Because Win2K was always a temporary installation for me. I was fairly certain I could run Linux there before I started work. So no, it's not "RRR" writ large. I had no intention of using Win2K from the beginning. I hate the interface, I hate the paradigm, and I hate the lack of customization.

I was just amused (deserved or not -- in my experience, deserved) that I had problems like that my first two days using Win2K, after having not used Windows as a main operating system for years and years because of the problems.

My experience has always been that Linux problems can be researched and fixed much more easily than Windows problems. You experience may vary. I've had a Linux desktop freeze up maybe 3 times, and twice it was attributed to Windows software running in VMWare. The third time it was some other easily identifiable problem. But in the space of a few days, I had two wierd-ass problems with Win2K that weren't readily attributable to any one action or badly written program, OTHER than the OS. And that's a big problem with Win2K -- it's monolithic. I can't replace the desktop when I have issues like that, as I did with KDE moving to Gnome.

No problem attaching to anything so far, and it's all Active Directalmy. The only problem I had was with DHCP, and that's some sort of wierd network card issue or something because I could use DHCP once the interface had been primed already.

I don't think it was the cutting and pasting... it was the cutting and pasting with Win2K believing I had something open, and then me optimistically thinking that "Undo" would really work under those conditions.

One final note on complacency: my intention is to replace most if not all of the developer boxes here with Linux, based on the functionality I can achieve with my box as compared to the Win2K boxes. I've already gotten a few bites. So no, I don't consider that complacency at all.