In article ,
mm wrote:

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:31:52 -0800, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
mm wrote:

What's
eating you, Smitty?

I do get worked up, don't I? Sorry about that. I just don't understand
why you want to spend hours and hours and hours,

**

and some money, setting
up some sort of clever, semi-automated, rube goldbergesque way to "save
time" in your quest. My point is simply that you've *already* spent more
time than you would have doing it the "slow" way. And you've barely
begun.

But it isn't like I've never wasted time, so I apologize for chastising
you. Knock yourself out, enjoy it, learn from it. Good luck.

Thank you. A lot. We're cool. It takes a big man to say more than
just "sorry", as you have done.

After I read this far, I wanted this paragraph to come after we were
cool:

**I don't want to spend the time, but I want the result. There are
features that this machine has that no other one has. (that I have
found and I've looked a lot). I'm hoping this will last me another 20
years**, but even if it only lasts 5 years, it will be well worth it.
It's not like I don't spend too much time watching tv as it is. I can
do this while I watch tv.

I once did something else like this that was repetitive, and I was
satisfied, but I haven't been able to remember what it was.

**The first one lasted almost 20 and I'm going to put a good surge
suppressor in front of this one (hope that makes a difference.)

I'd go into the details of the features this has that I want, but it
would take a long time and is probably boring to most people.



Posted and mailed too because it's been days and maybe no one is
reading this thread anymore.


Thanks to all of you for the help.

Thank you, sir. I'm not questioning your desire to make the machine
usable. Just your approach. Let us know how it turns out. (My email is
not as shown)