First and foremost, what I'm doing works fine. The program does not load slowly. If I spent time changing this over just to save a very small amount of time on initial program load, my clients would be unimpressed given all of the much more important things they want me to be accomplishing for them right now. When the IT dept. is hearing zero complaints about load time, they do not want me "fixing" it. Additionally, none of my clients' networks are being taxed, so network traffic is not an issue. Also, I like the ability to have less of a footprint on the local machine. It also makes for easy updates to the loader program. I just change it in one spot. And I can disable program access in one spot, though I use a different technique and I'm not saying there aren't other ways to accomplish that. Mike makes this into "if you're not doing it my way, you're not doing it the right way." I never argued that load time would not be faster (how much faster and is it worth it to change is a different issue). I just have a way that works for me, is acceptable to my clients, is not a hinderance, and is easy to manage. But Mike refuses to let anyone weight the pros and cons differently than he does and come to a different decision than he has, even over an issue that he said was "minor."


>>I see other issues with this technique and I've seen the programs load. It's not slow. Enough said.
>
>What issues you are reffering to ? I am using loader which brings newer exe's
>locally. I am not defensive or ofensive, Just curious :)