I spent the better part of yesterday wrestling with what should not have been a problem in the first place. But, since it was, and since it managed to burn up the majority of a perfectly good day of development, I share this information in hopes that it will spare someone else my frustration.

The Scenario

You're OS is Windows Vista Home Premium, the 64 bit edition. You are attempting to set up a local dev environment using Apache and MySQL, but no matter what you try, the changes you make to your hosts file just will NOT become visible to your ping attempts! For instance, you add an entry such as "127.0.0.1   local.mydev", but when you go to a command window and try to "ping local.mydev", you get "host not found". SO not cool.

Editing the hosts file

Okay, a few words about editing the hosts file in Vista. Vista is very self-protective, even to the point of trying to protect you from yourself, so editing the hosts file requires that you do so with admin privileges. Ah, but just being logged in as an admin isn't enough; you have to start notepad (or whatever editor you're using) using the "run as administrator" option. Click Start, enter 'notepad.exe' in the search box, when it shows up in the results, right click it and choose 'run as administrator'. THEN you can open your hosts file and edit it. Make sure when you go to save it that you change the file type to *.any and overwrite the original file; By default notepad really really wants to create hosts.txt (which your browser would ignore). If you plan on making hosts file changes frequently, you may as well just set up a shortcut on your desktop that already has admn privs and already points to your hosts file. Create a new shortcut with the target property of "C:\Windows\System32\notepad.exe c:\windows\system32\Drivers\etc\hosts". Then click the 'Advanced' button on the shortcut tab and check the "Run as administrator" box. Now everytime you need to edit the hosts file, you'll already have admin privs to do so.

The Solution

SO THEN, back to the issue. At this point you know that your changes to the hosts file are being saved, but still no positive ping action taking place. After googling for hours and trying all SORTS of things, here are the steps I followed that gave me positive results.

1. First, make certain that the system is looking at the same hosts file you are. The odds that it's looking somewhere else are slim, but best to eliminate the possibility anyway. To verify hosts file location, you'll be launching regedit and looking for the value of the registry key "DatabasePath" in the Tcpip/Parameters (full key path: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters). The value should look similar to %SystemRoot%\System32\drivers\etc .

2. Stop the "DNS Client" service

3. Make sure that the hosts file name is all lower case. It shouldn't make a difference, but the information I found all references it that way and on Vista, it was actually named Hosts originally. Changing it's name can be a booger because of OS security, so to do so, see step 4....

4. Create a new hosts file. I tried using notepad, but could not get it to omit the ".txt" extension no matter what I tried, so ended up using EditPad Pro (freeware). Just delete or rename the old file, then create this new one, adding in the entries you need.

5. Go to a command window and test by trying to ping one of the entries you created. With the DNS Client service stopped, Vista should use your hosts file. At this point in the game, you should definitely have positive results.

6. Restart your DNS Client service, then re-test in a command window just to make sure it's still working as designed.

If you follow the steps above and it still doesn't work, I have no clue what to tell you except to perhaps try re-ordering the steps, toss in a reboot or two, try executing some ipconfig /flushdns commands. Some order of all of the above is what finally got me where I needed to be.

Oh,and if you learn anything in the process that I haven't caught on to, please come on back and leave that tidbit in the comments section of this post. If you do, all of your wildest dreams will come true.

Doug out.

Sorry, I originally posted this article not realizing I was prohibited from doing so by my PUBLISHING AGREEMENT! That's right, this content was selected to be included in an anthology being published by Apress Publishing called "Coldfusion: The Best of Fusion Authority"!  I'm pretty excited about it. :)

I have spent the majority of today shopping around for medical benefits for myself and my family. Only it wasn't very much like shopping; not at all. It was more like going through a divorce, or a death, or some other traumatic event that causes the rest of life to be put on hold while you do lots of typing, talking, researching, worrying, counseling, fretting, waiting anxiously, and spending money you didn't have to begin with.

Some of the other "required" industries (those things that everybody needs and has to have) have figured out how to actually be a positive experience in people's lives, like (in my opinion), the real estate, auto, and shopping industries. But the healthcare industry as it exists today...they know that you need them and therefore aren't all that concerned with simplifying the process or making it a pleasant experience anywhere along the way. Simply applying for benefits can nearly bring a person to tears. They scrutinize every aspect of your life and make summary judgments and assumptions about your future health, demand their giant premiums UP FRONT before they'll even CONSIDER approving you (don't worry! If you're denied, they'll return them to you as soon as they've earned a wee bit of interest off of your money!), and arbitrarily DENY you benefits on what I consider to be a discriminatory basis.

Take Assurant Health for instance ( NYSE:AIZ). Today I called them up to ask their help choosing a medical benefits plan that was right for my family and I. I spoke with a nice gentleman named Brian who graciously offered to walk me through the process. So he begins asking me the usual questions about mine and my wife's height and weight, our tobacco usage, and then about my dependents. My oldest son is 24 and autistic. I had the understanding that any dependent over the age of 18 had to have a good reason for being covered under my benefits, so I voluntarily told Brian that Joshua was autistic. There was a brief pause, and then a somber "oh no" that suddenly had me a bit worried. "What kind of autism is it?", Brian asked me, "can you tell me more about it?". Knowing full well that autism has no connection whatsoever with physical health, I volunteered "well, he's non-verbal". Before I could give him any more detail whatsoever Brian told me that I had been summarily judged and that Assurant would not be able to offer me medical benefits for my son. "But, we can proceed with adding your other dependents if you would like", he gleefully added. I had to laugh, and asked Brian to please help me understand the correlation that Assurant Health (NYSE:AIZ)had made between AUTISM and PHYSICAL HEALTH.  He stammered a lot, and like most under-paid customer service reps do, retreated to the safety of his pre-written script, chanting it like a mantra in response to each of the analogies I drew and asked him to enlighten me about. In a nutshell, he hadn't a clue, nor was he ever once regretful, but staunchly stood his ground and told me repeatedly, "the Assurant Health (NYSE:AIZ)underwriters will not approve dependents with autism".

Let me tell you, my son Joshua is as healthy as a horse, and among all his siblings doesn't get sick any more and probably even less. He's non-verbal, yes, but not one time in his 24 years on earth has that ever equated to an increased risk of contracting influenza, heart disease, cancer, or any other condition that would require tight fisted Assurant Health to outlay cash unecessarily. In a word, Assurant Health is blatantly discriminating against my son, and how can that be permitted in today's society? I wouldn't then be surprised at all if some of the screening questions Brian had not gotten to had to do with my family's eye color, hair styles, or preferred sock heights, as perhaps they may have managed to also draw correlations between THOSE unrelated facts and their risk of having to pay on a claim! Assurant Health, congratulations, you have joined the ranks of those corporations whom I consider to be guided and directed by individuals with a much less than average IQ, and I do not intend to stop calling you out publicly in every forum I have access to until you put an end to your corporate-supported discrimination. On my side is the fact that you are a publicly traded company, and I believe and hope that your "owners" will see my point of view and empathize completely.

Back to my original theme, though, then there's the whole process of actually trying to USE the benefits you pay so mightily for. Making your visit to the doctor, supplying your benefit card only to receive a bill for amounts that should have been taken care of by your provider, only they decided to judge the item "out of scope" and defer it back to you to pay. After taking precious time out of your life to show them obvious facts from their OWN POLICY, they concede that it's their responsibility and eventually pay it. In the meantime, your credit suffers while their slow motion bureaucratic gears leisurely fulfill the obligation you paid them to. Bah.

I'm very frustrated right now, completely drained mentally, and am out $468 while I wait to find out if the mildly retarded underwriter sitting comfortably in their air conditioned office at one of these monolithic conglomerates will be merciful enough to accept me into their broken system and add me to the masses who posess what amounts almost to vaporous benefits. In terms of monetary costs, costs in time, and pain and mental suffering, I do believe I'd almost be happier investing the time getting a degree in homeopathy and just leaving the whole Gordian mess behind. Unfortunately, on occasion I do need the medical expertise that exists out there, and since it's priced way beyond the reach of the average family, I have very few choices in the matter, as do we all.

I guess I have no solutions to offer, I just want to immortalize the discriminatory actions of good ol' Assurant Health against my autistic son, and to vent with the rest of my good citizens who I know are having to endure the same frustrations as myself. I do not believe that we should just accept it all because "that's the way it's always been", nor should we learn to be okay with it simply because it appears that we have no choices. Systems, like little children, will live up to the expectations placed upon them. Sometimes it takes a long time, but change can happen if enough people are consistent in the pressure they apply and the stands they take.

UPDATE

It's been about three weeks now since my highly unpleasant encounter with Assurant Health, whom I consider to be nothing short of blatantly discriminatory. I thought I'd let my readers know that I DID find a healthcare provider who was more than willing to insure my autistic son, no questions asked. In fact, it wasn't that hard to find...seems Assurant Health hasn't managed to infect all of the rest of the health care industry with their discriminatory practices after all. I hope that others like myself who have found themselves under Assurant's prejudiced magnifying glass will speak out and spread the word. Perhaps a little fiscal pressure may get them to reconsider what they're doing with regards to our autistic citizens. If not, then I hope perhaps public awareness will caluse them to slowly drown in red ink as their true nature is manifested and investors see them for what they are: purveyors of prejudice.

I also notice (from reviewing my site's activity logs) that Assurant Health themselves have been visiting this blog post, from their Minnesota and Milwaukee offices. Keywords they used to find my post were very specific, using phrases such as "Assurant Health denies autistic", and "assurant health autistic brian". Good. I hope they continue to spread the word around their virtual office. Perhaps whatever semblance of humanity resides within their managerial hierarchy will take it upon themselves to actually back me and suggest that perhaps equating non-physical handicaps with the potential of physical ailments is indeed absurd and discriminatory. Besides that, adding to a person's already stressful burden of shopping for health benefits should be something a company strives NOT to do, shouldn't it? Assurant made it clear to me and therefore the entire nation that they do NOT care what we think, and if we don't like being grilled and pressed and summarily judged, then we can just take our sorry arses right on down the street. 

Keep on reading, Assurant, cause I'm surely not going to stop writing.  

Health Benefits and the costs thereof. I won't even pretend to be anal enough to have managed to have wrapped my head around the unnecessarily over-complicated subject of health benefits, but I did just go through an experience regarding that topic that I feel is worthy of sharing.

The Scenario
I am the non-custodial parent of several children for which I provide support and medical benefits. Since my ex spouse had the children covered under her plan at work, I opted not to purchase benefits through my present employer in order to save several hundred dollars a month. Well, the Texas Attorney General's child support branch recently mandated me to procure health benefits for my children, despite the fact that I provided them proof that my ex spouse already had them covered. Since I had no choice in the matter and since a legal mandate qualifies as a life status change event (enabling a health care provider to allow someone to enroll in benefits outside of their normal bogus "open enrollment" period), I decided to just go ahead and cover the whole family. I submitted my application and waited for a response. Finally after several days, I was told "no, we will only allow the mandated children to be covered". Hmmm. Okay, so I'm going to have to pay the already high premium to cover children, but Blue Cross and Blue Shield is only going to allow me to put  the non-custodial children on? Not my other children for whom I am the primary custodian? In a word, that's BS, and a senseless, arbitrary, judgment-less decision made by some heartless BCBS bonehead in a padded leather chair somewhere.

My Plan 

Refusing to give Blue Cross and Blue Shield one dime, I then decided to explore the alternative of purchasing my OWN health insurance as an individual. Now, I had always been brainwashed to believe that purchasing insurance on your own was so outrageously expensive that it couldn't possibly be affordable, so prior to this I had always just opted to tell my employer to "give me the works" and pay whatever I had to. But after inquiring among my peers and family, I found that there were LOTS of affordable options out there, none of which cost me any more than my employer was charging me, and all of which were comparable in coverage benefits! I finally settled on using United Health Care (www.uhc.com), and in so doing was able to speak directly to a rep who helped me design a custom benefits package that fit my budget and my needs to a tee, and at an EQUAL cost to what my employer was charging me! I lost nothing and I gained freedom from the "group" by which healthcare providers judge employees when deciding their rates.

Employers: Consider This

Here's food for thought, too, for any of you out there who have employees and who provide company sponsored benefits: Stop doing it. Instead, what if you simply told your employees to go out and get their OWN benefits, and then you reimburse them half of their monthly premiums? Let's look at some numbers.

My employer currently graciously covers a full 50% of what they are charged to provide me health benefits. If they're charging me $450 a month, then they are paying $450 themselves. Times the twelve employees we have, they're dropping $5,400 a month on us AFTER factoring in what they deduct from our paychecks. If instead they allowed each of us to go out and get our own, and let's say between us all (some single, some healthy, some ill, some old, some with families) we all managed to acquire a premium that averaged $600, they would spend only $3,600 a month, and each employee would only spend $300 a month. The employer saves $1,800 a month, the employee saves $150-200 a month...win win, right????

So then why isn't this happening? Why haven't more employers caught on to such an approach? Am I missing something? I know my nature is to simplify things, boil them down to their true core...but is it really this simple, or am I just incapable of "appreciating" an overly complex scenario? Is the emperor naked, or does he really sport a gorgeous new wardrobe? lol. Actually, I think it's the whole "herd" mentality prevailing in this industry, where every employer does it the way they do because every other employer does it that way too. Bah.

Bottom line, I don't think I'll ever elect employee sponsored benefits again, unless of course they are picking up enough of the tab to make it the best deal for me. I encourage all of you to at least explore the option yourselves, too, and approach your employer about adopting a similar reimbursement policy for their company.