usual?

(for more info see http://investigativereportingworkshop.org/investigations/wind-energy-funds-going-overseas/)

I grew up in Mankato, and I first used that MECC system discussed in the article around 1977 when I was in 4th grade. We didn't get Apples in our district until around 1978 or 1979, so for most of us, the MECC terminal was our first exposure to a computer. Our MECC sessions would continually print out on a large roll of yellow paper, and eventually it would run out and we'd need to get a teacher to help us reload it. Of course, it shouldn't be too surprising that most of us just used it for playing games. Among the games available on the MECC were Oregon Trail, a subhunt game (Seawolf?), and a dungeon game (Sceptre?). After a certain time of day (8am?), the access to some of the games was turned off, so some kids actually would arrive early just to play those games.

I greatly enjoyed the dungeon game, but never managed to get very far on it. Much later on, I learned about MUDs, and realized that I'd actually been playing one all those years ago. Nowadays, I suppose that many kids don't even know what MUDs are.

is how much gameplay each system actually gets in any given home. The gaming platforms in my home include multiple PCs, a 360 and a Wii. In a typical week, the gameplay (of my wife and me) breaks down to this:

PC: 12 to 20 hours
360: 12 to 20 hours
Wii: 0 to 2 hours at most, often going up to a month between power-ups

While our home is technically counted among those with a Wii, from our avg use numbers it looks like we barely qualify being called a Wii household. I suspect there are other Wii's out there in a similar situation. If a game that we wanted did come out that is truly multi-platform (Wii, 360, pc, etc), we'd most likely get the PC or 360 version instead.

I originally held out buying a 360 until the 65nm processor came out (Falcon version). But then due to the RROD problems, I opted to wait for the 65nm GPU as well (Jasper version). Those have been out for a while now, but it's still somewhat hit or miss as to whether the Elite version you get has a Jasper board (65nm CPU + 64nm GPU) or an older version. However, it appears now that most of the new elites and nearly all arcade versions have Jasper. My only reason for holding out longer is that I suspected a significant price drop on the elite was coming.

Now that the price is dropped, I'll finally get one. I'll just make sure to doublecheck that it's rated at 12.1 amps so I know for sure that I'm getting a Jasper.

That's the only one I'm really looking forward to.

Too bad the article didn't include a comparison of the failure rates for Jasper versions vs. earlier ones. From what I've been able to glean from other forums, it sounds like Jasper fail rates might be on par with the PS3 or Wii rates, or maybe even lower.

The concept of levels in RPGs primarily arose from the table-top pencil and paper versions like Dungeons and Dragons as a way to reduce book-keeping. The actual meaning of levels is rather ludicrous, but they eventually became a motivating force for players of those games as a way to measure their progress, and often to boast.

In a computer-based RPG, there is absolutely no need for this type of book-keeping convention. The computer can easily track minute details across all manner of character actions & statistics. As a result, levels could be (and IMHO should be) abolished entirely. A game using a skill-based advancement system (which tracks all these minute character details) is much more dynamic and offers a greater range of customization and choice for the player.

Unfortunately, decades of games featuring levels have in-grained player's thinking that levels are the be-all, end-all of RPGs, and it is very difficult to explain to them that levels are actually an archaic and unnecessary way to track character advancement. In addition, the term "skill-based" is often confused with playing skill, which is mostly unrelated to a skills-based advancement system in an RPG. Even the original summary seems to show this confusion.

I'd like to see more RPGs that ditch levels entirely, and switch to a skill-based advancement. It's time to move past the outdated level-up...ding!

I can almost always spot the Milky Way.

It's usually right next to the Snickers.

FYI - I'm an EE working in hardware development at a tech company in the upper midwest. Our workload and schedules are insane, yet the company is in the midst of still more layoffs. My todo list continually grows. ATM, it's well over 100 non-trivial items and tasks. Each single item is roughly 4 to 40 hours of concentrated work and at least a half-dozen of them are supposedly my top priority depending on who I ask at any given time. I arrive at 7am and leave at 6pm. I take an hour lunch at most, and at best I get to spend maybe 15 minutes across the entire day checking news sites, including slashdot. I'm salaried, and thus not eligible for any OT. I know many other hw engineers in the same boat.

Unfortunately, this is a one-horse town, so I have no option to go across the street to work for a competitor. The companies in this part of the country know they have us over a barrel. They motivate by fear, and if you complain or slack off, you're axed. With the bad economy things are only getting worse.

At least I have a job, and things could be worse. The hardware developers at my previous employer are expected to work 10-12 hour days regularly, but of course, like me they are only getting paid a salary based on doing 40hr/week.

Usually 9-10 per day. If anyone isn't pulling an equal amount of the load around here, they have a bull's eye on them when the next round of layoffs come around. In fact, at this point, anyone working less than 9 is pretty much a guaranteed casualty.