>>It was just interesting that he's defending his companies backwardness. Then spouting about how he could care less about the current state of affairs.
>
>Yeah, I sit in wonder sometimes. <g> But, y'know, I'll bet there's a whole lot more of that "out there" than many of us would readily guess. I'm sitting here, myself, on a machine that's running IE4/OE4 (because of how badly they hosed OE5), Office97 (because O2K wants IE5), and NT4 (because W2K wants IE5). It's working, too! Damn well. I've got other machines, of course, with other versions, but there's a lot to be said for the sentiment:
>
>   Working is a feature!

Indeed it is! I think many people confuse conservatism with backwardness. I for one maintain several DOS apps, and right now I'm on a break while working on an Access 2.0 application (before anyone yells at me, we're moving it into 97).

If a system is working, I don't think that it warrants an upgrade just because it's available. Many times upgrading creates problems where there weren't any, not to mention that it's a sure way to obsoletize a system.

alex