A couple of months ago, I started quite the little dialogue here about "dirty vs. clean" testing of PCs and stuff that runs on them.

The issue: Sometimes CNET users have a really lousy experience with a product that screams in our tests. We looked into that and realized we test some products on pristine, "clean" PCs. So should we test stuff on "dirty" machines, and if so who gets to play God and decide what constitutes the typical "dirty" box?

Our editors and Labs team dug into the issue, since it wasn't clear to you how we test and why. After a mostly civil debate, with a few testy words being reserved for me, we have arrived at a policy:

For evaluating hardware and software products, the system used should:

• Be a real-world, or a dirty, system, with real-world applications installed. Our editors adjust this mix of typical apps from time to time.
• Meet or exceed the recommended system requirements of the product being tested, not just the minimum requirements.
• Have the most recent Windows Updates installed.

Any problems or conflicts that pop up during testing need to be investigated fully by doing the following:

• Try updating relevant software (updates, patches, and so on).
• Try updating relevant drivers and/or firmware.
• Try updating the system's BIOS.
• Install the product on a different system (perhaps a clean system).

That's what we have so far. So, what do you think?

Bill Gates vs. Dorothy Parker
There are two kinds of people in this world: Dorothy Parkers and Bill Gateses.

There are two kinds of people in this world: Dorothy Parkers and Bill Gateses.

The Bill Gates type visibly brightens at the mention of any new technology, thrusts his shoulders back, hands on hips as he gives you his constructive opinion. You can almost see the skyline of a shiny new metropolis rising behind him. It's all rather revolting.

Dorothy Parker has a pained look as she listens to Bill and wonders what he's on. Her current technology is half-assed or half-obsolete, her kids keep secret how to use most of it, and if you talk about a trip to Best Buy she purses her lips and remembers she has plans to darn socks that day. It's all rather depressing.

And despite the names I've assigned, it's not a gender thing; there are female Bill types and male Dorothy types.

But as different as they are, in our consumer panel, they agreed on several things that surprised me.

• Dorothy and Bill are not put off by products that need professional installation. I was shocked. Personally, nothing turns me off of a product more.
• Dorothy and Bill don't mind paying for support and advice if it comes from a trusted person who knows their situation. They'll gladly pay if they can talk to the same person every time.
• Dorothy and Bill would prefer to be shown what to do, not told. In our group, they loved the idea of a DVD or VCD tutorial being packaged with a product, instead of a 96-page manual that was clumsily NAFTA-ized from Japanese into English/French/Spanish.

Now, either stay in your MBA program or take the three paragraphs above, head to Sand Hill Road, and get rich.

Too much protection?
Condoms on everything. That's California's reaction to technology. And we're at it again with a stout crop of new prophylactic measures.

The Democrat in me thinks the public really is this stupid and needs shepherding.

How did Silicon Valley ever take root here? I'm conflicted. The Republican in me likes the lawfulness and orderliness of all this. The Democrat in me thinks the public really is this stupid and needs shepherding. And the Libertarian in me wants to scream, then move to Idaho.

So go ahead, California, strap on another one. Just pray it doesn't rip, because underneath are 35 million consumers who are now used to having their thinking done for them.