Question:

Which is the best accounting software for a start-up business? are there any free ones? thanks

Try http://www.bizacct.com/download.html It is FREE.

Response:

Which is the best accounting software for a start-up business? are there any free ones? thanks

Response:

QuickBooks – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Which is the best accounting software for a start-up business? are there any free ones? thanks

Response:

Question:

  One class of the unborn deserves very little recognition, and can apparently   be killed wholesale without much concern.  Into this first class fall, for   example, the unborn victims of war, Innocent civilians will unfortunately die in any war;  that does not mean that there are no just wars.  If you want to argue that the wars in Iraq and/or Afghanistan did not mean the criteria of a just war, then by all means do so.  But don’t make a vague statement and pretend it’s the moral equivalent of abortion.

It is not a "vague statement"–the victims of the Iraq war are victims of an unjust War, and approx. 10,000 Iraqi civilans have been killed to date.  It is a moral outrage, and I consider Bush a War Criminal, and hope he gets the justice he deserves, just like Milosevic… However, it is vaguely defined on what the extent of the Bush administrations next War will be, or what wars will happen as a result of this war.  Each one of those 10,000 victims has family, and from those families the future ranks of Al-Qaida and other anti-American organizations will be filled.  Instead of making America more secure, the war has made America LESS secure, and strengthened the hand of our real enemies.  We need to fight this war with a lasar beam, not a shotgun.   the countless unborn who will die   directly as a result of policies originating from the current   administration’s suppression of the evidence of global warming, There’s plenty of scientific evidence that the "global warming" scare is a complete fraud; that the actions of mankind are not contributing to the increase of the earth’s temperature.  (Author Michael Crichton has a good article on the politicization of "global warming" at http://www.sepp.org/NewSEPP/GW-Aliens-Crichton.html)

Uhh-I hate to break it to you, but Michael Crichton is a SCIENCE FICTION author.  There is virtually no credible scientist who doubts that global warming is occuring and is occuring as a result of man’s activities. Exactly the predictions of environmentalists are coming true–that storms will have more energy and be more destructive, and there will be major habitat loss due to this. The news from the past week is an example.  Those 16 who died were victims of Global Warming. The habitat loss has already occured. Even from the republican administration: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/index.html And from a more authoritative source: http://www.climatehotmap.org/ In my analysis, after having studied the issue and read much about it, I have concluded that Global Warming is destroying the planet, and will dramatically affect the life of my children and grandchildren, and because of this, there is no higher priority now than curtailing Global Warming, (except perhaps avoiding global thermo-nuclear war) if you are concerned about minimizing human suffering, that is. Given this conclusion, it would be immoral for me to vote for anyone other than the candidate who supports environmental initiatives that would reduce Global Warming and who is likely to win.  Therefore, the only choice that is in-line with my Catholic Faith is John Kerry.   those   unborn poor who need quality healthcare, First, it should be pointed out that providing healthcare is not a function of our government.

Yes, it clearly is.  I will admit that the government does such a poor job at this, that your attitude is not uncommon, though.  You seem to be unaware of Medicare, and Medicaid?   We as Christians should do more to support the many private charity hospitals throughout the US and the rest of the world.  The only proper fuction of the government is to insure that those hospitals can carry out their right to operate.  It’s this free market approach to our economy (including health care) that has given the US the highest-quality health care in the world.  You think socialized health care is the answer?  Look at the splendid job it’s doing in Canada,

Well, actually, as someone who has relatives in Canada and travels there from time to time, I will say that they do a better job then the US does.  Also, Canada has become more attractive to immigrants (the young, smart, educated kind) then the US in part because of their healthcare system.  (Also because of their beautiful cities–just compare Windsor Ont to Detroit!)  Chinese and Poles I know have both said this, and have immigrated to Canada.  So the US is losing on both counts. or the stellar quality of health care in the old Soviet bloc countries.  There’s a reason patients seek/sought medical care in free-market countries (US/Western Europe, respectively):  socialized medicine doesn’t work.

Uhh–exactly which Western European country does not provide for universal healthcare for its citizens–The UK certainly does, as do Spain and Germany (although Germany is more complex–with state-mandated plans required for most to pay into, the government paying for health insurance for the unemployed and those with low income–not a single payer plan, but one in which the government acknowledges a fundamental responsibility to provide healthcare for all), among countries that I had traveled to in the past year or so. In Poland, which I have substantial experience with, medicine is now not provided very consistently from state sources, and there is a large private healthcare sector. But the consistency of that care leaves much to be desired, so it is not at all clear that ‘free market’ forces have greatly improved the healthcare there, or that in the future healthcare there won’t become part of the governments responsibility again ("socialized" in your words).  But, even in the old system, there was quality healthcare available to elites. By the way, as a side note–I was in Poland in 1986 when Chernobyl happened and the Polish Governmental medical authorities did a superlative job in distributing iodine, especially to school age children. At this time, the entire Polish Medical System was state run. By the day after the incident and before the radioactive gas cloud had come into Poland, nearly 100% of the school age children had received their doses, which had been pre-positioned throughout the country. (The dose must be given before exposure to radioactive Iodine Gas, otherwise it is ineffective, so a day late is much more than a dollar short.)  The incidence of thyroid cancer was thereby kept to approximately its normal rate in Poland, whereas in the Ukraine, where Iodine was not distributed, the rate was about 1000X times the normal rate.  So there is nothing ‘automatic’ about the failure of a state run medicine program.  I would venture that our ‘free market’ system would not function very well for such incidents–the outlay has to be done up front, and the profit motive alone would not provide investors with the return necessary to do the required planning–so for somethings, government action is clearly better. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   that even though the President has no direct legal authority to   protect them, the mere announcement of his opposition to a legal precedent   enjoins us to put all other concerns out of mind, and cast our vote, as   unthinking automatons, to continue the slaughter of those unborn in the   first class. The president has the authority to issue executive orders affecting our funding/lack thereof of abortion mills abroad (see the Mexico City(?) plan enacted by Reagan, destroyed by Clinton, and re-enacted by Bush). The president has the authority to appoint federal-level judges who recognize that there is no "right" to an abortion anywhere in the US Constitution (as Bush has done, and would have had even more success with if not for an unprecedented filibuster tactic by senate Democrats).  The president has the power to veto pro-life legislation (as Clinton did twice with the partial birth abortion ban).  And although it’s not a power typically discussed nowadays, it’s still up to the president and Congress, not the SCOTUS, to *enforce* court decisions.  These are just examples off the top of my head, and don’t include the symbolic importance of the president as a leader of his party in legislative priorities.

Well as I said "no direct legal authority."  You’ve listed all kinds of indirect ways the president can influence this issue.  That was my point! He can appoint judges that may, given enough time, could overturn Roe v. Wade, but that would only establish that the right to an abortion is not constitutionally protected, and most states would STILL have legal abortions.  So guess what–even if (and that is a very big IF) Roe v. Wade were overturned tomorrow, it wouldn’t change as much as most people think.  The whole problem with the current anit-abortion movement now is the fixation on overturning Roe v. Wade.  Instead they should concentrate on decreasing abortion through means other than attacking other peoples rights–and there is much that could be done–but it isn’t because Roe v. Wade is such a distraction. But the Presiednt has direct control over the issue of War (although technically I know that only Congress can declare war, the President as C in C,  can, and has in numerous occasions, ordered our forces into a War. Through his control over the EPA, he can directly initiate enforcement of cleanl air laws to prevent Global Warming, as well as restart participation of the USA in the Kyoto protocols.          Therefore I, being uneducated by only 2 degrees from Jesuit Universities, That explains the blind left-wing politics.

Well there have been many left wingers educated by Jesuits, but Right Wingers, too–the Schlafly’s (of gay-rights-critic Phyllis) were at my high school. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

  One class of the unborn deserves very little recognition, and can apparently   be killed wholesale without much concern.  Into this first class fall, for   example, the unborn victims of war, Innocent civilians will unfortunately die in any war;  that does not mean that there are no just wars.  If you want to argue that the wars in Iraq and/or Afghanistan did not mean the criteria of a just war, then by all means do so.  But don’t make a vague statement and pretend it’s the moral equivalent of abortion.   the countless unborn who will die   directly as a result of policies originating from the current   administration’s suppression of the evidence of global warming, There’s plenty of scientific evidence that the "global warming" scare is a complete fraud; that the actions of mankind are not contributing to the increase of the earth’s temperature.  (Author Michael Crichton has a good article on the politicization of "global warming" at http://www.sepp.org/NewSEPP/GW-Aliens-Crichton.html)   those   unborn poor who need quality healthcare, First, it should be pointed out that providing healthcare is not a function of our government.  We as Christians should do more to support the many private charity hospitals throughout the US and the rest of the world.  The only proper fuction of the government is to insure that those hospitals can carry out their right to operate.  It’s this free market approach to our economy (including health care) that has given the US the highest-quality health care in the world.  You think socialized health care is the answer?  Look at the splendid job it’s doing in Canada, or the stellar quality of health care in the old Soviet bloc countries.  There’s a reason patients seek/sought medical care in free-market countries (US/Western Europe, respectively):  socialized medicine doesn’t work.   that even though the President has no direct legal authority to   protect them, the mere announcement of his opposition to a legal precedent   enjoins us to put all other concerns out of mind, and cast our vote, as   unthinking automatons, to continue the slaughter of those unborn in the   first class. The president has the authority to issue executive orders affecting our funding/lack thereof of abortion mills abroad (see the Mexico City(?) plan enacted by Reagan, destroyed by Clinton, and re-enacted by Bush). The president has the authority to appoint federal-level judges who recognize that there is no "right" to an abortion anywhere in the US Constitution (as Bush has done, and would have had even more success with if not for an unprecedented filibuster tactic by senate Democrats).   The president has the power to veto pro-life legislation (as Clinton did twice with the partial birth abortion ban).  And although it’s not a power typically discussed nowadays, it’s still up to the president and Congress, not the SCOTUS, to *enforce* court decisions.  These are just examples off the top of my head, and don’t include the symbolic importance of the president as a leader of his party in legislative priorities.          Therefore I, being uneducated by only 2 degrees from Jesuit Universities, That explains the blind left-wing politics.

Response:

The new doctrine implied by Archbishop Raymond Burke’s recent public statements is indeed curious, though it is regrettably not unprecedented. Under this doctrine there seem to be two categories of the unborn, and they deserve completely different accounting in the moral sphere. One class of the unborn deserves very little recognition, and can apparently be killed wholesale without much concern.  Into this first class fall, for example, the unborn victims of war, the countless unborn who will die directly as a result of policies originating from the current administration’s suppression of the evidence of global warming, those unborn poor who need quality healthcare, among other groups too numerous to mention here.  Lest we forget, there are many of the born in similar groups who are dieing each day. The other class of unborn is so especially deserving of our protection, however, that even though the President has no direct legal authority to protect them, the mere announcement of his opposition to a legal precedent enjoins us to put all other concerns out of mind, and cast our vote, as unthinking automatons, to continue the slaughter of those unborn in the first class. Therefore I, being uneducated by only 2 degrees from Jesuit Universities, must ask Raymond Burke to clarify, with some precision, what are those characteristics of the first class of the unborn that make them so undeserving of protection and conversely makes those in the second class so especially deserving of our protection?  This question deeply vexes me. Regards, Erich Friesen

Response:

Question:

Why would a Phoenix company be making such systems soley for over-seas carriers?

Overseas doesn’t make any difference.  The company is in the US making parts for installation in FAA type certificated aircraft.   That’s all that is required for the FAA to get into the game.

Response:

Why would the FAA be involved? The system was not sold to a single US carrier, nor installed in a single USA registered aircraft.  If there was an oversight failure, it was with European/Swiss authorities. Ultimately they are responsible for regulations and control of any equipment installed in a Swiss registered aircraft. Actually, the FAA does have authority (responsibility can be argued). The US manufacturer produces part for an aircraft with a FAA-issued type certificate, and such the full force of Part 21 applies to him, whether the part is sold to a foreign entity or not.

No. But thanks for playing. John P. Tarver, MS/PE

Response:

@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net: Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane… — Can’t do that these days coz the people who ask for window seats are the ones who want to watch 20 year old game shows on the satellite TV so they keep the shades down. Once had a blind passenger ask for a window seat, odd.

The window seat is good for sleeping because it has that large headrest next to the seat.  Also this seat is not disturbed by seatmates wanting to get to and from the aisle.  It’s the ideal seat for being left alone. What’s odd is that this requires explanation.

Response:

In-flight entertainment systems linked to scores of jet ‘difficulties’ By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY Unless I’m flying with NWA, I’m too busy shagging a couple of the stewardesses to bother about in-flight entertainment. Cheers Phil

give them one from me!

Response:

O That system, built by a Phoenix company now out of the airline business, was put on to replace an existing system and pioneered interactive entertainment at each seat. But, as a USA TODAY investigation found in February, it was improperly designed, installed and certified by contractors without adequate FAA oversight. The General Accounting Office and the Transportation Department’s inspector general recently began investigating the matter.

Why would the FAA be involved? The system was not sold to a single US carrier, nor installed in a single USA registered aircraft.  If there was an oversight failure, it was with European/Swiss authorities. Ultimately they are responsible for regulations and control of any equipment installed in a Swiss registered aircraft. However there is a real problem, in that there are NO  specific FAA certification requirements for IFE.  NO TSO’s, no type  certificates, no nothing….

Response:

Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane… For 23 hours? miguel — Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Happily! -c.

Response:

In-flight entertainment systems linked to scores of jet ‘difficulties’ By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY Unless I’m flying with NWA, I’m too busy shagging a couple of the stewardesses to bother about in-flight entertainment.

Don’t tell me you boff UA hosties.. Have you no shame, man??

Response:

That system, built by a Phoenix company now out of the airline business, was put on to replace an existing system and pioneered interactive entertainment at each seat. Why would the FAA be involved? The system was not sold to a single US carrier, nor installed in a single USA registered aircraft. If there was an oversight failure, it was with European/Swiss authorities.

Why would a Phoenix company be making such systems soley for over-seas carriers?

Response:

But Candace Kolander of the Association of Flight Attendants union says the airline industry has become too obsessed with pleasing passengers. Discuss.

   Just like ta know what friggin’ airline she’s talkin’ ’bout so I can start flying it.

Response:

Whilst undoubtedly under the effects of alcohol, "JustaCowboy" The window seat is good for sleeping because it has that large headrest next to the seat.  Also this seat is not disturbed by seatmates wanting to get to and from the aisle.  It’s the ideal seat for being left alone.

The counter is that some of us don’t want to disturb those seated next to us. I managed to fly from LHR to SIN in a window seat, without getting out of my seat until about 11 hours into the flight. I could see that the guys next to me were fast asleep, and I did not want to disturb them (I had to go, but I wasn’t about to wet my pants either). Aisle seats have their advantages, I would much rather be climbed over than have to climb over two others whilst they are (trying to be) asleep. Dave Don’t Drink Drive…. It’s A Laundry Detergent

Response:

Whilst undoubtedly under the effects of alcohol, matt weber – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – O That system, built by a Phoenix company now out of the airline business, was put on to replace an existing system and pioneered interactive entertainment at each seat. But, as a USA TODAY investigation found in February, it was improperly designed, installed and certified by contractors without adequate FAA oversight. The General Accounting Office and the Transportation Department’s inspector general recently began investigating the matter. Why would the FAA be involved? The system was not sold to a single US carrier, nor installed in a single USA registered aircraft.  If there was an oversight failure, it was with European/Swiss authorities. Ultimately they are responsible for regulations and control of any equipment installed in a Swiss registered aircraft. However there is a real problem, in that there are NO  specific FAA certification requirements for IFE.  NO TSO’s, no type  certificates, no nothing….

The problem is that these aircraft fly to the US, and the FAA likes to think that it can dictate standards on aircraft registered and operated in other countries which fly to the US. As such, one would think there would be an FAA standard. Sadly, there isn’t. Dave Don’t Drink Drive…. It’s A Laundry Detergent

Response:

In-flight entertainment systems linked to scores of jet ‘difficulties’ By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY Unless I’m flying with NWA, I’m too busy shagging a couple of the stewardesses to bother about in-flight entertainment.

Something wrong with the NWA flight attendents?

Response:

Why would the FAA be involved? The system was not sold to a single US carrier, nor installed in a single USA registered aircraft.  If there was an oversight failure, it was with European/Swiss authorities. Ultimately they are responsible for regulations and control of any equipment installed in a Swiss registered aircraft.

Actually, the FAA does have authority (responsibility can be argued). The US manufacturer produces part for an aircraft with a FAA-issued type certificate, and such the full force of Part 21 applies to him, whether the part is sold to a foreign entity or not. However there is a real problem, in that there are NO  specific FAA certification requirements for IFE.  NO TSO’s, no type  certificates, no nothing….

There’s no such thing as a type certificate for appliances.   Many things on an aircraft don’t have a TSO either.

Response:

But Candace Kolander of the Association of Flight Attendants union says the airline industry has become too obsessed with pleasing passengers. Discuss.

When the US carriers first went into the old Soviet block/eastern Europe, the hardest time they had training new employees was in being pleasant to customers. Being indoctrinated since birth, in the Marxist ideology, that jobs were a right and customers were a given, it was hard to sift out the old attitudes. Sound familiars. Tom — "There are many who find a good alibi far more attractive than an achievement. For an achievement does not settle anything permanently. We still have to prove our  worth anew each day: we have to prove that we are as good today as we were yesterday. But when we have a valid alibi for not achieving anything we are fixed, so to speak, for life."  – Eric Hoffer

Response:

In-flight entertainment systems linked to scores of jet ‘difficulties’ By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY

Unless I’m flying with NWA, I’m too busy shagging a couple of the stewardesses to bother about in-flight entertainment. Cheers Phil

Response:

Once had a blind passenger ask for a window seat, odd. Not really. A window is very useful for leaning your pillow against if you want to try to sleep, much more effective than trying to lean against an aisle. –==++AJC++==–

Yep that’s true, we figured he probably just wanted a seat where people wouldn’t have to get up to let people in and out during the trip. — Trevor Fenn There are too many zz’s in my email address above. Take two zz’s and email me in the morning. "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just"                           The Star Spangled Banner                             Francis Scott Key                    

Response:

Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane…

And exactly how many people in a typical wide body jet can actually see out of a window? — Roland Perry

Response:

: Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking : out the window of an airplane… Especially the front one — George Black ICQ#: 6963409 More ways to contact me: http://wwp.icq.com/6963409 Home page:  http://www.koekejunction.hnpl.net/

Response:

Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane…

For 23 hours? miguel — Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Response:

But Candace Kolander of the Association of Flight Attendants union says the airline industry has become too obsessed with pleasing passengers. Discuss.

Candace Kolander?  Is that Xaviera Hollander’s sister?

Response:

But Candace Kolander of the Association of Flight Attendants union says the airline industry has become too obsessed with pleasing passengers. Discuss. miguel — Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

It is American and so, unfortunately, it doesn’t include anyone employed by Ryanair. JohnT

Response:

But Candace Kolander of the Association of Flight Attendants union says the airline industry has become too obsessed with pleasing passengers.

Discuss. miguel — Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Response:

@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net: Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane… —

Can’t do that these days coz the people who ask for window seats are the ones who want to watch 20 year old game shows on the satellite TV so they keep the shades down. Once had a blind passenger ask for a window seat, odd. — Trevor Fenn There are too many zz’s in my email address above. Take two zz’s and email me in the morning. "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just"                           The Star Spangled Banner                             Francis Scott Key                    

Response:

no offense, but from 39000 looking down on a cloud covered ocean?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane… — Gene Seibel Hangar 131 – http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html Because I fly, I envy no one. In-flight entertainment systems linked to scores of jet ‘difficulties’ By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY As a Boeing 757 airliner climbed to 14,000 feet in March, a routine takeoff suddenly became an emergency. Sparks and smoke came out of the passenger cabin’s in-flight entertainment system, cockpit instrument lights lit up, and the rudder and control wheel moved. The pilots, who reported the incident to a government safety database, said they returned for an "uneventful" landing. The database doesn’t identify the airline involved or the U.S. airport the flight diverted to, but the timing of the event was significant. It was the same month the Canadian government concluded that entertainment system wiring may have caused or contributed to a fire that sent a Swissair jet into the ocean near Nova Scotia in 1998, killing all 229 aboard. The Canadian Transportation Safety Board said an entertainment system wire or another wire short-circuited, creating a fiery electric arc that ignited acoustic insulation blankets. Despite intense scrutiny after the Swissair accident, in-flight entertainment systems continue to malfunction, and U.S. airlines are still being ordered to modify some systems. A USA TODAY analysis found that since the Swissair accident, U.S. airlines have sent the Federal Aviation Administration 60 "service difficulty reports" about in-flight entertainment systems, many involving fire, smoke or sparks. Airlines are required by the FAA to report within 72 hours each "failure, malfunction or defect" that endangers an aircraft’s safe operation. Pilots and flight attendants have voluntarily reported to another government database 20 incidents of entertainment system problems. It’s unknown how many of those incidents are also included in the service difficulty reports. The FAA has also sent 22 orders to ban, modify or repair certain entertainment systems. Most of those orders resulted from an investigation done by the agency after the Swissair crash. "The time is long past that we can consider these systems as risk-free," says Jim Shaw, a pilot and a safety expert for the Air Line Pilots Association union. "I know many instances where problems with in-flight entertainment systems created smoke and fire events," he says, speaking for himself. The union wouldn’t comment. Many jets have traditional in-flight entertainment systems with overhead movie screens shared by rows of passengers. Others, particularly new, wide-body planes flying international routes, contain more sophisticated equipment with individual screens that allow passengers to choose a movie, play games, shop or gamble. Upstart airline JetBlue offers live satellite TV on monitors at every seat. Some major airlines offer video or audio entertainment on most of their planes, while some, such as Southwest, have no jets with such equipment. Consultant Wale Adepoju estimates that 5,100 of 11,650 planes worldwide with 100 or more seats have some form of entertainment system, and about 2,000 of those aircraft have at least some seats equipped with individual video screens. Of about 3,700 wide-body aircraft in the global airline fleet, nearly 80% have some form of entertainment system, Adepoju says. Manufacturers insist that the most sophisticated entertainment systems, as well as older ones, are safe and meet FAA standards. They blame the type installed on Swissair, which was banned a year after the crash, for giving everyone in the industry a bad name. That system, built by a Phoenix company now out of the airline business, was put on to replace an existing system and pioneered interactive entertainment at each seat. But, as a USA TODAY investigation found in February, it was improperly designed, installed and certified by contractors without adequate FAA oversight. The General Accounting Office and the Transportation Department’s inspector general recently began investigating the matter. Other systems, though, have had problems since the Swissair accident. Safety experts say the number of service difficulty reports about entertainment system problems endangering passenger safety during the past two years could far exceed the 60 received by the FAA. "The 60 reports are probably just the tip of the iceberg," says Alex Richman, whose company, AlgoPlus Consulting, analyzes FAA data for some aircraft operators. "More incidents probably go unreported than are reported." The FAA’s 22 orders to ban, modify or repair entertainment systems involve those that airlines installed to replace previous ones. The orders apply to the equipment on eight types of Boeing, McDonnell Douglas and Airbus jets. More pounds, more wires An entertainment system adds thousands of pounds to a jet. It consists of more than 2,000 parts and, on a fully equipped wide-body jet, uses about 41/2 miles of wire, says Greg Steiner, a vice president at entertainment system manufacturer Rockwell Collins. Ed Block, a former Defense Department employee involved in wiring purchases, inspected wiring on various jets for an FAA task force and for Swissair victims’ families. It’s his opinion that all in-flight entertainment systems should be banned because they have electrical wiring and components that can malfunction and start a fire during flight. The aviation industry has been grappling for years with problems of cracked and deteriorated wiring causing fires and emergency landings, he says. Adding four miles of entertainment system wire to a jet that may have more than 100 miles of other wires is "like throwing gas on a fire." Ken Adams, who was the Air Line Pilots Association’s lead investigator in the Swissair crash, doesn’t think the systems must be scrapped. But he says they need to be better designed and suggests studying the use of fiber-optics instead of electrical wiring. "Any time you’re adding more and more electrical systems, you’re compounding the problem," he says. In a statement to USA TODAY, the FAA says entertainment systems are safe and that it "takes a very rigorous approach to approving non-essential systems." The agency says it has done in-depth reviews of the entertainment systems on airplanes, has taken action to make sure no system in use has the same design features as the one on the Swissair jet, and has issued directives designed to prevent any unsafe conditions from developing. Manufacturers say their systems must meet FAA and aircraft manufacturers’ standards and tests. "Safety is the absolute first priority," says Rob Brookler of the World Airline Entertainment Association, which represents manufacturers, suppliers and airlines. "We’d support any procedures that would further enhance the safety of the systems." The Air Transport Association, a trade group representing U.S. airlines, refused to comment about in-flight entertainment systems. Northwest Airlines, which flies many long-distance flights with such systems aboard, says it buys "the appropriate, proven system recommended by the aircraft manufacturer." JetBlue says the airline’s in-seat live television systems were certified by the FAA. The airline says it has had "no issues" with them. United Airlines says its in-flight entertainment systems are safe because they are continuously monitored by its maintenance department "for any irregularities or reliability issues that require attention." United says its systems have not been cited in any FAA orders and are not similar to those that were on the Swissair plane that crashed. Reports of problems Most of the 60 reports filed by airlines with the FAA, which were provided to USA TODAY by AlgoPlus Consulting, mention fire, smoke, sparks, an electrical short-circuit or burning odor in the passenger cabin. NASA collects such incident data for the FAA. Among the confidential reports given to NASA by airline flight crews, which NASA says are not verified for accuracy: .A flight attendant on a Boeing 767 flight last August reported that she became nauseated, her eyes and throat burned and a passenger vomited after breathing fumes from a malfunctioning video system. .On an Airbus A-300 plane in December 2000, a flight attendant reported passengers standing in the aisle during landing as "smoke, sparks and a flame" came from an entertainment system box under a passenger seat. .A pilot reported smoke "pouring out" of an entertainment unit on a 767 international flight in April 2000. .In February 1999, a flight attendant on a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 flying over Alaska said it was hard to breathe because of a burning wire odor coming from a video system. The FAA says such reports from crew members are voluntary and can’t be used to decide how prevalent a problem is. The 22 orders from the

… read more »

Response:

Don’t know what "entertainment" could possibly be better than looking out the window of an airplane… — Gene Seibel Hangar 131 – http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html Because I fly, I envy no one.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In-flight entertainment systems linked to scores of jet ‘difficulties’ By Gary Stoller, USA TODAY As a Boeing 757 airliner climbed to 14,000 feet in March, a routine takeoff suddenly became an emergency. Sparks and smoke came out of the passenger cabin’s in-flight entertainment system, cockpit instrument lights lit up, and the rudder and control wheel moved. The pilots, who reported the incident to a government safety database, said they returned for an "uneventful" landing. The database doesn’t identify the airline involved or the U.S. airport the flight diverted to, but the timing of the event was significant. It was the same month the Canadian government concluded that entertainment system wiring may have caused or contributed to a fire that sent a Swissair jet into the ocean near Nova Scotia in 1998, killing all 229 aboard. The Canadian Transportation Safety Board said an entertainment system wire or another wire short-circuited, creating a fiery electric arc that ignited acoustic insulation blankets. Despite intense scrutiny after the Swissair accident, in-flight entertainment systems continue to malfunction, and U.S. airlines are still being ordered to modify some systems. A USA TODAY analysis found that since the Swissair accident, U.S. airlines have sent the Federal Aviation Administration 60 "service difficulty reports" about in-flight entertainment systems, many involving fire, smoke or sparks. Airlines are required by the FAA to report within 72 hours each "failure, malfunction or defect" that endangers an aircraft’s safe operation. Pilots and flight attendants have voluntarily reported to another government database 20 incidents of entertainment system problems. It’s unknown how many of those incidents are also included in the service difficulty reports. The FAA has also sent 22 orders to ban, modify or repair certain entertainment systems. Most of those orders resulted from an investigation done by the agency after the Swissair crash. "The time is long past that we can consider these systems as risk-free," says Jim Shaw, a pilot and a safety expert for the Air Line Pilots Association union. "I know many instances where problems with in-flight entertainment systems created smoke and fire events," he says, speaking for himself. The union wouldn’t comment. Many jets have traditional in-flight entertainment systems with overhead movie screens shared by rows of passengers. Others, particularly new, wide-body planes flying international routes, contain more sophisticated equipment with individual screens that allow passengers to choose a movie, play games, shop or gamble. Upstart airline JetBlue offers live satellite TV on monitors at every seat. Some major airlines offer video or audio entertainment on most of their planes, while some, such as Southwest, have no jets with such equipment. Consultant Wale Adepoju estimates that 5,100 of 11,650 planes worldwide with 100 or more seats have some form of entertainment system, and about 2,000 of those aircraft have at least some seats equipped with individual video screens. Of about 3,700 wide-body aircraft in the global airline fleet, nearly 80% have some form of entertainment system, Adepoju says. Manufacturers insist that the most sophisticated entertainment systems, as well as older ones, are safe and meet FAA standards. They blame the type installed on Swissair, which was banned a year after the crash, for giving everyone in the industry a bad name. That system, built by a Phoenix company now out of the airline business, was put on to replace an existing system and pioneered interactive

entertainment at each seat. But, as a USA TODAY investigation found in February, it was improperly designed, installed and certified by contractors without adequate FAA oversight. The General Accounting Office and the Transportation Department’s inspector general recently began investigating the matter. Other systems, though, have had problems since the Swissair accident. Safety experts say the number of service difficulty reports about

entertainment system – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – problems endangering passenger safety during the past two years could far exceed the 60 received by the FAA. "The 60 reports are probably just the tip of the iceberg," says Alex Richman, whose company, AlgoPlus Consulting, analyzes FAA data for some aircraft operators. "More incidents probably go unreported than are reported." The FAA’s 22 orders to ban, modify or repair entertainment systems involve those that airlines installed to replace previous ones. The orders apply to the equipment on eight types of Boeing, McDonnell Douglas and Airbus jets. More pounds, more wires An entertainment system adds thousands of pounds to a jet. It consists of more than 2,000 parts and, on a fully equipped wide-body jet, uses about 41/2 miles of wire, says Greg Steiner, a vice president at entertainment system manufacturer Rockwell Collins. Ed Block, a former Defense Department employee involved in wiring purchases, inspected wiring on various jets for an FAA task force and for Swissair victims’ families. It’s his opinion that all in-flight entertainment systems should be banned because they have electrical wiring and components that can malfunction and start a fire during flight. The aviation industry has been grappling for years with problems of cracked and deteriorated wiring causing fires and emergency landings, he says. Adding four miles of entertainment system wire to a jet that may have more than 100 miles of other wires is "like throwing gas on a fire." Ken Adams, who was the Air Line Pilots Association’s lead investigator in the Swissair crash, doesn’t think the systems must be scrapped. But he says they need to be better designed and suggests studying the use of

fiber-optics instead – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of electrical wiring. "Any time you’re adding more and more electrical systems, you’re compounding the problem," he says. In a statement to USA TODAY, the FAA says entertainment systems are safe and that it "takes a very rigorous approach to approving non-essential systems." The agency says it has done in-depth reviews of the entertainment systems on airplanes, has taken action to make sure no system in use has the same design features as the one on the Swissair jet, and has issued directives designed to prevent any unsafe conditions from developing. Manufacturers say their systems must meet FAA and aircraft manufacturers’ standards and tests. "Safety is the absolute first priority," says Rob Brookler of the World Airline Entertainment Association, which represents manufacturers, suppliers and airlines. "We’d support any procedures that would further enhance the safety of the systems." The Air Transport Association, a trade group representing U.S. airlines, refused to comment about in-flight entertainment systems. Northwest Airlines, which flies many long-distance flights with such systems aboard, says it buys "the appropriate, proven system recommended by the aircraft

manufacturer." JetBlue – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – says the airline’s in-seat live television systems were certified by the FAA. The airline says it has had "no issues" with them. United Airlines says its in-flight entertainment systems are safe because they are continuously monitored by its maintenance department "for any irregularities or reliability issues that require attention." United says its systems have not been cited in any FAA orders and are not similar to those that were on the Swissair plane that crashed. Reports of problems Most of the 60 reports filed by airlines with the FAA, which were provided to USA TODAY by AlgoPlus Consulting, mention fire, smoke, sparks, an electrical short-circuit or burning odor in the passenger cabin. NASA collects such incident data for the FAA. Among the confidential reports given to NASA by airline flight crews, which NASA says are not verified for accuracy: .A flight attendant on a Boeing 767 flight last August reported that she became nauseated, her eyes and throat burned and a passenger vomited after breathing fumes from a malfunctioning video system. .On an Airbus A-300 plane in December 2000, a flight attendant reported passengers standing in the aisle during landing as "smoke, sparks and a flame" came from an entertainment system box under a passenger seat. .A pilot reported smoke "pouring out" of an entertainment unit on a 767 international flight in April 2000. .In February 1999, a flight attendant on a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 flying over Alaska said it was hard to breathe because of a burning wire odor coming from a video system. The FAA says such reports from crew members are voluntary and can’t be used to decide how prevalent a problem is. The 22 orders from the FAA after the Swissair crash came when the agency reviewed systems that, like the one on the Swissair McDonnell Douglas MD-11 jet, were put in as replacements between 1992 and 2000. The orders involved systems on at least 182 planes, including removal of the entire system on six Douglas DC-9s. It also ordered removal of an unspecified number of systems on DC-10s and 767s. And corrections were ordered for some systems on other 767s, 757s, 747s, 737s, MD-11s, DC-10s and Airbus A-340s. Ten of the 22 orders, including one issued in December for an unspecified number of 767-300s, instructed airlines to install switches that allow the systems to shed an electrical load or to be turned off

… read more »

Response:

Question:

Hallo everyone, In composing a Porter’s 5-forces analysis about Air France, I came across the following questions that I did not find an answer to so far.

Question:

I keep getting these e-mail ad for bridge21.net where they say you can build this outsourced accounting firm and make a lot of money. Has anyone had any experience with this company or in setting up your own outsourced firm. — Karl E Irvin, CPA  -  Arlington, Texas

Response:

I keep getting these e-mail ad for bridge21.net where they say you can build this outsourced accounting firm and make a lot of money. Has anyone had any experience with this company or in setting up your own outsourced firm. — Karl E Irvin, CPA  -  Arlington, Texas

I went to a bridge21.net (KC Truby) presentation a year or so ago.  I found it highly entertaining, but not something I could get interested in.  I would advise caution. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html Washington, USA

Response:

Some consider him the ultimate used car salesman. I keep getting these e-mail ad for bridge21.net where they say you can build this outsourced accounting firm and make a lot of money. Has anyone had any experience with this company or in setting up your own outsourced firm. — Karl E Irvin, CPA  -  Arlington, Texas I went to a bridge21.net (KC Truby) presentation a year or so ago.  I found it highly entertaining, but not something I could get interested in.  I would advise caution.

     Mike Block – Tax Cut CPA   World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester     FREE  NetLedger accounting   FREE 462p QB books/error codes 100+ QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/

Response:

I keep getting these e-mail ad for bridge21.net where they say you can build this outsourced accounting firm and make a lot of money. Has anyone had any experience with this company or in setting up your own outsourced firm. — Karl E Irvin, CPA  -  Arlington, Texas

Let’s see. People in, Oshkosh for example, are going to hire a CPA in Texas to find them a CPA in Alabama (or even in Oshkosh) to keep their books and do their tax returns. I believe an economist would call that "intermediating where intermediation is not wanted, needed, or useful". Or, for a $1,000, bridge21 provides a seminar on providing seminars. Day 1 – how to fill the room (Answer: Promise a seminar on selling seminars.); Day 2 – how to get the money (Answer: charge them up front for the seminar on selling seminars). Anybody but me see anything wrong with this picture? easy2000

Response:

I do not have any direct experience with Bridge 21, but have asked numerous other consultants and industry folks what they know about this organization since I too get bombarded with their email. From what I’ve been able to gather, they are trying to sell you on the idea of building a huge practice offering off-site accounting services for large monthly fees. In previous "lives" they were hawking the concept of offering QuickBooks seminars as a way of attracting accounting clients. The feedback that I’ve gathered is: – This is an expensive system — there is some type of monthly fee you pay Bridge21 to be "in the program". Bridge21 now promotes the concept of being an off-site bookkeeper to clients. They are promoting either Netledger or the new QuickBooks online (not sure which) – The leader of this organization is a great salesman – It has been difficult for me to find an organization that has had great results with this organization. There are always testimonials offered in their emails but I sometimes wonder if they are somehow affiliated with Bridge 21. My personal thoughts: – Obtaining $2,000/month bookkeeping clients is a LOT easier said than done!! I think the $2,000 / month client is the exception and not the rule. I do not know of too many QuickBooks level clients that have $2,000 per month to spend for an outsourced bookkeeper. – The QuickBooks market is very crowded. Every breathing CPA has the ability to offer these services with very little training. – Bridge21 does the paid seminars and somehow funnels the leads to CPAs in the area. – If this were such an easy system and had $2 million/year potential I think Bridge21 would be doing it themselves instead of teaching others to do it?? I mean doesn’t that make sense? – You are going to have to kiss a LOT of TOADS to pick up one or two decent outsourced accounting clients. – This is a concept with a VERY VERY VERY low barrier to entry. I would not be paying too much money to learn some "secret" plan to offering QuickBooks consulting — I mean just use a little common sense!! Your results may vary! I am a reseller for a higher end brand of accounting software so my opinions may certainly be considered biased. Regards, Wayne — Schulz Consulting is an authorized consultant/reseller for the popular MAS90 accounting software. Visit us online at http://www.s-consult.com

Response:

I do not have any direct experience with Bridge 21, but have asked numerous other consultants and industry folks what they know about this organization since I too get bombarded with their email. From what I’ve been able to gather, they are trying to sell you on the idea of building a huge practice offering off-site accounting services for large monthly fees. In previous "lives" they were hawking the concept of offering QuickBooks seminars as a way of attracting accounting clients.

You are a recent observer. All this is my opinion. We did well promoting QB, long before Bridge21, without paying tribute. Truby’s prior life was to give us the ultimate CPA contact manager and file locator. It was readily available from the developer for much less if you compared computer (not CPA) magazine features. Truby did not pay the developer enough for promised changes, though he seemed to get far more in deposits from us, so he never delivered it. The life before that had us give away cassette tapes to clients, banks and prospects. It was abandoned. The life before that was furniture sales. All had one thing in common: big profits for the ultimate used car salesman and bad results for most professionals. We should know better than to have such non-professionals teach us professional marketing. Some Truby profits related to undisputed and unpaid bills. mike block – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -The feedback that I’ve gathered is: – This is an expensive system — there is some type of monthly fee you pay Bridge21 to be "in the program". Bridge21 now promotes the concept of being an off-site bookkeeper to clients. They are promoting either Netledger or the new QuickBooks online (not sure which) – The leader of this organization is a great salesman – It has been difficult for me to find an organization that has had great results with this organization. There are always testimonials offered in their emails but I sometimes wonder if they are somehow affiliated with Bridge 21. My personal thoughts: – Obtaining $2,000/month bookkeeping clients is a LOT easier said than done!! I think the $2,000 / month client is the exception and not the rule. I do not know of too many QuickBooks level clients that have $2,000 per month to spend for an outsourced bookkeeper. – The QuickBooks market is very crowded. Every breathing CPA has the ability to offer these services with very little training. – Bridge21 does the paid seminars and somehow funnels the leads to CPAs in the area. – If this were such an easy system and had $2 million/year potential I think Bridge21 would be doing it themselves instead of teaching others to do it?? I mean doesn’t that make sense? – You are going to have to kiss a LOT of TOADS to pick up one or two decent outsourced accounting clients. – This is a concept with a VERY VERY VERY low barrier to entry. I would not be paying too much money to learn some "secret" plan to offering QuickBooks consulting — I mean just use a little common sense!! Your results may vary! I am a reseller for a higher end brand of accounting software so my opinions may certainly be considered biased. Regards, Wayne

     Mike Block – Tax Cut CPA   World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester     FREE  NetLedger accounting   FREE 462p QB books/error codes 100+ QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/

Response:

Question:

We supply, install and maintain several accounting packages, one of which is Opera for DOS. For more info, go to : http://www.city-accounting.co.uk Jeff

Response:

Hello John: If your application was written in FoxPro or Clipper (many were!), there is a good chance you can fix the Y2K bug in your current software with Y2KFOX (http://www.y2kfox.com). Y2KFOX sets a "century rollover year" so that 2-digit years are automatically translated to the correct century. It is done externally to the program, so source or code changes are not usually required. There are many people using Y2KFOX with xBase accounting packages — these include SBT, Accountmate, and others. If you are not certain what language your application was written in, Y2KFOX can help you find out. Also, there are demos if you would like to try Y2KFOX for yourself. Regards, Maureen Maureen Weicher Communication Horizons http://www.y2kfox.com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John

Response:

IBM PC DOS v7 is Y2K  compliant and is much better solution for your situation than Microsoft can provide. Check IBM web site for details. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John

Response:

John;     We are a small manufacturer and for years have used a package on Lantastic called Inmass/MRP.  They have a comparatively inexpensive dos based package that I know for fact will work well on your network.  We ran Lantastic and Inmass together for years.  Call Pat Kittridge at (520) 795-6800 and tell him Michael English at DAC Intl. referred him to you.  It doesnt cost anything to talk.  I still use Inmass and can recommend their software and support.  I am a cost accountant/analyst/network administrator for my company and am very familiar with Inmass/MRP.  We recently converted to a Netware system and all the data and programs for Inmass transferred/converted with no error or problems. Michael English – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John

Response:

It _is_ networkable (look for version 4.6). John, I seem to remember that the last DOS version of One Write Plus was advertised to be Y2K ok.  I don’t recall whether it was networkable.

– Please remove NOSPAM from address when replying.

Response:

Something no one has mentioned is Repetitive Stress Injury. I’ve been a fairly heavy user of computers since around 1980.  I had not experienced any Repetitive Stress problems until my first tax season using windows.  By the end of March I was in agony.  My neck, RIGHT arm, and RIGHT shoulder were killing me.  After a lot of reading, I concluded that the likely culprit was my mouse. I tried a number of different pointers, and ultimately settled on a simple kensington scroll mouse with a homemade "cab" taped to the top (fits my hand) mounted on the left (I am ambidextrous).  I also tend to use control keys when I can.  I have been largely pain free for a couple of years now.  I did notice some minor hints of pain in my LEFT arm and shoulder this past tax season. Jim Hudspeth – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The real problem with DOS software is that most publishers ar e migrating to windows and less and less publishers sell and maintain DOS software. You will be forced to change to windows in the need future. Well, if the DOS program is "well behaved" then it would probably continue to run in a DOS session under OS2, Windows NT, Windows 2000 etc for many years to come. The limitations are that the program only access memory in certain standard ways, especially extended memory above 640K, never make any illegal, direct memory accesses or access the hardware directly and so forth. None of the good performing DOS software qualifies.  The reason it was 10 times faster than a Windows program is it went directly to the hard disk controllers and memory, etc. of the 1980’s or early 1990s, and took direct control! Obviously DOS programs are obsolete, the underlying premise is no longer valid that they are significantly faster. The only stuff they do faster is small small small.   Those things can also be done in a blink of an eye by todays CPUs.  And then, DOS software can do nothing big. (Don’t tell me Clipper can manage 500Meg databases- I know: but that is not a big computing task.)  There is not a single business need that can be better performed by DOS software than Windows or Linux or OS2 software and there are dozens of very very important business needs which DOS softare is hopelessly unable to serve.  Primarily in the areas of interoperating with other software and other enterprises. The reasons I prefer DOS is not the processing speed you refer to, but the mechanism of the interface of most DOS programs. I find it much faster to navigate via keystrokes than Mouse manipulation. Also the main reason for my wishing to continue with our current DOS set-up is our use of 2 third party programs which run as TSRs. For instance we process all Invoices for UPS shipment with as few as 3 or 4 keystrokes (most info is "screen captured").We have a Credit Card processing program that works similarly. We process many low dollar value orders, which take under 1 minute each to Invoice including UPS manifesting. It is not cost efficient to spend more time processing orders than this. Possibly there are some Windows programs which may have all these functions written into them but they will most likely be lacking something we’re looking for on the accounting side, or are far more expensive than our current needs warrant. (Plus DOS computers are much easier to maintain) Vice it may be, I still think keyboards (especially those tactile feel ones) are sexier than any mouse I’ve ever met.(I knew Minny and Mickey) Ditch the junk.  Or if you like it, admit that it’s a vice and you’re just sentimental about it… If you like DOS I really recommend you install linux, you’ll love it. Todd If there were any LINUX programs available out there for our purposes, I’d try and get sentimental about it too. — John

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The real problem with DOS software is that most publishers ar e migrating to windows and less and less publishers sell and maintain DOS software. You will be forced to change to windows in the need future. Well, if the DOS program is "well behaved" then it would probably continue to run in a DOS session under OS2, Windows NT, Windows 2000 etc for many years to come. The limitations are that the program only access memory in certain standard ways, especially extended memory above 640K, never make any illegal, direct memory accesses or access the hardware directly and so forth. None of the good performing DOS software qualifies.  The reason it was 10 times faster than a Windows program is it went directly to the hard disk controllers and memory, etc. of the 1980’s or early 1990s, and took direct control! Obviously DOS programs are obsolete, the underlying premise is no longer valid that they are significantly faster. The only stuff they do faster is small small small.   Those things can also be done in a blink of an eye by todays CPUs.  And then, DOS software can do nothing big. (Don’t tell me Clipper can manage 500Meg databases- I know: but that is not a big computing task.)  There is not a single business need that can be better performed by DOS software than Windows or Linux or OS2 software and there are dozens of very very important business needs which DOS softare is hopelessly unable to serve.  Primarily in the areas of interoperating with other software and other enterprises. Ditch the junk.  Or if you like it, admit that it’s a vice and you’re just sentimental about it…

I have two DOS programs on the NT 4.0 box that I’m using to write this message that I intend to keep. One is multiplan.  For some small tasks it is simply unbeatable, at least for me.  A good part of that may have to do with the fact that I’ve used it for over 15 years. I can run it in my sleep.  I do use excel for larger tasks. The other is a flat file data base progarm called Q & A (4.0 Version).  It is one of the most reliable programs I have ever used.  It is also the core component of my wife’s anesthesia practice billing system. We get our input information in paper form from the Surgery Center and input it into a Q & A template that matches the format that we receive it in.  We then process it to a file which is picked up by our electronic billing program (also a DOS program), which transmits it to a clearinghouse.  X days later we have checks in hand.  It works. If you like DOS I really recommend you install linux, you’ll love it.

As soon as someone comes out with reliable tax software that will run under linux, I probably will. Jim Hudspeth

Response:

The real problem with DOS software is that most publishers ar e migrating to windows and less and less publishers sell and maintain DOS software. You will be forced to change to windows in the need future.

Well, if the DOS program is "well behaved" then it would probably continue to run in a DOS session under OS2, Windows NT, Windows 2000 etc for many years to come. The limitations are that the program only access memory in certain standard ways, especially extended memory above 640K, never make any illegal, direct memory accesses or access the hardware directly and so forth.   None of the good performing DOS software qualifies.  The reason it was 10 times faster than a Windows program is it went directly to the hard disk controllers and memory, etc. of the 1980’s or early 1990s, and took direct control!   Obviously DOS programs are obsolete, the underlying premise is no longer valid that they are significantly faster. The only stuff they do faster is small small small.   Those things can also be done in a blink of an eye by todays CPUs.  And then, DOS software can do nothing big. (Don’t tell me Clipper can manage 500Meg databases- I know: but that is not a big computing task.)  There is not a single business need that can be better performed by DOS software than Windows or Linux or OS2 software and there are dozens of very very important business needs which DOS softare is hopelessly unable to serve.  Primarily in the areas of interoperating with other software and other enterprises. Ditch the junk.  Or if you like it, admit that it’s a vice and you’re just sentimental about it… If you like DOS I really recommend you install linux, you’ll love it. Todd

Response:

The real problem with DOS software is that most publishers ar e migrating to windows and less and less publishers sell and maintain DOS software. You will be forced to change to windows in the need future.

No question that is true (just as there isn’t much CP/M software out there anymore either <grin).  But that’s a distinct issue from the Y2K issue.

Response:

The dos product has one version which is y2k compliant, 4.6. Just FYI. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – John, I seem to remember that the last DOS version of One Write Plus was advertised to be Y2K ok.  I don’t recall whether it was networkable. One Write Plus was bought by Peachtree, which was then bought by Sage. They may or may not still be selling the program.  Might be worth a few phone calls. I’m still using some DOS stuff, but I now run it in a window. Jim Hudspeth, CPA I was not aware that DOS was the limiter regarding Y2K, since our other DOS programs are certified Y2K. I thought the older BIOS chips is the only problem. When DOS 6.0 gives date and time it is in this  format: date is: Tue 08-24-1999 Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John How will this get you around Y2K if DOS is not Y2K?   Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.  World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester 450+ page QB book/free updates $10 QB add-ons http://www.blocktax.com/       Ft Lauderdale FL 954-566-7540

Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.

Response:

John, I seem to remember that the last DOS version of One Write Plus was advertised to be Y2K ok.  I don’t recall whether it was networkable. One Write Plus was bought by Peachtree, which was then bought by Sage.  They may or may not still be selling the program.  Might be worth a few phone calls. I’m still using some DOS stuff, but I now run it in a window. Jim Hudspeth, CPA – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was not aware that DOS was the limiter regarding Y2K, since our other DOS programs are certified Y2K. I thought the older BIOS chips is the only problem. When DOS 6.0 gives date and time it is in this  format: date is: Tue 08-24-1999 Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John How will this get you around Y2K if DOS is not Y2K?   Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.  World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester 450+ page QB book/free updates $10 QB add-ons http://www.blocktax.com/       Ft Lauderdale FL 954-566-7540

Response:

Accpac Plus which is a DOS application if fully Y2K certified. Allan Martin Accpac Qualified Installer and Dealer NJ Area – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John How will this get you around Y2K if DOS is not Y2K?   Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.  World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester 450+ page QB book/free updates $10 QB add-ons http://www.blocktax.com/       Ft Lauderdale FL 954-566-7540

Response:

How will this get you around Y2K if DOS is not Y2K?

MS-DOS is at least as Y2k compliant as MS Win 95 and MS Win 98 (indeed it may be more so as its easier to check !) — Roger Barnett

Response:

I was not aware that DOS was the limiter regarding Y2K, since our other DOS programs are certified Y2K. I thought the older BIOS chips is the only problem. When DOS 6.0 gives date and time it is in this  format: date is: Tue 08-24-1999

I think you need to be careful when we call something not Y2K compliant.  That is, is the problem that if you enter a date as 01/01/00 it will treat it as January 1, 1900 (so you have to remember to enter four digits) *OR* is that the system will simply fail to function as of that date?   It’s kind of like discussing bugs in a program.  It’s one thing if the program produces a cosmetic glitch on the screen when an obscure set of commands is entered.  It’s another if it dumps all values in the receivables file back to zero and, for good measure, trashes the hard drive it’s on.  Just as all bugs are not the same in terms of seriousness, not all Y2K glitches are the same.

Response:

The real problem with DOS software is that most publishers ar e migrating to windows and less and less publishers sell and maintain DOS software. You will be forced to change to windows in the need future. By the way, does anyone have payroll software for an IBM 1401? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was not aware that DOS was the limiter regarding Y2K, since our other DOS programs are certified Y2K. I thought the older BIOS chips is the only problem. When DOS 6.0 gives date and time it is in this  format: date is: Tue 08-24-1999 I think you need to be careful when we call something not Y2K compliant.  That is, is the problem that if you enter a date as 01/01/00 it will treat it as January 1, 1900 (so you have to remember to enter four digits) *OR* is that the system will simply fail to function as of that date? It’s kind of like discussing bugs in a program.  It’s one thing if the program produces a cosmetic glitch on the screen when an obscure set of commands is entered.  It’s another if it dumps all values in the receivables file back to zero and, for good measure, trashes the hard drive it’s on.  Just as all bugs are not the same in terms of seriousness, not all Y2K glitches are the same.

– Frederick E. Jorden http://fejcpapc.com/ Frederick E. Jorden, CPA PC (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211

Response:

Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John

How will this get you around Y2K if DOS is not Y2K?   Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.              World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester 450+ page QB book/free updates $10 QB add-ons http://www.blocktax.com/       Ft Lauderdale FL 954-566-7540

Response:

I was not aware that DOS was the limiter regarding Y2K, since our other DOS programs are certified Y2K. I thought the older BIOS chips is the only problem. When DOS 6.0 gives date and time it is in this  format: date is: Tue 08-24-1999 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I am looking for an inexpensive DOS based Accounting package that is network-able (Lantastic) for a small business. We currently interface via TSR’s with a UPS shipping program and Credit Card processing program. It works efficiently enough that I do not want to get away from DOS. Our current program is NOT Y2K so that’s reason for the search. I am aware of ACCPAC, but would like to look at a few more. Any input would be much appreciated. TIA, John How will this get you around Y2K if DOS is not Y2K?   Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.  World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester 450+ page QB book/free updates $10 QB add-ons http://www.blocktax.com/       Ft Lauderdale FL 954-566-7540

Response:

Question:

Accounting systems are gradually, and very cautiously, being interconnected via the internet. In 1999 the country is busy rolling out bill presentment and payments, online storefronts, and all manner of more private B2B and supply chain connections. Clearly, in the future, our transaction infrastructure will be better evolved both in internal database technology and its communications. It will become effortless for individuals and small companies, to remit funds, send invoices, order goods, etc. with network devices. The emergence of internet payments technologies and high-powered ERP accounting systems has been sudden. It may take a decade or more for large numbers of individuals to wake up to the potentials. Some of the most explosive potentials are already possible, today. The online payments and accounting infrastructure enables individuals, for the first time, to participate in collaborative ventures of arbitrary complexity by enabling allocations of revenue they helped to generate, or in allocations of costs or cost pools from which they have drawn resources by their activities. People are already quite mobile and quite capable of working in extended groups. Corporations themselves are extended groups. But unlike the present situation, sole proprietors will not be slaughtered by the complex accounting and overhead involved in partnerships or JVs. I honestly believe that the day is coming when the entire expense and revenue stream of midsized corporations could be split out to all the employees as if it were a co-op. Contracts could be written. We would not be employees. Who could be targeted by tax authorities as "the Employer"? Some ISP on the internet in San Jose? Which person, the system engineer? The DBA? Go to Yahoo Calendars. Hundreds of thousands of people already use, or are familiar with, shared calendars on internet. Now, see E-room or HotOffice which enable shared discussion and files as well as calendars. Now, imagine these with a powerful accounting hypercube beneath, where you could view every cent of every transaction, and the way it was allocated to members. Imagine these with realtime facilities that give you the power, every day, to understand and control your commitments. * Click here to view details of your costs. * Click here to approve your allocations for May 23, 1999. * Click here to remit partners’ draw to yourself…. Imagine that the system had gotten stable and functional enough to produce all the paper filings and reports and tax returns, and print them on paper and send to governments which so richly deserve them. Click here to create an LLC Click here to review your form K-1 Technology will reduce the risks of partnering with new, untrusted ventures. Nick Szabo’s Smart Contracts contains a useful catalogue of techniques. http://www.best.com/~szabo/formalize.html Five years from now there will be CPA firms and consultants will performing services that do not even exist today.  For example, financial virtualization of companies.  I don’t know what the term will be.  Maybe "LLC Conversions". What it means is a functioning corporation with stockholders, employees, payroll, and perhaps other stakeholders like creditors or vendors will be groaning under the burdens of legacy Client Server stuff like SAP or Solomon.   They will convert to parterships or LLCs in which all the participants get roughly the same deal that they are getting today, except 20% more money by ripping out the entire admin system and legal form, and replacing it with an accounting hypercube in a Web-based ledger. Everybody will get slices and allocations of every expense (or more realistically, expense pools, perhaps daily or weekly) for their inspection and approval.  Ditto the income. It will all reside in powerful hosts and quite often offshore.  It’s perfectly legal, makes good tax sense and that’s what will happen. * Todd F. Boyle CPA    http://www.GLDialtone.com/ * 9745-128th Av NE, Kirkland WA 98033       (425) 827-3107 * Accounting ASP, Web ledger, netledger, web GL, GL Dialtone, whatever.

Response:

The entire economy can be viewed as a single mathematical model. Each individual human being has a monetary balance, which is the sum of his/ her cash and monetary assets, minus monetary liabilities.  The grand total for the entire human race, sums to zero. (This is self evident, surely we can all agree on this, in theory)

That depends on the about of dark matter in the universe. If the amount is enough to reverse the expansion,  then at the moment of the big crunch it would indeed sum to zero. Or perhaps this would occur at the time our sun becomes a red giant or when we blow each other up in a nuclear holocaust.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The online payments and accounting infrastructure enables individuals, for the first time, to participate in collaborative ventures of arbitrary complexity by enabling allocations of revenue they helped to generate, or in allocations of costs or cost pools from which they have drawn resources by their activities. The entire expense and revenue stream of midsized corporations could be split out to all the employees as if it were a co-op. They will convert to parterships or LLCs in which all the participants get roughly the same deal that they are getting today, except 20% more money by ripping out the entire admin system and legal form, and replacing it with an accounting hypercube in a Web-based ledger. Everybody will get slices and allocations of every expense (or more realistically, expense pools, perhaps daily or weekly) for their inspection and approval.  Ditto the income.

The entire economy can be viewed as a single mathematical model. Each individual human being has a monetary balance, which is the sum of his/ her cash and monetary assets, minus monetary liabilities.  The grand total for the entire human race, sums to zero. (This is self evident, surely we can all agree on this, in theory) In tomorrows universe the nations’ accounting systems will be increasingly, kept in agreement with each other electronically.  Your liabilities will tend to equal the assets on other systems. This accounting fabric is the MDD or hypercube I’m talking about, inaccessible without security of course but it is terribly real, nevertheless. The simple list of transactions since birth, totalling your net monetary worth (NMW) is a 1-dimensional list isn’t it? The most immediate dimension to be added (for individuals) is WHO.   Who do I owe, and who owes me.  Now, you have a 2-dimensional spreadsheet with columns for your employer or income sources, as well as utilities companies and other payees and liabilities.  call it customer/vendor. Another dimension of course is time periods.  Years, months, days.   (I’m talking about the phenomenal, objective reality not models or designs.  The fact is days have identities in the calendar and people ask, "when did transactions occur".) Dimensions upon dimensions exist. by product or service. By channel.   By method.  Fixed or variable.  Associations with actions, or mental processes e.g. mandatory/discretionary. You reach out your hand. The dials increment and decrement like the cockpit of an airplane. Someday, we will drill down into the financial statement of publicly held companies into a product line, and review their cost structure. We will review their average salaries and, probably, form judgements whether they are gouging us.  For example, the average W-2 income of individuals in the software industry in the state of Washington in 1997 was $160,000. There will be greater income equality.  Ordinary, private enterprises may publish their data.  Who cares?  When you see that the automotive mechanic on the corner uses higher cost parts and has 50% lower gross margin that the Ford dealer has, you might make purchase decisions on that basis. Everything a company does, it does by the power invested in it by its customers. Many businesses will achieve better relations with their customers when the customers understand better the disposition of funds.   Customers may come to expect an accounting of the money they have spent.   Why shouldn’t we be able to drilldown into the payment we made to the electric utility, and see their financial statement? What more natural way to navigate, than from your own family budget? There will be greater democracy.  We already know that policy choices and social contract is defined more by how we spend than how we vote. * Todd F. Boyle CPA    http://www.GLDialtone.com/ * 9745-128th Av NE, Kirkland WA 98033       (425) 827-3107 * Accounting ASP, Web ledger, netledger, web GL, GL Dialtone, whatever.

Response:

Question:

I have to agree that Gleim is a good product.  I sat for the 1st time in November and passed all 4 parts using the Gleim review!  Of course it takes a lot of study time and a certain amount of "luck" that you’ve memorized the right subjects, but I don’t think you can go too wrong using Gleim.

I have the Gleim 98-99 CPA Review Books and Software for sale. At the Gleim web page (https://www.gleim.com/), the books (4) sell for $24.50 each and the software (4 disks) sell for $35 each. I offer the lot for $120 with the buyer paying shipping.

Response:

I’m having a great time with Gleim CPA Review.  Of course, not everyone learns the same way, but people who say "Because the exam is nondisclosed, Gleim doesn’t work" are trying to sell you oceanfront property in Arizona… check ‘em out at www.gleim.com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am planning to take the CPA test in about 6-10 months after I graduate. Although I do not want to take a REVIEW TYPE class right now ( becuase I have enough with work and school-both full time), I would like to purchase a program ( CD ROM ) that will review all the accounting concepts that I need to review for the CPA test. The program doesn’t have to be geared toward the CPA exam, just a CD ROM that reviews all of INTERMEDIATE ACCOUNTING and some other advanced issues. Anyone know of suck a program???

Response:

Visit CPA Becker Review site. They have such a CD-ROM.

Response:

I have to agree that Gleim is a good product.  I sat for the 1st time in November and passed all 4 parts using the Gleim review!  Of course it takes a lot of study time and a certain amount of "luck" that you’ve memorized the right subjects, but I don’t think you can go too wrong using Gleim. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m having a great time with Gleim CPA Review.  Of course, not everyone learns the same way, but people who say "Because the exam is nondisclosed, Gleim doesn’t work" are trying to sell you oceanfront property in Arizona… check ‘em out at www.gleim.com I am planning to take the CPA test in about 6-10 months after I graduate. Although I do not want to take a REVIEW TYPE class right now ( becuase I have enough with work and school-both full time), I would like to purchase a program ( CD ROM ) that will review all the accounting concepts that I need to review for the CPA test. The program doesn’t have to be geared toward the CPA exam, just a CD ROM that reviews all of INTERMEDIATE ACCOUNTING and some other advanced issues. Anyone know of suck a program???

– Posted via Talkway – http://www.talkway.com Surf Usenet at home, on the road, and by email — always at Talkway.

Response:

I am planning to take the CPA test in about 6-10 months after I graduate. Although I do not want to take a REVIEW TYPE class right now ( becuase I have enough with work and school-both full time), I would like to purchase a program ( CD ROM ) that will review all the accounting concepts that I need to review for the CPA test. The program doesn’t have to be geared toward the CPA exam, just a CD ROM that reviews all of INTERMEDIATE ACCOUNTING and some other advanced issues. Anyone know of suck a program???

Response:

Question:

Note from Hammell: Following my comments is the latest in a series of very alarming press releases which consumers of dietary supplements and herbs, all over the world should be aware of. Tony Martinez just forwarded this to me. PharmaPrint Inc. is very bad news. They intend to drive natural herbs out of the marketplace to clear the way for themselves to make huge profits by selling patented analogs, as is already happening in Europe. They intend to sell their patented so called "BioPrinting" process to other pharmaceutical firms. Please do not be complacent about this. We must all fight back! Note what is said here (towards end of article below) "PharmaPrint is the only developer and manufacturer of patented pharmaceutical versions of multimolecule herbal medicines. Management expects to introduce a succession of new pharmaceuticals  originating from widely demanded, but scientifically UNTESTED and UNREGULATED herbal products." (my emphasis, these herbs have only been used by millions of people for thousands of years and these greed driven people have the colossal gall to call them "untested"???) The so called "Commission on Dietary Supplement Labels" (created when DSHEA was gutted by Waxman) is currently considering creating a separate regulatory category for herbals and botanicals. (p.3 of the official minutes from the Commission on Dietary Supplement Labels, Meeting #5, September 19-20, 1996, Sheraton Hotel, Reston VA. If this new category is created, it would create a very slippery slope for all other dietary supplements. Given the overt WHO backing of PharmaPrint Inc.,this is clearly a Codex harmonization effort. PharmaPrint announced in an earlier press release (PR Newswire, Dec.4, 1996 "New Technology, Global Initiative to Bring Herbal Medicines into Modern Medical Science Announced by World Health Organization Today) that they have the complete backing of WHO in their efforts to create patentable analog products from the world’s most popular herbs. Is this good for consumers? The FDC Tan Sheets (Dec.2, ‘96) stated that PharmaPrint has entered into a joint venture with University of Miami to patent an analog of saw palmetto berry extract (which according to them, "consumers are currently using on an unregulated basis".) They want to put their patented version through controlled clinical trials. After they spend the money to do this, you can be sure they will seek to protect their investment and will do everything in their power to sweep the natural product off the shelves. The latest PharmaPrint press release follows, and the best way to strike back is to use the attached file or download my Codex Report from Bonn from http://www.lef.org and forward it to more people so we can build the coalition necessary to fight back. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -PharmaPrint names former Regency Health CFO  Jim Wodach chief financial officer    Business Editors    IRVINE, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Dec. 18, 1996–PharmaPrint Inc. (NASDAQ:PPRT) Wednesday announced the appointment of well-known  industry financial executive James R. Wodach as senior vice  president and chief financial officer as part of the company’s stated plans to expand management in key areas.      President and Chief Executive Officer Elliot Friedman said:   "Jim adds a new dimension to our management team.  He has tremendous  experience working with high-growth companies, and we intend to use  his experience as we execute our expected licensing of the  PharmaPrinting technology to other pharmaceutical companies.      "Just as important, Jim has a distinguished track record in  financial management, not only in drug discovery but also health  service operations, adding a unique, broad perspective to our  strategic planning and financial systems."      Wodach was formerly director of finance of Paragon Biomedical  Inc., a company that provides contract research services for the  pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.  Prior to Paragon,    Wodach served in various capacities, including senior vice president  finance and chief financial officer for Regency Health Services  Inc., a New York Stock Exchange company.      Wodach, a certified public accountant, has 12 years of experience  in the health-care industry.      PharmaPrint is the only developer and manufacturer of patented pharmaceutical versions of multimolecule herbal medicines.   Management expects to introduce a succession of new pharmaceuticals  originating from widely demanded, but scientifically untested and  unregulated herbal products.      The company also markets its PharmaPrinting technology to other pharmaceutical companies.  PharmaPrinting was developed over the  course of 20 years at the University of Southern California, which  still owns an interest in the company.      For more information on PharmaPrint Inc. via facsimile at no cost,  simply call 800/PRO-INFO and dial client code 285.      –30–RJ/la*  RPL/la    CONTACT:  PharmaPrint Inc., Irvine              James Burgess, 714/224-2555                 or              Financial Relations Board, Los Angeles              Moira Conlon, 310/442-0599 (investor/analyst contact)              Steven Seiler, 310/442-0599 (media)    KEYWORD:  CALIFORNIA    INDUSTRY KEYWORD:  PHARMACEUTICAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT CHANGES MEDICINE Copyright 1996 Business Wire. All rights reserved.

John Hammell, Political Coordinator,Life Extension Foundation            Please Snowball My Codex Report From Bonn                 Download from http://www.lef.org       Join Us To DEFEND Health Freedom INTERNATIONALLY!!!

Response:

Hammell) writes: They intend to drive natural herbs out of the marketplace to clear the way for themselves to make huge profits by selling patented analogs, as is already happening in Europe. They intend to sell their patented so called "BioPrinting" process to other pharmaceutical firms. Please do not be complacent about this. We must all fight back!

This information re Codex has been discussed for some time in myAR/ vegetarian list. I saw the national news a while back where this anaolg and patenting process was announced with great glee, like they had discovered a cure for AIDS. As one who is never ceased to be amazed at the stupidity and gullibility of most ppl, I have every reason to believe that this could happen. As usual, the bottom line is $$ not health. Next think ya know, they’ll be telling us we can’t smoke cannabis leaves. ~Velvet O’Rourke~ Sacramento, California

Response:

Question:

I have MCI at home and am registered with american airlines to get mileage for every long distance dollar spent. Now , my question is if I get an American airlines Citibank VISA/MC can i accumulate miles on the same account ( that is my MCI AAdvantage number) for every dollar spent on my credit card?? -Rajeev

Response:

| I have MCI at home and am registered with american airlines to | get mileage for every long distance dollar spent. Now , my | question is if I get an American airlines Citibank VISA/MC | can i accumulate miles on the same account ( that is my MCI | AAdvantage number) for every dollar spent on my credit card?? | | -Rajeev Yes.  This is precisely what I do.  In fact, it gets better than that.  You can ask MCI to automatically charge each month’s phone bill to your credit card, and if the credit card is that same CitiBank/Aadvantage card, you will get an extra mile for your phone calls! (Actually, it works out to slightly more.  You get MCI miles (5 mile per dollar) only for the phone calls, but you get Citibank miles for the total charge, which includes tax as well.) –Robert Book   a.k.a. The person accounting hope didn’t exist when marketing   came up with the ‘frequent flier program.’

Response: