Windows Update - One for Brett Roberts

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Graeme Woollett, Jun 10, 2005.

  1. I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)

    WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    the US?
    WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    %$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)

    I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    connection.

    IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    are available from servers inside NZ.
    Graeme Woollett, Jun 10, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Graeme Woollett wrote:
    > WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    > the US?


    It doesn't, it is farmed out to akmai technologies, who load balance it
    out to all over the world, if the NZ server(run/hosted by Xtra?) is
    busy, it'll try the next closest etc until it finds one willing to
    accept it.

    > WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    > %$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    > sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)


    it doesnt, akmai does, so I guess MS outsource the problem... if you
    want it, I have it(sp2) here, check /files on dave.net.nz pretty sure it
    is there somewhere, if not, I can up load it for you on Monday(going
    home now).

    > I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    > connection.


    thats not MS's fault... thats yours for chosing to go with paradise...
    hang on, paraside, all servers will be intl for you, thats telstras
    fault, have a google for the next line
    "telstra de-peer" site:nz

    > IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    > are available from servers inside NZ.


    those nz sites are also intl to you anyway... see my paragraph above.
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Jun 10, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Graeme Woollett

    AD. Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:19:30 +1200, Graeme Woollett wrote:

    > IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    > are available from servers inside NZ.


    It's not exactly learning from Linux distros. Those mirrors are only there
    because certain dedicated people are willing to provide locally hosted
    content at their own expense. Some are even trying hard to build a
    critical mass of NZ based content and peering exchanges so we can be a
    little more self sufficient and less reliant on nasty telcos and their
    political games.

    Thanks Citylink (and others of course) :)

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Jun 10, 2005
    #3
  4. Graeme Woollett

    E. Scrooge Guest

    "Graeme Woollett" <> wrote in message
    news:d8b4cf$5v8$...
    > I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    > trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    > dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    > hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    > Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    > And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    > the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >
    > WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    > the US?
    > WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    > %$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    > sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >
    > I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    > connection.
    >
    > IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    > are available from servers inside NZ.


    So your dodgy PC is all MS fault.
    Get a decent PC instead of farting round with upgrades on junk.

    You might like to try asking for a SP2 CD that will have most the updates on
    it.

    Millions of other people with good working PCs don't have MS update
    problems.

    E. Scrooge
    E. Scrooge, Jun 10, 2005
    #4
  5. Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > Graeme Woollett wrote:
    >
    >> WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >> the US?

    >
    >
    > It doesn't, it is farmed out to akmai technologies, who load balance it
    > out to all over the world, if the NZ server(run/hosted by Xtra?) is
    > busy, it'll try the next closest etc until it finds one willing to
    > accept it.
    >
    >> WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >> %$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >> sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)

    >
    >
    > it doesnt, akmai does, so I guess MS outsource the problem... if you
    > want it, I have it(sp2) here, check /files on dave.net.nz pretty sure it
    > is there somewhere, if not, I can up load it for you on Monday(going
    > home now).
    >
    >> I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >> connection.

    >
    >
    > thats not MS's fault... thats yours for chosing to go with paradise...
    > hang on, paraside, all servers will be intl for you, thats telstras
    > fault, have a google for the next line
    > "telstra de-peer" site:nz
    >
    >> IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >> are available from servers inside NZ.

    >
    >
    > those nz sites are also intl to you anyway... see my paragraph above.

    Not quite true, debian.co.nz and ihug are still both still charged as
    national, traceroute b4 you leap. But if paradise de-peers from APE
    your statement will then be correct.

    And don't get me started on Telstra depeering... %$&$* Telstra...

    Still in the good old days of NT4 (Maybe 2000 as well) you could
    manually download and keep the big updates.
    Graeme Woollett, Jun 10, 2005
    #5
  6. E. Scrooge wrote:
    > "Graeme Woollett" <> wrote in message
    > news:d8b4cf$5v8$...
    >
    >>I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >>trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >>dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >>hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >>Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >>And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >>the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>
    >>WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >>the US?
    >>WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >>%$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >>sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>
    >>I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >>connection.
    >>
    >>IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>are available from servers inside NZ.

    >
    >
    > So your dodgy PC is all MS fault.



    > Get a decent PC instead of farting round with upgrades on junk.
    >

    A truly stupid statement.
    > You might like to try asking for a SP2 CD that will have most the updates on
    > it.
    >
    > Millions of other people with good working PCs don't have MS update
    > problems.
    >
    > E. Scrooge
    >
    >

    I never said the PSU was their fault, but I am critisizing the way in
    which the fixes are not easily cacheable. And yes I agree, a 1yr old
    PSU is bound to be old junk.
    Graeme Woollett, Jun 10, 2005
    #6
  7. Graeme Woollett

    Gordon Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 17:07:46 +1200, E. Scrooge wrote:

    >
    > "Graeme Woollett" <> wrote in message
    > news:d8b4cf$5v8$...
    >> I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >> trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >> dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >> hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >> Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >> And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >> the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>
    >> WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >> the US?
    >> WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >> %$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >> sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>
    >> I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >> connection.
    >>
    >> IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >> are available from servers inside NZ.

    >
    > So your dodgy PC is all MS fault.
    > Get a decent PC instead of farting round with upgrades on junk.
    >
    > You might like to try asking for a SP2 CD that will have most the updates on
    > it.
    >
    > Millions of other people with good working PCs don't have MS update
    > problems.


    Well, interesting stuff. Let us leave the dodgy PC aside. We have a suite
    of windows OS pc. Now how to update them? A cache would be handy.
    Gordon, Jun 10, 2005
    #7
  8. Graeme Woollett

    shannon Guest

    AD. wrote:
    > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:19:30 +1200, Graeme Woollett wrote:
    >
    >
    >>IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>are available from servers inside NZ.

    >
    >
    > It's not exactly learning from Linux distros. Those mirrors are only there
    > because certain dedicated people are willing to provide locally hosted
    > content at their own expense. Some are even trying hard to build a
    > critical mass of NZ based content and peering exchanges so we can be a
    > little more self sufficient and less reliant on nasty telcos and their
    > political games.
    >
    > Thanks Citylink (and others of course) :)
    >


    But not Telstra clear paradise
    shannon, Jun 10, 2005
    #8
  9. Graeme Woollett

    Tony Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:19:30 +1200, Graeme Woollett <>
    wrote:

    >I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >
    >WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >the US?
    >WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >%$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >
    >I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >connection.
    >
    >IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >are available from servers inside NZ.




    In the Bad or Good old Days, MS had a Corporate link that let you dnload all
    the updates separately..

    This allowed firms with 100's of PC's to dnload the Updates Only once..

    How do Corporate uses with lots of PC's do it now..?
    Tony, Jun 10, 2005
    #9
  10. Graeme Woollett

    Craig Shore Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 17:15:29 +1200, Graeme Woollett <>
    wrote:

    >E. Scrooge wrote:
    >> "Graeme Woollett" <> wrote in message
    >> news:d8b4cf$5v8$...
    >>
    >>>I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >>>trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >>>dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >>>hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >>>Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >>>And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >>>the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>>
    >>>WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >>>the US?
    >>>WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >>>%$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >>>sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>>
    >>>I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >>>connection.
    >>>
    >>>IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>>are available from servers inside NZ.

    >>
    >>
    >> So your dodgy PC is all MS fault.

    >
    >
    >> Get a decent PC instead of farting round with upgrades on junk.
    >>

    >A truly stupid statement.
    >> You might like to try asking for a SP2 CD that will have most the updates on
    >> it.
    >>
    >> Millions of other people with good working PCs don't have MS update
    >> problems.
    >>
    >> E. Scrooge
    >>
    >>

    >I never said the PSU was their fault, but I am critisizing the way in
    >which the fixes are not easily cacheable. And yes I agree, a 1yr old
    >PSU is bound to be old junk.


    You can download the one or IT Pros. It's 272391 KB

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...be-3b8e-4f30-8245-9e368d3cdb5a&displaylang=en
    Craig Shore, Jun 10, 2005
    #10
  11. Graeme Woollett

    xray spex Guest

    "Gordon" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 17:07:46 +1200, E. Scrooge wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Graeme Woollett" <> wrote in message
    >> news:d8b4cf$5v8$...
    >>> I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >>> trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >>> dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >>> hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >>> Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >>> And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >>> the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>>
    >>> WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >>> the US?
    >>> WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >>> %$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >>> sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>>
    >>> I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >>> connection.
    >>>
    >>> IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>> are available from servers inside NZ.

    >>
    >> So your dodgy PC is all MS fault.
    >> Get a decent PC instead of farting round with upgrades on junk.
    >>
    >> You might like to try asking for a SP2 CD that will have most the updates
    >> on
    >> it.
    >>
    >> Millions of other people with good working PCs don't have MS update
    >> problems.

    >
    > Well, interesting stuff. Let us leave the dodgy PC aside. We have a suite
    > of windows OS pc. Now how to update them? A cache would be handy.


    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/updateservices/default.mspx
    xray spex, Jun 10, 2005
    #11
  12. Graeme Woollett

    xray spex Guest

    "Tony" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:19:30 +1200, Graeme Woollett
    > <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >>trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >>dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >>hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >>Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >>And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >>the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>
    >>WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >>the US?
    >>WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >>%$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >>sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>
    >>I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >>connection.
    >>
    >>IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>are available from servers inside NZ.

    >
    >
    >
    > In the Bad or Good old Days, MS had a Corporate link that let you dnload
    > all
    > the updates separately..
    >
    > This allowed firms with 100's of PC's to dnload the Updates Only once..
    >
    > How do Corporate uses with lots of PC's do it now..?
    >
    >
    >


    SMS and WSUS
    xray spex, Jun 10, 2005
    #12
  13. In article <d8b7c4$cf8$>,
    Graeme Woollett <> wrote:

    >Still in the good old days of NT4 (Maybe 2000 as well) you could
    >manually download and keep the big updates.


    As a matter of principle, I tend to refuse installers that insist on
    going out to the network to obtain components for the install. I want it
    to happen entirely locally.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 10, 2005
    #13
  14. In article <d8b7c4$cf8$>, says...
    >
    > Still in the good old days of NT4 (Maybe 2000 as well) you could
    > manually download and keep the big updates.
    >


    Actually there is an easy way to fill your requirement: send off for the
    free SP2 CD. I did, and it came in the mail within a week or 10 days at
    a cost of $0.00 to me.

    Never mind that I hated it and uninstalled it again because it broke a
    few things here :-< . Running SP 1 and very happy with it ... all my
    security is non MS anyhow. (surprise!).

    cheers, -P.
    Peter Huebner, Jun 10, 2005
    #14
  15. Graeme Woollett

    Tony Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 19:40:18 +1200, "xray spex"
    <> wrote:

    >"Tony" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:19:30 +1200, Graeme Woollett
    >> <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >>>trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >>>dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >>>hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >>>Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >>>And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >>>the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>>
    >>>WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >>>the US?
    >>>WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >>>%$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >>>sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>>
    >>>I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >>>connection.
    >>>
    >>>IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>>are available from servers inside NZ.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> In the Bad or Good old Days, MS had a Corporate link that let you dnload
    >> all
    >> the updates separately..
    >>
    >> This allowed firms with 100's of PC's to dnload the Updates Only once..
    >>
    >> How do Corporate uses with lots of PC's do it now..?
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >SMS and WSUS
    >



    Not for Home users at all, the one that I was referring to was for WIN98 and
    any one could use it..
    Tony, Jun 10, 2005
    #15
  16. Graeme Woollett

    Tony Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 20:20:53 +1200, Peter Huebner <> wrote:

    >In article <d8b7c4$cf8$>, says...
    >>
    >> Still in the good old days of NT4 (Maybe 2000 as well) you could
    >> manually download and keep the big updates.
    >>

    >
    >Actually there is an easy way to fill your requirement: send off for the
    >free SP2 CD. I did, and it came in the mail within a week or 10 days at
    >a cost of $0.00 to me.
    >
    >Never mind that I hated it and uninstalled it again because it broke a
    >few things here :-< . Running SP 1 and very happy with it ... all my
    >security is non MS anyhow. (surprise!).
    >
    >cheers, -P.




    All SP2 update problems can easily be fixed..

    Plus if you have any brains its a Must..
    Tony, Jun 10, 2005
    #16
  17. Graeme Woollett

    Richard Guest

    Tony wrote:

    > All SP2 update problems can easily be fixed..
    >
    > Plus if you have any brains its a Must..


    can you fix the restrictions on the ip stack? I put it on my DC++/torrent
    machine and saw a marked reduction on performance so its back to no SP for me on
    there.
    Richard, Jun 10, 2005
    #17
  18. Graeme Woollett

    Tony Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 22:41:22 +1200, Richard <> wrote:

    >Tony wrote:
    >
    >> All SP2 update problems can easily be fixed..
    >>
    >> Plus if you have any brains its a Must..

    >
    >can you fix the restrictions on the ip stack? I put it on my DC++/torrent
    >machine and saw a marked reduction on performance so its back to no SP for me on
    >there.





    Here is the one I think what you need, but checkup as their might be a later
    version


    XP_SP2_TCP_Slowdown_Fix.zip


    http://209.171.52.99/useritems/UnoLibsNet_V2.asp?print=true

    Time me think to read more info on the Web sites..

    My file is dated 10/4/05


    Also


    Also some fixes with XP-antispy

    http://www.xp-antispy.org/
    Tony, Jun 10, 2005
    #18
  19. Graeme Woollett

    H.O.G Guest

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 18:31:02 +1200, Tony
    <> spoke these fine words:

    >On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:19:30 +1200, Graeme Woollett <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>I'm writing this after having to ressurect a Windows machine that
    >>trashed itself twice before I traced the problem to a most probably
    >>dodgy PSU, and having to each time download SP2 and all manner of
    >>hotfixes. So much for Windows wonderful journalling FS.
    >>Thankyou MS for blowing my cable data cap for the month!!
    >>And Yes I was too tight to spend a few clams on Norton Ghost.(Funny how
    >>the Yanks get it for $US69.95 and we pay $NZ166....)
    >>
    >>WHY does Microsoft insist on all updates coming from a server based in
    >>the US?
    >>WHY does Microsoft make it so (insert your favourite swearword here)
    >>%$&^ difficult to cache the updates for XP so internet usage on small
    >>sites can be minimised? (No I don't have NT server to run SUS on)
    >>
    >>I get charged 10% for national traffic and 100% for intl on my cable
    >>connection.
    >>
    >>IMHO MS could learn a LOT from Linux Distros like Debian where all files
    >>are available from servers inside NZ.

    >
    >
    >
    >In the Bad or Good old Days, MS had a Corporate link that let you dnload all
    >the updates separately..
    >
    >This allowed firms with 100's of PC's to dnload the Updates Only once..
    >
    >How do Corporate uses with lots of PC's do it now..?
    >
    >

    Why do people keep saying this? There are Network Install versions of
    all of MS's updates for XP, including SP2. We download each one, and
    add them to a script which is run and silently installs all updates on
    any PC.

    Why do people keep saying they can't cache updates? Take a look at
    Windows Catalog.
    H.O.G, Jun 10, 2005
    #19
  20. H.O.G wrote:
    >
    > Why do people keep saying they can't cache updates? Take a look at
    > Windows Catalog.

    Could you be more specific about where it is on the Windows catalog
    site? It isn't that obvious to me.
    It appears to be a reference for general bits of software that are logo
    certified for Windows.
    Can you specify a fully qualified URL where the archive downloadable
    Hotfix and SPs are?
    MaximumDamage, Jun 10, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kookaburra

    Atten: Brett Roberts

    Kookaburra, May 6, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    327
    John Saunders
    May 6, 2004
  2. Gurble
    Replies:
    34
    Views:
    798
  3. JohnO

    Ping Brett Roberts - re COA Stickers

    JohnO, Jun 16, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    2,243
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Jun 29, 2005
  4. Jonathan Walker
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    409
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Aug 28, 2007
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Microsoft Replaces Brett Roberts

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 14, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    650
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Mar 16, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page