StevieM

The original application is old, but the children get regular updates each day. No, it's multi-platform shareware - available in a variety of languages.

We have this social interaction thing going in our place during lunch and break-times... it's called 'conversation'!

In that case, I'll have a pair of smalls. (Well, not a pair of smalls...a pair of small socks.)

No, this time its... BRING ME THE SOCKS!!!

Verily!

Me me me!!! Edit: Grrrrr! I would've been first but I had to wait for 60 seconds before I posted. Edit: Edit: Can I have one regular sock and one small, as I have odd sized feet. Edit: Edit: Edit: Ahhh...so SOCKs are the cool/warm twist.

I'd take it to mean wiring a plug for your own domestic use is fine, but not as part of your job. Saying that, all new appliances not only have to come with a plug, they have to come with a moulded plug. Still a useful skill to pass on, though. Imagine a kid turning up for his/her first day as an apprentice sparky and they didn't even know how to wire a plug!

Like others, we bung them in with any redundant equipment that is being collected. Not sure if they are under WEEE or not, but as they CAN be recycled, they SHOULD be recycled.

Many happy returns, fella.

But the spoon manufacturer has already said to me, 'Give me all your rubbish spoons and I'll replace them with shiny new top-of-the-range spoons - for a fee'. 'Ok!' I said, and handed over the money. But now, they're giving away all these shiny new spoons for free to people who buy rubbish yoghurt. But if I stop paying the fee, they're going to take my shiny spoons away and give me back my rubbish ones.

It does if the manufacturer/reseller inflates the price of a PC just because it's available through TAP. A bit like when a supermarket increases the price of something from £1 to £1.50 shortly before running a 'Buy two get the third free' offer.

That's EXACTLY my point! I'm being offered significantly better quality for less than average quality, but because it's not available through TAP I have to pay an additional premium for the OS which is (allegedly) being 'given away' with the poorer quality computer.

Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing? EDIT: Saying that, I don't want to buy the cheaper (yet strangely more expensive) machines. I want the good ones. I just don't want to be penalised by Microsoft for doing so. EDIT: EDIT: Love the double contraction I'd've. Works for me!

Forgive the length of this post, but bear with me and allow me to clarify my position. OVS/EES (I'm talking specifically about OS subscriptions) and TAP are a bit like paracetamol and Lemsip; both can be good for you if you have a cold, but not if you take them together. Last year, we had a suite of PCs running XP that needed to upgrade to Windows 7. As the machines were coming towards end of life, it seemed a waste to buy individual upgrade licences. A subscription seemed the obvious answer. It allowed us to upgrade the OS on the existing machines and, when we replaced them, we could purchase the cheaper Home Premium and upgrade to Pro and no additional cost. We could do the same the following year when were due to replace our other suite, and again when we replaced the staff laptops. Excellent! I signed up for a 3-year subscription for OS and Office only, as we'd already purchased Server and CALs outright. Now it's time to replace those machines and I've got two quotes: Supplier A is offering a PC of average build quality and average reliability for £350 per unit.* Supplier B is offering a PC of significantly better build quality and reliability for only £340 per unit.* (*Not actual prices, but relative for this example.) There's no contest then, I hear you say. Go for supplier B. It's a no brainer! But wait - the computers from supplier B aren't available through TAP so I have to add an additional £60 per unit for Home Premium just so I can upgrade it to Pro through a subscription that I'm already paying for. The computers from supplier A, however, are available through TAP and come complete with Pro. Question: If supplier A couldn't offer the computers through TAP, would they charge £410 to supply them with Home Premium? I doubt it - and that means that some of the savings intended for schools are being turned into extra profit for the suppliers. For example, a supplier purchases a licence through TAP for £1, inflates the price of the hardware by £20 (because it's still cheaper for the consumer than paying £60 for a licence), sells 50 units to a school and makes a cool extra £950 on the deal. How is that good for schools? Here's my dilemma - Do I purchase an inferior product at an inflated price so I don't have to pay an additional premium for a base OS? If that's the case, only 4 PCs in the school will be benefiting from the OS subscription that we're tied into for the next two years and, if we cancel the subscription at the end, I'll still have to purchase Pro licences for those four machines! Or do I purchase the superior product and take the hit of a £60 premium per unit so that I can upgrade to an OS that non-subscribers can get 'for free'? If Microsoft did away with the upgrade only status and 'gave away' the OS to subscribers like they're 'giving it away' through TAP, it really would be the schools that benefitted from the deal and not suppliers looking to make a fast buck. In my opinion.

Last year I took out a 3-year EES for Windows. This means I can purchase Windows Home licences and upgrade to Windows Pro at no additional cost. If I end our subscription, we must revert to Home. The Technology Access Programme gives certain manufacturers and resellers the opportunity to offer Windows Pro licences with new PCs at a greatly reduced cost (although, I suspect, not as greatly reduced as some of them may obtain it for!). That's great. I'm sure it will be good news for a lot of schools. But for me, as a subscriber, I feel like I've been kicked in the teeth. If I buy a new suite of PCs through TAP, I'm effectively writing off the next two year's worth of EES subscription, because I no longer need Pro upgrade rights. If I want to buy a new suite of PCs that are not eligible through TAP (which I do), not only do I have to pay an additional £60 per machine for a Home licence, I'll also lose the right to use Pro if I choose to end the subscription. Come on, Microsoft. If you REALLY want the benefits to go to schools, why not offer Pro eligibility for EES subscribers without the upgrade caveat?

What?! It's going to be in July?

What? It's going to be in January? Missed you, babe. EDIT: It's not even half-way through September and already I'm stopping what I'm doing in order to post here!

NOOOOOOO!!!!! Not...yet... Must... get... work... fini...

Well done, Matt. I doff my cap to you (as I'm not allowed to rep you again yet!)

Done it! Even though I'm not using the default desktop folder anymore, it was still niggling me. 7-Zip didn't work, nor did rmdir, but I managed to delete the one file from inside the folder using the command prompt. Once that was gone, I was able to delete the folder through Explorer (if it's still called that).

Not used 12, but we switched from Symantec to ESET a few years ago and there has been no looking back.

Thanks, guys. Decided it would be easier just to relocate the Desktop folder pointer. I've already relocated the libraries onto my D: drive so it made sense to put the Desktop there too.

Thanks but I've just tried to download it and it's blocked as malware/phishing.

I have a folder on my desktop that I can't delete because it cannot be found. I can open the folder and see the one file that it contains (which also cannot be deleted) from the desktop and by navigating to the desktop folder. I can also access the folder's properties. Does anyone have any idea how I can get rid of a folder that isn't really there?