<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Searching M$'s KB</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I know that at times I have told listers that the
answer is in M$'s KB without giving an article number. Sorry about that,
but now you have no excuse for not looking it up yourself before asking the
list.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>==============I always come to the list when I
find myself stuck. It's the first place I try. Not the KB, not the
wide, wide, world of the web. Why? Because if there's an answer to be had, it
is probably here. In fact, AccessD has been mentioned in two of my book
acknowledgements. Why should anyone waste time spinning their wheels looking
for something they might not find. Even if info is found, trying to apply it
to what you're doing can be as much a problem as finding it! Especially the MK
articles, because they're almost always out of date! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>That just isn't very efficient. </FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2>In our business, time is just as important as accuracy.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>No one on this list should waste precious time
looking up what someone here already knows. It doesn't make sense. This list
is not a last ditch effort -- "I've looked everywhere else..." </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Susan H. </FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>