The Dean

That was the first clue this list is a piece of garbage (as are most lists).

I'm guessing you will find you were notified, but that notification was buried in the middle of the usual drivel of small print. Companies that use sleazy tactics will often try to find another way to screw you with new sleazy practices if some of their old sleaze results in regulation designed to protect the consumer. Then these sleazy companies will blame whatever regulation was passed as the reason they had to resort to this new sleaze. Of course, some will always blame the gov't for the new sleaze, instead of pointing the finger at the real source: The corporate greed of some slimy companies that show zero concern for serving their customers in an ethical manner.

It's fairly obvious she wasn't fired for being too hot (although she is very attractive), at least not officially. She was fired for dressing inappropriately. That's a big difference. Now, she may have been actually fired for being a total pain in the ass, or because the guys she worked with were horndogs who couldn't keep their concentration around an attractive woman, she may have used too much perfume or had bad BO. But firing her for inappropriate dress was probably the safest reason to give her...and it might be even be true.

That is for kick (combined punt and kickoff) returns only.

I think that's the real question, here. Define "return yards". Don't forget fumble returns, as well.

I was wondering the very same thing.

I believe 18 is legal in the USA and all of North America: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_conse...n_North_America

What's all this now?

Of course. How could I forget that.

I suggest you use it to tip your servers and bartenders.

As a 53 year-old man, I assure you that is fine by me.

As a Sicilian, I agree. RIP, Dennis.

That Mac Mini is running OSX and OS9, because some stuff has to run in OS9. I rarely get on it. But it used to be the computer connected to the modem/router, so I would sometimes use it for some basic maintenance. Even opening a browser takes forever. Their is one old design program one person there uses to work up ads and announcements. But if I get a chance, I will try what you suggest. And IMO Windows 7 is great. It requires less effort in the initial setup (which I still recommend as there are a few tweaks that help the speed and some builders are still putting garbage programs on their machines) and seems to be more innately secure. As has been already mentioned, it starts up, runs and shuts down quite fast. Oh, one more thing. "Vag-Com"? Sounds like something a gynecologist would use

No, i said the Macs I have owned and used extensively were garbage. But I don't use that experience to say all Macs are garbage, as I know better.

Good thing I don't take steroids.

Hmm. Maybe steroids and mushrooms don't mix, after all.

XP, after SP2, and with considerable help from 3rd party apps (free for the most part) was terrific, IMO. I still use it on my laptop and have no problems with it. Of course, you shouldn't have to go to the effort I did to make your OS work well. But one nice thing about Windows is there are a bunch of free apps to choose from to help out the issues with the OS.

I'm not completely up-to-date on the latest protection for Macs. But there are a few options. First of all, I think you may already have antimalware protection built in to your OS: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352102,00.asp Check it out to see if it has the capability to do a scan, or if it is simply works actively to prevent intrusion. This article pimps an offering from PCTools called iAntivirus for Mac. It is free, as is ClamXav. Both are Antivirus programs, but may be OK with other types of malware, I really don't know. http://www.freepcsecurity.co.uk/2009/01/11...-free-programs/ http://www.simplehelp.net/2009/01/12/how-t...ac-for-viruses/ These articles are over a year old, which can be a long time for computer security information. I will keep my eyes open and let you know if I come across anything interesting.

I've been there, that's for sure.

Well, Microsoft sends security updates for free, too, you know. Just the fact that Apple sends security updates should be proof enough that there are security issues. And, you should keep in mind that Apple is fairly slow at responding their security issues. according to many computer security experts. But back to the point, Symantec is an AntiVirus and really isn't the best malware detector. This was even truer several years ago. AV programs were way behind at detecting infections like trojans, dns changers, hijackers, malware and assorted spyware. It was meant to detect and protect against "Viruses". As I mentioned earlier, virus infections now represent a very small part of the total infection landscape. Some of the better AV programs now do a decent job with assorted malware.

Which is why making broad assumptions based solely on your personal experience is probably not a good idea. I will tell you one area where I think Mac has a huge advantage over PC. When you take a Mac out of the box it is pretty much ready to go and mostly properly configured. PC's really should be attended to before using, out of the box. Because there are so many different manufacturers of PCs, each trying to make them less expensive to the consumer and gain market share, they tend to sell hard drive space to advertisers and software companies. They also tweak the PC OS to look pretty (instead of performing as fast as it can) and the security is almost always poorly set on a PC. For the most part, when I set up a new PC for one my clients and they do a decent job of maintaining them (or have me maintain them) these PCs have very few problems and run very fast. Now, I don't know what processor your Dell is running (3Ghz tells me very little, as there is more to processor performance than the Ghz), but if it is a modern dual core (or quad core) processor, I would guess the Dell hasn't been properly configured.

out west out west Actually those are both very good suggestions, but they aren't out west, obviously. If you are talking about mostly adults, then I'd think about Sonoma and Napa. You either fly into SF or Oakland, or if you can go to one of the regional airports (Alaska and Horizen fly to Sonoma's Charles Shulz airport, I think). There are plenty of cool places to stay and much to do (including drinking some of the best wine the USA has to offer). Some of the better (higher-end) places to stay include: The Sonoma Mission Inn is pretty cool. We once had a catered even there based on game. Very cool http://www.fairmont.com/sonoma Meadowood is also very nice. Croquet, tennis and golf on the property. http://www.meadowood.com/ Auberge du Soleil is really something else. I have yet to stay there, but have been on the grounds and had drinks. http://www.aubergedusoleil.com/ Of course there are many other and more affordable options. But if you have younger kids, you may be looking for something entirely different.

"A purported prophylactic pilferer lead police on a roughly 60-yard foot pursuit Wednesday during a 12:20 a.m condom caper at a Walmart Supercenter in St. Lucie West, reports TCPalm.com." Who wrote this, Irv Weinstein?

No Brazil nuts, though.

I think it's pretty clear who here is drinking the kool aid. If I were to base Macs solely on my experience with them, I would say they are pieces of garbage. My Mac Book Pro was a stinking pile of crap that froze several times a day. The iMac I used at one job in the last 90's was the slowest computer I have ever used, and this includes some very very old OS machines. I also currently have to work on a Mac Mini that is such a dog, the worst POS PC in the client's stable outperforms it by double. But I actually can think beyond my experience, and pay attention to the experience of others. I know Macs are not garbage, even though most of my Mac experience has been miserable. They are very good, if overpriced, machines for the most part. And as a rule, they suffer from fewer infections than PCs. This is primarily due to their low market share (they don't make an appealing target for the bad guys...unlike iPhones, which are so popular they are the most attacked phone) and not simply due to the OS. Need proof? There is a competition that started four years ago called PWN2OWN. If you can break into and take over a device, you keep it. In this case, the goal is to keep a particular machine, so market share doesn't enter the picture. The results from the four PWN2OWN contests to date: 2007: http://securitywatch.eweek.com/apple/mac_h...wn_contest.html 2008: http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/711 2009: http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/0...ro-day-exploits <h1 class="h s-1"></h1> 2010 http://www.downloadsquad.com/2010/03/25/pw...t-man-standing/ So, as you can see, the OS is vulnerable, and can be infected with malware or taken over. Another issue that should be addressed is the use of the term "virus". Only a very small percentage of malware infections are "virus" infections. I believe Macs are as susceptible to Adware as any OS, although I may be wrong here. I know they can be infected by a DNS changing trojan. Which leads me to my question for you Bart. How do you know your computer has never been infected? If you don't use AV or Antimalware, and don't perform scans looking for malware, how can you be positive you are clean? You may be infected and not even know it. Not all infections make themselves apparent to the user.