Thanks for all the replies I've received to date regarding the atrociously slow logon times achievable using RM 'CC3' (Community Connect 3) based Win-XP workstations. Please keep your comments / own experiences flowing in. ...and BTW are there many other disgruntled users of RM software out in TeacherLand who might be interested in forming an "RM Users Association" for the purpose of pooling our collective RM experience and putting pressure on RM to either get their act together or get out of the education market, I'd love to hear from you. Here's my take on what I believe is the root cause of RM's problem: XP is a lot more sophisticated than previous '9X' versions of MS Windows, which means this ought to takes far longer to boot. Except those clever(?) boffins at Microsoft realised their customers would never stand for this. So they got around this problem by developing some pretty nifty 'fast-boot' and 'pre-fetch' technology. Hence a medium spec'd XP workstation (talking to a vanila MS or Linux server) should be capable of booting in around 30 seconds of so. Now the other major improvement to XP is it's a lot more secure than earlier versions of Wndows. Indeed XP is now pretty much as good as everything RM used to overlay onto older versions of Windows. So with the advent of XP this meant RM found it was left without a genuine use for their ageing premium-priced 'Community Connect' workstation overlay. So what did RM do? Well first they concentrated on making CC3 even more secure -- to justify it's continued existence. How? Well they kludged their now obsolete (seven or there abouts year old) 'CC' technology into the heart of Windows XP. But in the process they completely trashed Microsoft's new 'FastStart' technology and crippled their new 'pre-fetch' facility. This RM CC3 based overlay is of course now marketed by RM as a 'feature'. But of course they neglect to point out to prospective new customers or upgraders that their unlucky users will take between four minutes and a full quarter-of-an-hour (or even longer) to logon and reach a usable 'start' menu. For non technical members of this list or for non technical people you knoiw who might be considering purchasing RM's CC3, let me explain the implications of all this in 'laymans' terms. Here I'll use the example of a car dealer whose name I won't reveal ...I'll simply refer to them by their initials -- 'RM' Motors. Now this motor company did rather well in the 90s selling bog-standard motor cars they'd modified to better meet the needs of school-teachers. However eventually all major car manufacturers caught up with the limitations 'RM' Motors had previously addressed so well. This left 'RM' Motors without an excuse to sell their 'cars for school-teachers' at a premium price. But wait, behind the garage they remembered they'd stashed away gallons and gallons of used sump-oil. OK, so this is a bit sludgy and so carcinogenic you'd better not spill it on your hands. But when poured into the engines of sophisticated modern cars this causes an evil smelling blue oil-haze to belch from the exhaust pipe. Well in salesman-speak this of course be represents positive proof that 'RM' Motors' premium priced specially modified motor cars must be far superior to the generic vehicle on which this is based. Well so what if the engine runs a bit rough. As long as this keeps going until after the warranty period runs out why should 'RM' Motors care! In fact if the motor packs up shortly thereafter, well this represents a great excuse for flogging the customer another engine or even a whole new car ...and likely several more after that!!! Only let's hope none of 'RM' Motors' customers twig they've simply been adding snake-oil to their car engines. IMHO RM (the Managed ICT services supplier) is in deep trouble because they've failed to keep up with the latest technology. You might recall this happened to RM once before with regard to their proprietary 'Risk OS' and their 'Acorn' machines. On that occasion they successfully reinvented themselves by fixing the security holes in early versions of Windows, making them more usable in schools. But right now I suspect they are up a creek without as paddle. Only time will tell. In the meantime I'd recommend schools shouldn't touch RM's latest "improved" 'CC3' system with XP workstations with a barge pole. And if you've got any shares in RM you'd better get rid of them fast. Now if your school's management has been suckered by their hype about enhanced security, then you can point out that in the education market the wrong kind of security is all too often grossly oversold. IMHO the real (hidden) purpose of RM style security is to make the life of the ICT Coordinator / Network manager / RM support people as easy as possible, at the expense of the usability and educational value of a school's ICT infrastructure. As for me, the principal task I have ahead of me is to persuade my school's senior management they are currently wedded to a real lemon of an managed ICT services supplier ...one who needs to be given the boot ASAP, no matter how much money the school will have to write off in the process. Wish me luck. David