Will Small Resellers Be Forced out of the Gaming Laptop Market Too

I remember an era where laptops for gaming were a specialist thing. I seriously doubt they shipped in any noteworthy quantities but they sure generated lots of profit for the companies. The price was just too big to justify buying these types of notebook computer for people. They the the latest technology and basically the best laptop computers. They most likely weren’t best sellers though because I think us people buy laptop computers that we can easily afford. As more established companies see the potential in the gaming laptop market, things seems to have transformed.

Bringing their brand names into the market would probably allow them to charge higher prices. With such small markup on other laptops it is no surprise they would like to be included here. With their enormous marketing resources I am sure they can get anybody to buy laptop computers like these. In my point of view this could possibly ruin littler companies if they don’t differentiate their usp. I know for a fact that laptops for gaming will become greatly accessible for us. Local retailers cannot really leverage a brand name like the bigger competitors can.

I think they certainly are making a couple of the best laptop computers out to buy. This is a prime opportunity the littler resellers should apply to their advantage. From time to time the littler system builders are able to supply the newest components faster and hence supply better specs as well. Generally this kind of buyer is in the know in regards to the tech specs and can easily evaluate configurations. More often than not the specifications matter than the design for these kinds of buyers. This would be viewed as a positive development for the consumer. One method that the smaller retailers might apply is to cut markup in to sell more system. Do not forget that is just my point of view on the current trends. Mobile technology is always getting better and the new notebooks will usually be high priced on release. It is difficult to know what will occur now that the global brands have gotten involved in manufacturing laptops for gaming.

http://www.rizeon.com/gaming_laptops/page.php seem to be shifting their gaming laptops at cheap prices to compete with others.

Rapid take-up of mobile broadband will enhance development

According to Ofcom, the UK telecoms regulator, the rapid take up of mobile broadband may increase opportunities for fibre-optics developments. Their assertion suggests that as the popularity of mobile broadband increases, fixed-line operators will be pushed by the resulting competition, forced to assist in the development of fibre technologies. In connection with their proposal, Ofcom has specified their plans for a pro-investment regulation, which promises all operators a return on their investment, if they participate substantially.

Ofcom’s chief executive, Ed Richard, introduced this concept at a recent conference, demonstrating the future for fixed-line services. He pleaded with operators to participate in the program, investing funds into the technology’s development. As result of their investments, Richards guaranteed that cash to fibre will benefit operators substantially.

As part of the regulatory program, which will be officially published in September, Ofcom has contacted each major broadband provider, and other leaders in the communications industry. Ofcom asks all businesses to help in the deployment of next generation networks, to progress the industry as a whole.

Regardless of the advancement of the communications industry, fibre optics is definitely essential to the future of UK. As over 1/3 of UK businesses predict of need of 100 Mbps, the current technology is less than adequate.

Surfboard Lighting Concept

There is just not enough time during the day to surf. Many times the best surf is at night, how often do you challenge a sunset to catch that last wave? Well thin you are a surf-aholic and as you have seen out there you are not alone. There is some new killer technology on the horizon for the dedicated surfer.

Recently we have seen WiFi surf boards so you can do your email between sets. This works pretty good and I was jazzed when I first heard of it. Surfing while surfing makes a lot of sense. Still waiting on the mail order as this article is finished, but here is some more information on that.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3812357.stm

If your ocean becomes your office and your surfboard becomes your desk, what if you decide to work late or early? Well this is why I am going to figure out how to run my surfboard laptop, WiFi and headlight on electromagnetic energy? As you know batteries and water do not mix all that well. You say headlight; on a surfboard; come again? Yes, that is what I said; now then I have tried this already via a battery-less flashlight and duct tape.

The waves provide a good amount of movement. Which is need to power up the new electromagnetic induction technology flashlights, which charge a capacitor instead of the working off a battery. Currently there are some nifty micro-flashlights being used which you can buy which use a similar technique and are available thanks to the Everlite Flashlight technology research lab. These smaller flashlights work by shaking them for about thirty seconds and shine for about 6 minutes and they shine quite bright since they use a very bright LED light. Here is a link to this home use flashlight:

http://www.modernoutpost.com/gear/details/ee_shakelight.html

Here is a quick movie you can watch online to see how this technology works.

http://www.modernoutpost.com/gear/movies/ee_forever.MPG

I propose we get a really smart Surfboard making entrepreneur with some balls to put on of these flashlights inside the surfboard rather than having to duct tape it on top. We can test it for them and get some free surfboards. I propose that the front of the surfboard have an automotive style headlight lens with the LED light inside. Think on this now, surf on it later.

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

Certification Skullduggery

On the surface, the race for certifications in software, hardware, networking, and other technical disciplines sounds like a wonderful idea for ensuring companies receive the level of expertise they need to receive optimal efficiency and talent for their operations. Many employers seeking the best talent have certainly bought in on this hype from the industry’s rush to set up a certification test for almost anything. Despite the popularity of these practices, there is an ominous and insidious impact going on beneath the surface that both employers and technicians should consider.

When the certification craze first began to appear on the scene, it was instituted more as a means for vendors to extract a few extra dollars from their clients in exchange for a warm and fuzzy feeling that these tests would ensure a higher degree of competency from people who had received the vendor stamp of approval. The pitch here was simple, if vendors could come up with a skills test that demonstrated a level of experience that could only be attained from having worked in a particular discipline for a number of years in the field, companies who hired these individuals would then be assured that they were getting the best possible personnel in the field. In the beginning, vendors tapped into the brains of their own best talent to assemble the most obscure trivia they could devise regarding their products, to design a program of certification that could only be passed by someone who had intimate knowledge of the product. Even at this stage of the development, there was not necessarily as much focus on the practical application of this minutia as there was on the fact that most beginners in the field would be unable to pass the test.

With a sufficient amount of trivia collected, software and hardware vendors launched their certification testing plans at a price level that added enough credibility to the program to convince customers that they would really be getting something if they paid to have their employees engage in these testing procedures, at a level of difficulty which practically ensured that those who took these exams would have to repeat the testing process a number of times before they could pass. As technicians devised ways to prepare for passing these exams more easily, changes to the tests, revisions of the technologies, and requirements for new certifications on releasing new iterations of systems and software have kept the business of charging large sums of money for the process alive and well.

In practice, most capable technicians can pass just about any kind of certification they can afford if they persist in paying to take the exam, and research the information they are uncertain about between attempts. This does not mean they will be able to adequately perform the duties that will be required of them when applied to the workplace, but they have demonstrated an acuity for absorbing some of the trivial concepts associated with their field of endeavor.

Having participated on both sides of this practice, the one thing missing from this entire process is the ability to measure true talent. In recent developments associated with current business practices, there has been a sudden unhealthy shift in the trends previously experienced. Though companies have continued unabated in their insistence on hiring certified professionals, there are increasing numbers of organizations that are no longer willing to pay the costs associated with obtaining the certifications they demand from their employees and potential employees. To make matters worse, more and more companies are requiring potential candidates to have a huge number of technical certifications in a wide range of specialized areas in order to qualify for employment consideration.

With the costs of certification now being shifted to the individuals rather than to companies who require this questionable measure of skill, the net effect is a form of technical discrimination that effectively pushes out those talented individuals who cannot afford to keep up with the shifting sands of getting certified for every aspect of their working experience. In some cases, I have seen companies requiring levels of certifications and experience in their requirements that are literally impossible for anyone to meet. For example, one job requirement required both individual certification and more years of experience with a single product than the number of years that particular product had been in existence!

While working for a software vendor who had decided to initiate a certification program, I was chosen to become one a few engineers who were selected to provide support for certified customers. When told what we would be doing differently for these customers, the management said the approach would be to treat these companies like they knew a little more than a regular customer, and skip a few of the normal preliminary questions when initiating the process of opening a support issue. That was all we had for a guideline. In obtaining an enterprise certification for myself with another vendor, I took the exam several times before passing it. I used the information I had gained to create a pretest preparation study for other engineers who would also be taking the test, and they passed their exams on the first try.

The bottom line here is that the current form of technical certifications being used as a measure of ability are practically worthless in what they truly offer, and more insidious in their impact on professionals trying to maintain a viable career in the technical industry. As it stands now, the technical industry does not need any more barriers to progress in attracting experienced talent that has already proven itself in real time industry experience.

Director of Software Concepts
BHO Technologists - LittleTek Center HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~jdir
Please provide a rating for the article to help us determine future content choices.

Is Evolution An Outdated Theory?

The question used to be, “Can evolution be proven?” Today, a more appropriate question is, “Is evolution science?”

(The following is a condensed version of the chapter entitled “Genetics” of the book “Evolution: A Science Breakdown,” available free at EvolutionDead.com.)

To most people, science is seen as “today,” modern, up-to- date, and perhaps even the promise of futuristic wonders. A generation which possesses supersonic jets, Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM’s), space shuttles and sophisticated computers can hardly be called primitive. Or can it?

In the midst of all of this state-of-the-art technology, there seems to be a rather primitive theory which, although steadily losing credibility even among those who have adhered to it for a long time, still has many convinced that it is based on science. This theory has proven one thing beyond a shadow of a doubt: although modern technology is nearing Star Wars sophistication, modern man is still capable of some embarrassingly primitive thinking. I’m talking about the “scientific” theory of evolution. If this theory is not honest misinterpretation, it may very well be the most sophisticated hoax ever perpetrated on the human race.

The scientific concept of the origin of life on earth begins with the premise that life first appeared billions of years ago with the formation of microscopic organisms out of inanimate matter. In the billions of years which followed, small organisms evolved into higher and more complex forms of life, and one species evolved into another.

The question here is not whether this actually happened. To any human being living in the 1990’s, the question should be, is such a scenario even possible? Well, according to what we know today about genetics, the answer is an unequivocal no.

Probably the strongest thing going for evolution at the time of its inception, over a hundred years ago, was that virtually nothing was known about genetics in that era. I am convinced that if the public had had a decent understanding of genetics, and random mutation in particular, before being presented with the theory of evolution, the theory could never have been taken seriously and certainly could never have been accepted as legitimate science.

According to evolutionists, random mutation is purportedly what brought life from the one celled stage to its present complexity. That is, through a series of beneficial accidents of random mutations, they claim, simple organisms evolved over billions of years into new and more complex species.

Keep in mind that for one species to have evolved into another, massive random genetic changes would have to have occurred throughout earth’s history. But here’s how genetics–the most crucial aspect of evolution–does not only not support the theory but actually contradicts it:

Modern man has been acquainted with and acutely affected by random mutations more than any prehistoric creature. Sources of random mutations have been around us for years. What are they? Carcinogenic chemicals. Cosmic rays. Sources of radioactivity such as nuclear weapons, nuclear reactors, nuclear waste, and medical X-rays. And some of these sources of random mutations have been affecting modern man way before he even knew how they wreaked their havoc.

Let’s take radiation, for example. Here’s an idea of what it does:
Exposure of high doses of radiation to limited parts of the body can cause severe tissue damage and eventual necrosis.

Exposure of the entire body to a few hundred “rem” (rem is a unit used for measuring radiation effectiveness) can initially cause nausea. Then, in about a month, the person might begin suffering hemorrhages, anemia, tiredness, weakness, and an increased risk of infection. Although some may survive, others will die as a result of these maladies.

At about 1,000 rem, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may develop within hours of exposure. As these symptoms become worse, they are followed by fever, loss of fluids, severe infections, and finally death.

At about 10,000 rem, the dose to which a worker might be exposed during a nuclear reactor accident, vomiting and diarrhea would occur within an hour, followed by reduced blood pressure, convulsions, and unconsciousness. Death would come within one to three days.

Radiation can also have long-term genetic effects. Studies show that radiation can cause not just one, but a variety of different types of mutations. One of the effects of these
aberrations is cancer. The cancer can show up years or even decades after the organism’s exposure to radiation. If the organism does not show any signs of cancer, there is still the
possibility that cancer may show up in future generations.

Some other disorders or genetic diseases which may show up in later generations as a result of random mutations are: hemophilia, congenital cataract, spontaneous abortions, cystic fibrosis, color-blindness, and muscular dystrophy.

Still other diseases such as diabetes, heart disorders, asthma, and schizophrenia could manifest themselves in later generations as a result of random mutations combined with environmental factors.

This was just a quick glimpse of the severe effects of random changes on biological life. And it seems that the results are almost always the same: deterioration, destruction, and, in many cases, death.

Does this coincide with what evolutionists have been chewing our ears off with for years?

For years we’ve been hearing stories about how biological life underwent billions of years of random genetic changes. We’ve been hearing how by accident some of these changes resulted in beneficial mutations. We’ve been hearing how these beneficial mutations eventually resulted in new and more complex species. Yet when we look at what random genetic changes–or any other random changes, for that matter–actually do to biological life, we find nothing but disease and death. Where are all those beneficial mutations evolutionists have been talking about? Not one patient has ever developed or passed on to future generations better biceps, for example, as a result of radiotherapy. Not one of the thousands of surviving bomb victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has developed a more evolved brain, for example, as a result of exposure to radioactivity. Not one person involved in a nuclear reactor accident has developed a more sophisticated skin, for instance, which is tougher and more durable than average. In virtually every case, random mutations have resulted in havoc and destruction.

Is it possible that modern technology has actually disproven evolution rather than helped it?

Evolutionists in the past have hidden behind the “it took billions of years” routine. Before the nuclear age it may have been necessary to get into a time machine to verify whether, given enough time, random mutations would cause life to evolve. However, with the advent of modern technology’s ability to affect massive random mutations relatively quickly, there is no longer a need to dig into the past to see the contrived fallacies supporting the evolutionary powers of random mutation. The answer is right in front of us. Random mutations result in quite the opposite of what we’ve been led to believe. They result in nothing but illness and fatalities–not improvements. What’s more, the more massive and prolonged the occurrences of these mutations, the greater the havoc and destruction. So what do you suppose would happen to a planet subjected to random mutations for billions of years? Total annihilation!

When you take what we know as fact today about random mutation and try to reconstruct a scenario of those alleged billions of years of earth’s history, instead of the fairy-tale story of evolution, you come up with a picture which more and more resembles a horrible scene out of a “post-nuke” movie:

Even if earth had already been as populated in that alleged period of three and a half billion years ago as it is today, and had since been affected by billions and billions of random mutations, according to what we know today about random mutation, by now life would probably have been virtually wiped out. With random mutation being the highly destructive force that it apparently is, the process which was supposed to have caused life to evolve is precisely what would have caused, in all probability, such genetic havoc that few organisms would have survived the ordeal. Furthermore, under such circumstances, “survival of the fittest” is a totally ludicrous concept. The word “fit” would have described largely those organisms which were less disease ridden than the rest, a far cry from the “better species” of evolution. And of those “fit” survivors, many would have passed on genetic diseases to their offspring. Even if the “fit” had not been wiped out by the random mutations, their offspring still would have stood a chance of being wiped out by hereditary genetic diseases. Then, any disease-free offspring would again be threatened with annihilation when this entire mutation cycle started over again.

Thus, after billions and billions of years of random mutations, even in the unlikely event that some genes mutated in a way that might have ultimately produced some beneficial changes to an organism, an already populated planet would have been reduced to a few diseased life forms, at best. Those few beneficial genes, if they could even have existed, would have been so overwhelmed by the staggeringly high number of diseased genes necessary to produce just a few beneficial accidents, that they could never have borne any fruit. An organism would have been wiped out long before it had an iota of a chance to change or improve. In a sense, earth would have resembled a planet after a nuclear holocaust.

Now, if a planet began with relatively few life forms, as earth allegedly did, how far would life have gotten? I don’t mean how far would evolution have gotten. I mean, how far would those few organisms have gotten before being wiped out by the destructive powers of random mutation? According to what we’ve actually seen random mutations do in modern times, life never would have gotten off the ground, let alone proliferated into highly complex and healthy species. In all likelihood, earth would have turned into a desolate planet long ago.

The insanity of evolution is also apparent in the more aesthetic aspects of man. How could qualities such as artistry, abstract thinking, and appreciation of music have become traits common to an entire species? According to the mechanics (or imagery) of evolution, it would have been a great wonder if such qualities, so meaningless to the survival of purely physical and biological systems, would have evolved in only a minute fraction of a species. Yet, to be present–to one degree or another–in virtually every human being? How? This should never have happened.

The existence of such aesthetic human qualities as emotion, humor, and intellect cannot be explained biologically, no matter how ridiculous you want to get. Why, for example, did nature give us a sense of humor? How did nature even know what a sense of humor was? And how did a sense of humor render humans more “fit to survive?” There are millions of plants and animals without a sense of humor which have obviously survived. There are even humans without a sense of humor who seem to survive. How did such a quality ever evolve?

With a little serious thought, it should be at least somewhat obvious that the scenario proposed by the theory of evolution does not work and certainly could never have occurred. One may even find it puzzling how a concoction such as evolution could ever have been accepted as science in the first place. I think that if evolution can be called science, there should be several other equally qualified scientific topics included in science text books–the physics behind Superman’s X-ray vision, the story of how the power of speech evolved in Mickey Mouse, and the chemical composition of Batman’s Shark Repellent Spray. If we’re going to have fun theories, let’s really make them fun.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Josh Greenberger: A computer consultant for over two decades, the author has developed software for such organizations as NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, AT&T, Charles Schwab, Bell Laboratories and Chase Manhattan Bank. Since 1984, the author’s literary works have appeared in such periodicals as The New York Post, The Daily News, The Village Voice, The Jewish Press, and others. His articles have ranged from humor to scientific to topical events.

Visit his site ==>shopndrop.com

Get his free book on evolution ==>EvolutionDead.com

Caution Required

Being active users of the internet, we all come across so many tempting
business offers. Most of us would love to be able to quit our mundane job
that takes all of our time and energy. Most of us think “I know there is a
way to make money on the computer, and some day I will sit down and figure
it out.”

Every time an advertisement or website catches your interest, you can not
help but wonder if it could actually work, and then you could work from home
and spend more time with your family. There is nothing wrong with that!
Sometimes change is good, or sometimes you just have to take that chance.
But since there is so much riding on any decision you may make, especially
money, shouldn’t you step back and take a second look?

First off, and very important, never ever take an ad for what it says.
There are no guarantees that advertisers tell the truth. They want to sell
to you, and they will tell you whatever it is that you want to hear to get
you interested. Now, there are many legitimate businesses that will not
steer you wrong. But, please do not take them for face value. Don’t jump in
with both feet without taking the time to investigate.

I have always felt that MarketingTrendz.com has done a good job in trying to
educate our readers as far as dealings on the internet. But the fact is,
most of the people I hear from have all learned the hard way about the
offers they find on the internet. My thinking in sitting down to write this
warning to you is- Do you need to burn your hand to know that fire is hot?
Can we not learn from other real experiences and save ourselves from a lot
of trouble?

There are many ways to verify that a person or business is what they claim
to be and believe me (and everyone who has gone through this) it is worth
the extra time and research to protect yourself. Below are some web
addresses that I personally find useful and have book marked for my easy
access.

- Check the website registration.
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whois
Do this with all domains you are interested in buying from. Of course, they
need their OWN domain for this to work.

- Verify names, addresses and phone numbers.
http://www.infospace.com/
Not everyone comes up in these directories, but it only takes a few seconds
and can make you feel more sure.

- Look for a membership to an association for protecting consumers.
http://www.scaminator.com/cobra/directory.htm
There are solid guidelines that members must follow. Remember: Also look
for their listing in the association’s directory. That way you know they
haven’t just stolen a graphic and are pretending to be a member.

- Stay up-to-date about circulating scams.
http://www.scaminator.com
http://www.scamwatch.com/scams/sacm001.html
There are many other places to read about scams. Look around, you might save
yourself a lot of problems.

Other things you should do:

- Contact the actual people of any testimonies that are given. This can
shed a lot of light on the business in question.

- Check out the company at your local Better Business Bureau and Attorney
Generals office in your area.

- Make sure all phone numbers to the company are working numbers. Call them
or check with the local phone companies and directories to see who the phone
number is listed to.

- Look for a street address for sending payments. Never send to a PO Box.
If they refuse to give the street address to you, that is a good indication
that there is something not quite right.

These are just a few things you need to get in a habit of doing. Even if it
seems like a huge pain, it is the best action to take for yourself. No one
else will be looking out for you.
Your Caution is Required.

About the Author

Written by Sara Hardy
Owner of MarketingTrendz, and Publisher of
The OnLine Exchange Ezine.
To subscribe to her ezine goto:
http://www.online-exchange.com
This will automatically make you a member of The Profit Zone,
a FREE Members Only Club that gives you unlimited access
to FREE marketing tools, ebooks, resources and more!

Australian Search Engine Toolbars

In the last couple of years Australians have been hit with a barrage of online advertisements by search engines trying to get us to download their toolbars. Many are feature packed with pop up blockers, spell checkers, customisable buttons and quick links to news, weather forecasts and other useful tools.

So which one is the best? It comes down to the search engine you most regularly use and what features you consider most important.

The Ansearch Toolbar for instance, allows you to refine your search based on gender and age which is very cool. It also comes with quick links to weather forecasts which I find very useful.

The Google Toolbar features a spell check and dictionary which is very appealing students and anyone else who regularly uses the Internet for research.

If you’re still not too sure which one to install, just try them all out and then make your decision. It’s simply a matter of uninstalling the ones you don’t find useful.

- Google Australia Toolbar
- Ansearch Australia Toolbar
- Yahoo Australia & New Zealand Toolbar
- ninemsn Toolbar
- Sensis Toolbar
About the Author

Kham is the webmaster of various websites such as Wallpaper World, Motor Desktop, Toast Mobile, eComm Australia and the Ze News blog.

Four Mistakes to Avoid During a Data Center or Server Move/Consolidation

Server consolidation and data center moves can deliver
significant benefits - including cost savings, enhanced business
continuity, optimized service management, and improved
regulatory compliance.

The impact of this physical displacement should not be
underestimated. If you don’t adequately understand and address
the issues that arise when you put more physical distance
between users and servers, you can set yourself up for serious
pain and potential failure.

Here are four killer mistakes you should be particularly careful
to avoid:

1) Confusing network latency with application latency If moving
your servers adds 50 milliseconds of network latency, that
doesn’t mean that your application response times will only
increase by 50 milliseconds. On the contrary, applications
require many back-and-forth interactions between user and server
(often referred to as application “turns”). So the addition of
50 milliseconds of network latency can cause an action that only
took 3 seconds to complete locally to take 30 seconds to
complete after a server move.

Network managers can’t change the speed of light, or make Tokyo
closer to New York. So it doesn’t make sense to lay the problem
entirely on them. In fact, because application design issues are
often responsible for poor response times after a server move,
additional investments in the network will be of little use
whatsoever.

2) Failing to realize how network latency impacts server
performance and scalability Servers allocate resources to each
client session and lock them up until the session is completed.
Local clients complete their sessions quickly, because their
application turns experience minimal network-related delay.
Remote sessions take much longer to complete.

Thus, remote users keep the server’s resources busy for a longer
period of time - preventing the server from releasing its
resources for use by other clients and severely limiting its
ability to scale. That’s why IT organizations should consider
the possibility that network latency will require them to invest
in additional server infrastructure.

3) Putting distance between servers - even temporarily - can
crush performance It can take weeks or months to complete a move
to a new location. During interim stages, some systems will
operate from their original locations while others will operate
from the new location.

The impact this separation between servers has on application
performance can be even more dramatic and unexpected than the
introduction of latency between users and servers, because
computing processes are almost never designed to accommodate
significant inter-server latency.

Consider the following example of a credit application that
authenticates users on an Active Directory (AD) server and
accesses a database to validate customer credit scores:

1. Client accesses the credit application server (10 turns) 2.
Credit application server authenticates client on the AD server
(50 turns) 3. Credit application server gets credit data from
database server (200 turns) 4. Client receives answer from the
credit application server (5 turns)

Note that there aren’t many application turns between the client
and the front-end credit application, but there are many turns
between the servers. Thus, if distance between these servers is
introduced during a move, there is likely to be a severe impact
on application performance.

Any IT organization planning a
data center move must therefore ask a variety of questions.
What happens when servers with critical inter-dependencies are
temporarily separated? Which servers must be moved with other
servers? When should Active Directory servers be moved? Which
servers will need to be replicated for the duration of the move?

4) Not dealing with users’ performance expectations until after
the move Sometimes, it doesn’t make sense to set a
post-relocation Service Level Objective (SLO) that is identical
to the SLO before the move. If it originally took a local user
three seconds to execute a task, it is very unlikely that the
task will take the same amount of time after servers are moved
across the country. So an SLO of seven seconds, for example, may
be more reasonable.

It’s therefore critical to address users’ service level
expectations up front. If you wait until after the move and tell
users they have to live with what you can deliver, you’re
setting yourself up for a battle. But if you can get buy-in
beforehand as part of the planning process, you can avoid such
hassles and ensure that no one has unrealistic expectations.

To achieve this pre-relocation acceptance, IT must be able to
predict and simulate post-relocation performance. These
predictive and simulation capabilities enable IT to set up
“acceptance environments” where users can experience
post-relocation performance before the move is actually executed
- and where they can buy into post-move SLOs before a single
server is relocated.

Seven Steps for Project Success IT organizations can avoid all
of these mistakes. But to do so, they must leverage the
expertise of the application team, systems managers and network
architects. They also need to be able to create virtual models
of both the pre- and post-relocation enterprise environment - as
well as all transitional phases.

IT organizations can avoid all of these mistakes. But to do so,
they must leverage the expertise of the application team,
systems managers and network architects. They also need to be
able to create virtual models of both the pre- and
post-relocation enterprise environment - as well as all
transitional phases.

The following seven-step plan highlights how collaboration and
modeling can ensure the success of a data center move:

1. Build a virtual model of the pre- and post-relocation
enterprise environment, as well as all planned transitional
phases. All participants in the planning process, including
business users, need concrete information about how network
infrastructure will impact application performance with the new
data center.

2. Establish an SLO baseline by measuring application
performance before the move. Users’ needs and expectations don’t
exist in a vacuum. Pre-move transaction response times provide
essential context for determining reasonable SLOs for after the
move.

3. Measure post-move application performance in a virtual
environment. The only way to accurately predict the impact of
server moves on application performance is to run those
applications in a fully simulated post-move environment. This
will provide the specific data on potential performance
degradations essential for proper planning.

4. Identify applications that need special performance tuning.
Rather than wasting time, effort and money on beefing up all
elements of your enterprise infrastructure, focus instead on
specific applications or network components that may be
particularly problematic.

5. Assess dependencies between back-end servers to establish an
appropriate move plan. In addition to addressing network
latencies between clients and servers, the team must fully
understand the impact of latencies that may be created between
servers during transitional stages of the move.

6. Analyze problems and validate potential fixes for failing
applications. Before investing in and deploying a solution, it’s
important to make sure that it actually works. Assumptions about
bandwidth or CPU power should always be tested before being
executed in the production environment.

7. Manage user expectations and get buy-in commitments for
performance improving investments through hands-on acceptance.
Users should therefore be given the opportunity to directly
experience post-move application performance in advance, so they
can offer informed consent to the relocation plan.

By following this seven-step plan, IT organizations can
substantially reduce risk, eliminate unnecessary infrastructure
spending, accelerate time-to-benefit, and overcome a wide range
of potential political pitfalls. So if you’re planning a server
consolidation or other type of data center move, consider
investing in simulation technology that allows you to experiment
with alternative scenarios and determine in advance what will
work and what won’t. It’s a great way to ensure that your
business reaps the full benefits of the move - without suffering
any of its potentially disastrous consequences.

For this and other network performance articles, white papers,
and industry resources, please visit Shunra at
http://www.shunra.com/resource_center.aspx.

About Shunra Shunra’s solutions empower organizations to
address service level and performance concerns before rollout.
The Shunra VE solution creates an exact replica of the
production network environment, enabling IT professionals to
safely develop, test and experiment with applications and
infrastructure before deployment, and effectively plan for
growth and change. Tailored for networking, performance and
testing professionals, and software developers, Shunra VE
facilitates collaboration across IT disciplines so IT
organizations can quickly and more efficiently uncover and
resolve problems before they impact the business. Over 1,500
leading enterprises and technology vendors worldwide are using
Shunra’s award-winning solutions including 3M, Boeing, Cisco,
Dow Chemical, EMC, FedEx, General Electric, General Motors,
JPMorgan Chase, Kelly Services, Merrill Lynch, Motorola, Nestle,
Pitney Bowes, and Vodafone. Shunra’s headquarters are located in
New York City and Kfar Saba, Israel, with worldwide offices in
the UK, Sweden and India. Shunra is also supported through a
global network of channel partners.

You will need to Change a toner cartridge because:

1. Your printer implicates that toner is not full enough to
print. Note: Low toner generally implies you can print a couple
hundred extra pages without a problem 2. The pages turning out
of the printer appearance withered or washed out 3. The pages
develop a repeating shortcoming of some variety 4. Users are
able of and required to be capable to change toner in black and
white printers. Note: Color printers are harder so if you are
diffident of how to change color toner ring the helpdesk and
they will usually help you.

First thing you will want to realize is what model of printer
you develop.

This might be scripted on the printer somewhere, there are two
names that you will likely find on the printer, one is the name
of the printer. The other is the model name . You may want the
model name.

With this information, most stores might be capable to tell you
which exchange toner cartridge to apply. Note: If there is a
nuiscance identifying which exchange to employ call the printer
manufacturers helpdesk. Supply them your serial number and they
will make sure you have the replenishment toner cartridge that
you should.

Utilize the following process to replace the toner cartridge

1. Take the new cartridge back to the printer and take the fresh
toner cartridge from the package. 2. Power the printer off. 3.
Open the toner cover on the printer. 4. dislodge the old toner
by extracting and away from the printer. Note:It should come to
low to print with only a modest amount of pressure 5. dislodge
the new toner from its bag, remove the protective strip from the
cartridge. Note: This is a small tab on the side of the
cartridge that is bound to a plastic strip. If you do not
dislodge this strip the printer will only print blank sheets.
Attend to stay away from getting the toner on you once you rip
off the strip. Spilled toner is best cleansed up with a dry
textile. If you splatter any toner on yourself you can wash it
off with cold water 6. Place the new cartridge into the printer
the like way the old unit came to low to print Note:there will
be arrows or other prompts to help you line up the cartridge
right and itt had better glide in with minimal force. If it does
not glide in easily, make sure you develop the cartridge aligned
right and that you are using the correct cartridge 7. Once you
develop the cartridge sat down all they way in place then close
the toner cover. 8. Power the printer back on. 9. Print a couple
of test pages

If the prints appearance wonderful, you are just about done,
bundle the old toner cartridge in the pack the new toner came in
and Give it to the recycler. Most palce get a credit for the old
cartridges. Now you are finished.

If there is a problem with the trial pages, some cartridges are
refurbished and sometimes the cartridges can be faulty. If you
see runs, duplicated flaws, bleached out pages or extra defects
that did not survive before you changed, toner it will be
because of a issue with the toner cartridge. Try acquiring
another new cartridge, installing that cartridge, and printing
occasionally trial pages. If the printouts are uninfected, then
the First cartridge is a blemish, return it to the supplier for
credit.

If each new toner cartridges appear to develop problems call up
the manufacturers helpdesk. There is in all likelihood something
improper with the printer.Please Note: Toner cartridges are
light sensitive if you are resorting to leave them to low to
print of the package or printer for extra than a couple of
minutes please cover them to stop breakage.

Visit one of the most fact filled toner cartridge
resources on the web.

SEO Solutions and one way
link publicity services provided by LinkAcquire.

1ST FILIPINO VOIP SOLUTION RELEASED: Libreng Tawag Gamit Ang Internet

Union City, California (BUZZFON) July 8, 2004 - A small but
emerging Filipino VoIP company, Bonusfon, answers to the clamor
of the market today by launching, BuzzfonP2P
<http://www.buzzfon.com/>, a free, compact and convenient soft
phone that allow users makes clear pc to pc calls possible
without the choppiness, echoes or the static noises; just
crystal-clear voice even in low bandwidth environments.

VoIP?

VoIP - Voice Over Internet Protocol. It may sound alien to you
now, but this is tomorrow’s technology here today, VoIP is the
hottest growth area and one of the most debated topic on the
world wide web today!

It’s major advantage is to be able to make free or low cost
digital calls using the internet thereby lowering communications
costs and improving relations whether for personal, business or
network use.

At one time or another, you may have already tried it using free
popular chat clients like Yahoo or MSN, though free, these
applications does have it’s disadvantages, like crackling
sounds, choppiness, echoes and etc… This is whereVoIP
softclients or webphones comes in.

VoIP Softclients or VoIP softphones are software that runs on
your computer, it converts your voice into digital formats,
converts it to IP and uses the internet as medium to transfer
data calls from one PC to another, worldwide. Using the latest
communication protocols for transmission, Session Initiated
Protocols (SIP) secure voice communications are possible and
call set-up is much more precise. Using the latest in
compression and decompression technologies (codec) calls are
much clearer, no breaking up of voices and sometimes the quality
is better than traditional telephones.

Buzzfonp2p, a beta voip solution developed by US Based Filipino
company, Buzzfon will enable you to make free and crystal clear
calls from your pc to another pc. Buzzfon will be releasing
their pc to phone version shortly providing the best quality
international voice calls at the lowest cost. The VoIP market is
presently dominated by US based broadband communications
services such as net2phone, Vonage, and Yahoo.

BUZZFONP2P

You can download it for free at http://www.buzzfon.com. It’s so
easy to use, no configuration necessary, Buzzfon p2p will
traverse NATs and firewalls. All you need is a headset with a
microphone. Moreover, it promises to uphold the “no spyware
installed” regulation. Bonusfon, a broadband VoIP service
provider just launched “BuzzfonP2P <http://www.buzzfon.com/>”
through Buzzfon.com, along side with Skype who has listed 11
million downloads and 170,000 concurrent users, Tamerlane
Sanchez says “Our products and services are better than any VoIP
product and service provider in the market today. ” Tough words
for the competition. Buzzfon says that the market is clamoring
for a better VoIP softphone able to make high quality calls even
in low bandwidth environments, thus the emergence of Buzzfon.com

FROM PINOYS TO THE WORLD

Buzzfon is set to release a next generation voip solution by
October 2004.

The new release will have premium features enabling users to
make crystal-clear pc to pc, pc to phone, phone to pc, and phone
to phone calls worldwide on the lowest rates. Rumors have been
going around that users from anywhere in the world will be able
to call the US for only 1 cent per minute, just hold on till you
see the rest of their international calling rates.

Buzzfon is poised to redefine telephony as we know of it today,
from 24×7 Customer Service, crystal-clear voice calls, premium
services like Addressbook, Call Redial, Do not disturb, Speed
Dial, Call Waiting, Call Mute, Call Hold, Music on Hold, Call
Hunting, NAT Traversal, Stun Firewall implementation, Silence
Suppression, Comfort Noise; IPBX services and probably the most
exciting of all is its most aggressive pricing for international
voice calls. They made it clear that one of it’s biggest markets
will be the Philippines, with special focus on the millions of
overseas Filipino workers and their relatives.

This is indeed another mark made by Filipinos globally making
the world a smaller place to live in through advanced technology.

Kaya tawag na!

Buzzfon is copyrighted and distributed by Bonusfon.

CONTACT INFORMATION: Maida M. Barrientos Buzzfon.com 1 866 263
0710 Toll Free (63) 920-2570992 Philippines Direct Buzz# :
818801062 http://www.buzzfon.com