MUGGSY, obscure Children’s TV show from the 70’s


MUGGSY, from left: Paul Michael, Ben Masters, Sarah MacDonnell, 1976-77

This is serious TV trivia.  I remember a television series that was geared to young people that aired on NBC in the 70’s.  What made this show interesting was that it dealt with crime, drugs, gangs and life in the inner city.

For the longest time, I just could not remember the title.  All I could remember was that the best friend of the protagonist was named Clytemnestra.  She looked after this red haired girl who was living with her brother in a trailer, or truck or something like that in the city.

For some reason, I found the series!  And my memory served me well.

The TV show was called Muggsy.  Sarah MacDonnell was Margaret Muggsy Malloy, the girl with bright red hair.  Her brother Nick Malloy, played by Ben Masters, was a cab driver who took care of her. I recalled her father had a serious drinking problem and the mother was absent, but I cannot recall the reason.

Unlike a lot of shows, it was very “real” and dealt with some hard core material.  It was way above average and I remembered it being very good.

I cannot believe my memory brought this obscure show back to life.

12 episodes were aired, but 13 were created.

According to what I found out, here are some interesting facts about Muggsy.

Notable guest stars included Christopher WalkenDavid NaughtonPamela Reed, and Scott Baio.

The theme song was sung by David Clayton Thomas of Blood, Sweat, and Tears.

If you recall this long forgotten series, let me.  I just recalled how good it was and how it dealt with such hard material. I do not think television has really done anything like this as far as gearing something like this to young people.


Duo, Allo, Google Talk, Hangouts WTF?

Google’s Confusing Chat Client

For some explicable reason Google, of all companies, is a confusing hot mess when it comes to chat clients. They can produce solid online offerings, but messaging is an area of communication they consistently get wrong.

One notable exception is Hangouts. It was so adept that at one point Google was encouraging users to make it their default messaging client. For reasons not known, they are now encouraging users to switch to Allo and Duo, or as I like to call them collectively “Client Dumb and Client Dumber.”


A very good chat client, but who knows how long it will be around.

The functionality that Hangouts posses has been separated into two. Allo is a messaging application and Duo is a mobile video chat application. The division of features makes no sense. When people chat, message, video chat and the like, they prefer to be in one application not two, or three. However, Google is not the only one out there messing up in chat arena.

Stalwarts of messaging AIM, and Yahoo have become more anemic than robust. Yahoo Messaging has become a pale thin shadow of its former self. The heavy hitters in the chat world are Facebook Messenger, nearly a requirement on a mobile, Skype, a well respected chat client nearly everyone uses, Viber, popular with the international set, What’s App, and there are other cult favorite players with followings.

Peculiar is an appropriate term when it comes to a major smart phone OS maker that is fickle about what direction it should steer the general public concerning messaging. It makes no sense. Then again, Google has a distinguish history of hit and/or miss products.

One notable success was the image editing and picture organizer Picasa. The popular program has been retired. There is no real reason why not to support it, and it was a robust image editor for bulk work, organization and syncing with Google Photos on line. It was just left to rot and now dead.


Hello and Goodbye,  neither is what anyone really wants in chat.

Google also made an interesting choice in taking over the Nik Collection. This is a collection of Plug-Ins for Photoshop. After making them available for sale, they now offer the entire suite for FREE! It is nice move. But, you must download fast. No one knows how long this will last. Future updates are not stated.

The conundrum Google faces is one faced by tech companies that are established. It appears after a period of time companies begin to “anticipate” what consumers want without ever asking them what they need. The decision makers produce an idea and assume that it will work without thought to the real world.

Microsoft’s menu redo in Windows 8 was a perfect example of change for the sake of change without regard to end users. In a act of hubris more suited for a Greek Drama than a PC maker, they arbitrarily changed the startup menu. They never once bothered to see if people wanted this change or found it necessary. Microsoft was forced into making a retreat and brought back the popular, well organized, brilliant menu of old. The people spoke. Microsoft listened.

Google does go off and produce assorted programs here and there. There is much less of that now than before. In the past, Google looked like a big company willing to make room for their smart engineers to fiddle in the hopes that a winner would emerge from the many developments.


It has been revamped, but it lacks critical features that Hangouts already has.

However, you cannot move, fidget, launch, relaunch and direct back and forth and back when you are dealing with end users that need productivity tools. It is great to experiment and do R and D. But, you have to let the core products alone until you have everything lined up ready to go with a polished product.

Google for all of its success has a winner in Hangouts. There is no real reason to do anything other than beef it up and add needed functionality. When you have too many products on the market doing more or less the same basic things, no one is really going to spend the time figuring what is appropriate. . Allo, Duo, what do they do? Who cares?

Simplicity is the key, and confounding choices are productivity killers. I do not like the idea of having to look at Google Talk, Google Hangouts, Google Allo, Google Duo and whatever else, when one product is all that is needed. No one has the time to pick chose and guess what is what when one elegant program is all anyone really wants or needs, not split up applications that have hit or miss feature sets.

Attack on the Elderly: Joni Mitchell under fire

For all of the progresses “allegedly” made, growing old is still problematic, particular for women.


“There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other 1.”   It is a phrase former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright began using 25 years ago.  Those words immediately came to my mind after reading Dr. Gina Barreca’s article “Joni Mitchell on New York Magazine: Is The Photo Disturbing? In Psychology Today 2.

It is a tragic reality that a woman’s appearance is still excruciatingly tied into her achievement.  Irrespective of how accomplished any woman is, how she appears is usually factored into any evaluations of her work, relevant or not.  It is an anachronistic element of society that lingers like a rotting corpse.


Mitchell, unlike any number of her peers, has survived the rigors of a business known for creating fast careers and forgettable songs. 



Mitchell modelling for Yves Saint Laurent


For all of the political correctness, rhetoric and enlightenment we are supposed to possess at this juncture, none of it has erased the problem of woman having to be concerned with aesthetics obscuring what they do.  Gauging female achievement based on looks is at the center of Barreca’s article on Joni Mitchell.

While the author cites comments Mitchell has made that she takes issue, those concerns have the feel of being justification for critiquing her on how well, or poorly, she has aged.

Let me go back a bit. I think the genesis of how these pictures came to be is intriguing.

Yves Saint Laurent decided to focus on older woman to make a statement about both age and fashion. The concept was to bring to the forefront women of achievement who were in their later years. It was a bold move in a fashion world that is laser focused on youth, and being as slim as possible.

Where Barreca finds Mitchell so objectionable is when she is depicted wearing a white formless dress and long straight hair in the signature style of her youth.  For some inexplicable reason, this image Is objectionable to Barreca.


All of those substantial achievements are eclipsed in Barreca’s article simply because Mitchell did not age in a manner she deemed appropriate.

Granted, Mitchell does not resemble her youthful self, but it is difficult to look at these images of her and think they are repugnant.  It is not as if she is dressing too provocatively, displaying too much skin or doing something far outside the boundaries of the acceptable.  The reaction that Barreca has to these images is extreme.  They just do not seem to be in accord with the reality of what the images represent.

One can debate and question what Mitchell has said over the years.  One can debate the merits of any artist without calling the process of evaluation into question.  When you enter the public domain you will be the subject of discourse.  People will talk, speculate and evaluate.


From her appearance at “The Last Waltz,” the only woman to appear on stage.

                However, when the critique comes to looks, that reaches a peculiar low.  It is not the substance of a serious debate.  It becomes the foundation of a kind of gossip mentality, a decidedly mean spirited one.

The underlying point to Barreca’s article is that Joni Mitchell has grown old and not altered her look to compensate for the changes time necessitates.  She commends Stevie Nicks for aging well, but dismisses Mitchel for not.  However, both are doing the same thing with their looks: adapting them to their times.  It is not as if one is doing something totally unrelated to the other.


Mitchell, unlike any number of her peers, has survived the rigors of a business known for creating fast careers and forgettable songs.


One starts to think that what is being discussed is not only the physical changes of time, but the idea of what time does to people.  Inevitably, some of us grow old.   Sometimes people grow bitter in the process.  Some go to extremes to fight the inevitable.

Via body alterations, speech and dress, some are not willing to accept the aging process and fight hard to keep the hands of time still.  Some do better than others at this.  Some try too hard and end up caricatures of themselves.  Some know when they have gone far enough.

Mitchell has been cited for her cynical nature toward the music business.  It is often painted as a flaw in character, or the ruminations of someone who simply grew weary of professional music making.  However, unless you have been in the world of contemporary music, or art period, you may not have an idea of how brutal it can be. It really is a blood sport.


Mitchell with B.B. King, she freely crossed genres and styles during her career.

                Dreams are crushed, talent exploited and artists suffer.  The weight of fame, success, awards and constant media attention is a burden too great for some.  Add to this the turmoil of being on tour for months on end, and it can be a soul stomping ride through hell than ends up in self-medication and excess.

The wars to keep your art intact, the fights to even get your creation to the public without being made “commercial,” and all of the indignities endured along the way make it an epic undertaking to make music that is high on artistry.  Mitchell, unlike any number of her peers, has survived the rigors of a business known for creating fast careers and forgettable songs.  Longevity in contemporary music is not common.   Those that have made it are part of an exclusive club.

During her career, Mitchell has created recordings spanning jazz, pop, rock and roll, blues, folk, country and in some cases a style of music so different it is hard to place it in any one category.  Her influence is still felt.  Her work has already stood the test of time.

All of those substantial achievements are eclipsed in Barreca’s article simply because Mitchell did not age in a manner she deemed appropriate.   Because of her failure to live up to one expectation, now she is seen as a disturbing image best forgotten.  Sadly, it is based on her appearance, not her achievements.

One possible reason Barreca maybe so uncomfortable with Mitchell is that we are a society that wants to consign the elderly to the hinterland.   Older people are not supposed to occupy the media space.  The faces of the older among us are too painful a reminder of where all of us will be if we live long enough.


The photography for “Hejira,” an album that defies any classification.

The face of the older Joni Mitchell is a sobering reminder that time creates changes.  Some may have a hard time seeing the stars and idols of youth doing something that all of us do if we live long enough.

For some film stars of the past, when age set in, they retired to apartments and lives far away from the limelight.   Rather than disturb the image of beauty and youth they projected so carefully, some actors hide away tending to their legacy like sacred objects to be preserved in tact immune to time.

Seeing the image of an older Joni Mitchell is not disturbing, any more than her musing on the record business.  She has created, survived and lived through interesting and arresting times.  It is sad that her physical appearance is evaluated in a negative light while her considerable achievements are diminished or ignored.

What makes this article truly disturbing is that this is in Psychology Today and that Barreca is a  Ph.D.  This is yet another example of a women taking aim at another woman for nothing more than not living up to some inane concept of female beauty and aging.   It is an attack mounted for no real legitimate reason other than to attack a woman for her looks.

As a whole, there is much work to be done to change attitudes about aging, particularly for women.  Barecca proves that the past movements have not stopped women from slamming each other or becoming far too critical of each other.   Some habits die hard deaths.

  1. Open Ed, New York Times, Feb 12 2016
    1. Gina Barreca “Joni Mitchell on New York Magazine: Is The Photo Disturbing?

    Psychology Today

Two Faces of White Privilege

Brock Turner and Lena Dunham

Brock Turner and Lena Dunham

When Stanford University Swimmer Brock Allen Turner’s sentence for rape became known, the outrage and disbelief caused an instant outpouring of anger, both off and online.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky’s verdict was a visible reminder that race, class and privilege still determine outcomes that are favorable to those who enjoy them.  Prosecutors asked for a six-year sentence.  The actual sentence was slighter.

“A prison sentence would have a severe impact on him,” Persky said. “I think he will not be a danger to others.”  The rationale provided  was that Turner did not have an extensive criminal history.  He was sentenced to six months in jail, that more than likely will become three, with good behavior, of course.

Turner’s father, Dan, in a written statement summed up the sexual assault as “20 minutes of action” in a plea for leniency.  He had an interesting way of summing up the event as little more than “Boys will be Boys.”

It is no secret that stars on the playing field are “indulged” both on and off of it. The veneer of stardom is powerful and alluring.  No one wants to punish an athlete, particular those of the “blonde” and “All American” type.

What this entire trial made painfully clear, despite so many proclamations to the contrary, is that class, privilege and money count.   It is hard to maintain the illusion of a free and democratic society when those attending prestigious  institutions of higher learning  can do as they please with minimal consequences.   There is no equality here, but there are those given distinct advantages. We have seen it before, and it should not be so shocking now.

Clearly, the judge in this instance seemed to be far more concerned about Turner’s future than the long last effects of a rape on young woman who had passed out and was taken advantage of in the most brutal of ways in the most vulnerable of places.

As to be expected when monumental events transpire, the celebrated are going to make their voices heard.   Sometimes with the best of intentions, or sometimes for the worst, someone will say something, anything.

Some spokespeople do no real harm when they voice support.  However, there are some who by their very presence carry a veneer so tarnished and ugly that their voices are better left silent.

I have never been a fan of Lean Dunham.  For several excruciating hours I tried to make sense of her H.B.O. series “Girls.”   Poised as something of a junior version of “Sex and the City,” Dunham’s creation lacked even a hint of the wit, pathos or humor that made the former memorable.

Now she has come out to speak against violence against women.

The world of “Girls” amounts to nothing more than the vapid complaints of the self-absorbed fortunate few who must create meaning from self-induced pain.  The shrill sounds of their own meaningfulness utterances had a difficult time as being passed off as profound.

Michelangelo Antonioni, Françoise Sagan, and Federico Fellini were masters at turning the ennui of the affluent into the stuff of which art is made.   The best that Dunham can muster are sitcom one liners and self-aggrandizement.

Dunham also frequently peppers her trudge through the lives of the ungrateful and the dull by parading around nude.  The idea behind this is that she is “accepting” her body and “owning it.”  She is somehow doing those not part of the cultural norm of attractive a service.  She opening the range of what the acceptable body type for women ideally should be, supposedly.

What this amounts to is that female self-value is still in some way rooted in the body, not in female accomplishments.  She may sound like she is breaking new ground, but instead she is resorting to the old “female nude as valuable only ethos” and in turn just reinforces the idea that any woman must see her body as one of her primary assets.   Nothing new is here.

It is interesting to note that a woman who strives so hard to see beauty in an unconventional body only finds attractive men who are the most conventionally physically attractive.  In her show I have never seen her attached to a man who has an equivalent body type to her own.

Even her memoir, if you can all it that, “Not That Type Of Girl,” qualifies everything in it by Dunham stating that it may be true in part or possibly all fiction.   She cannot commit to being either a chronicle of her experiences or a writer of fiction.  She wants the veracity of truth and the escape clause of fiction.  It is that ambiguity that stifles her work.  It also robs it of any real substance as well.

What is certainly not fictional are the allegations, or more accurately hints, in the book of a rape by a conservative named Barry when she attended Oberlin College.  Dunham never called the police and reported the indicient.  The rape itself can be called into question.   Durham makes it clear  she is not a reliable witness.

Unfortunately, the only Barry on the campus had to endure the humiliation of everyone thinking he was a sex offender.   The real life Barry has been able to clear his name, but accusations like these have a long shelf life.

Jumping to yet another disturbing revelation in her book is that she was a sexual predator.  She recounts events where she manipulated her sister Grace in order to have sexual encounters.   When she was questioned about this, she brushes off the episodes as just so many children’s games. “Boys will be Boys” and one assumes, “Girls will be Girls.”

One cannot help but wonder what would happen if a man wrote a quasi-fictional piece like this?

When it became known that Josh Duggar had molested his sisters, the response to this was swift, and fiscal.  Outrage filled the internet and a lucrative television show was shut down in short order.

Honey Boo Boo’s mother, “Mama June Shannon,” lost her reality show when  reports surfaced that she was dating a man who had been convicted of raping one of her daughters.  Like Josh Duggar, the media response was swift.

Interestingly enough, Dunham has found herself largely untouched by her disturbing maybe real maybe not revelations.

Now, Dunham has come out as an outspoken voice in support against Brock Turner.

What makes this truly disturbing is that you have a person who admits to being an unreliable witness wants to be  a voice against the very acts she may, or may have not, done herself.  In what kind of upside down sideways universe does this happen?

For a woman to make light of sexually molesting her sister, and then to condemn acts of violence against women, Dunham is the very last person on the planet who should even be near this arena.

An interesting point of convergences is that both Dunham and Turner are operatives in a world where privilege, wealth, access and ethnicity work in concert to create a world where everyone feels entitled, but no one responsible.   It is an atmosphere top heavy on “Noblesse and paper thin weak on “oblige.”

The very same sense of entitlement used by Dunham and Turner are here. Neither has the objectivity to see that they are both coming from a place where one can do what one pleases and not face consequences.  Rational thinking and logical thought processes have been replaced by a needs and wants mentality.  Desire is the generator and all other considerations are mute points.  Any sense of compassion or consideration of other people is secondary, if at all considered.

Dunham and Turner are  not total equivalents, but they are not far removed from each other.  Both have enjoyed the rewards that come from a system that gives hall passes to the affluent.  For a society that denies the benefits of race, class and economic position, for a society that strenuously insists that the U.S. is a level playing field, one has to simply look at the evidence.  It is omnipresent.


By Kurt Joachim von Behrmann


Between Two Poles: A Biplor Themed Exhibition

Abbreviated Version:  My artist statement.

The exhibition opens: February 4th 2016 starting at 5:00 p.m. and ending at 7:00 p.m.

Location:  Shemer Art Center 5005 East Camelback Road, Phoenix, AZ 85018

My web site


Pferd, from the German for Horse.  A metaphor for someone caught in the push and pull of bipolar disorder.

“If I got rid of my demons, I’d lose my angels,” said the late Playwright Tennessee Williams. The idea of the artist single mindedly following a vision oblivious to the world and suffering for it is a cliché. But is it? The connection between intellectual achievement and madness could be far less tenuous than previously believed. Dr Kay Jamison made a compelling case for the tie between bipolar disorder and artistic expression in “Touched with Fire: Manic-Depressive Illness and the Artistic Temperament.”
The list of artists who have had mental illnesses reads like a who is who in fine art. Before I was diagnosed with Bipolar disorder, it was not something I had given much thought. It was not until I was diagnosed did I realize that for me this affliction was both a blessing and curse.
Once called Manic Depressive, what makes this brain disease valuable for creativity is that it allows you to think quickly, connect unlikely ideas and have the energy to stubbornly persist where others relent. The enthusiasm, the willingness to take risks, the flaunting of convention and the grand operatic gestures are the part of what makes this so invigorating. Even the depressions allow you to experience pain to such a degree that you can express the most profound sorrow without reservation.
What creates also destroys. The list of artists, scientists and writers who committed suicide, destroyed themselves or had great difficulty coping with the world is long, not short. The kind of effort being original demands is great. It can take a huge toll.
As I was dealing with my own demons, and angels, I thought why not make the process of dealing with bipolar the subject of an exhibition. This was not art as therapy. Nearly anyone can do that. That may not even be interesting to see. But, a serious investigation into bipolar as a source of inspiration for imagery and ideas, that to me had merit.
Describing epic lows, depicting exuberant highs, that is the stuff of which all art is made. It is the mixture of the beautiful with the tragic. It is a balancing act between the heavens above and the dark canyons below.
When I began this journey, I was not sure what I would find. I was traveling with just nerves, feelings and a battered mind. I was focused, excited and up one day, then down and depressed the next. Through all of this, I created.
Eventually, the driving force of creativity returned. Between Two Poles is a travelogue of my adventure within bipolar and the universal themes that art has always been drawn, the glorious and the tragic.


Drawing Workshops, Start this Saturday October 3, 2015


The first set of workshops went so well that I am teaching again at Milkweed Arts in Phoenix, Arizona.
There is still time to enroll in the classes. I am offering a beginning class that starts this Saturday, October 3rd at 5;30 p.m. and ends at 7:30 p.m. The course is a four week program.
For more information, select this LINK for this class.
I will also offer a four week workshop that goes beyond the basics and gives a more in-depth look at drawing where we will put techniques to positive use.
This class begins Monday, October 5th and meets at 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. for four weeks.
For more information, select this LINK.
Milkweed Arts is really a great place to learn, grow and obtain the very best in art education in a very supportive environment.
This is a unique opportunity to learn. Below is a brief video that gives you an idea of what the space is like.

Act 17!, the final act or a part of a new legacy

Act!, through all of its iterations over the years still has an edge when it comes to managing contacts for small businesses.   Based around a contact centered approach, over time this CRM has  added more functionality and greater integration with the web.

While ACT! 17 is geared toward small businesses, it also makes sense for those not running a business who need to keep track of contacts with more detail than a simple address book can muster.   While most address books can handle the basics, names, numbers, and the like, if you need to keep up with emails sent, attachments, activities, and even grouping your contacts together, a comprehensive program like this permits organization of disparate data.

act_17 The consistent face of Act! remains more or less the same.

Rather than just putting data into a notes section, Act! provides specific locations within tabbed windows to easily track the details regarding a contact.  Information about an individual, items, dates to keep up with and a history of activities are here.   Secondary contacts can be placed within a contact and automatic grouping of contacts is possible once parameters have been set.

Over the last few versions, Act! has become more and more web savvy.  Integration with social networking like Twitter, Facebook, and whatever type of networking you want to add is possible.

Within Act! is as web browser.  This translates into working with a contacting, obtaining online information and never having to ever leave the program, or open a browser.  There is smooth integration with Google contacts and calendars that means those based in Android and the Google ecosystem are not going to have difficulty integrating their data.

A real plus to Act! is that it has a cohesive feel.  The parts that make up this very comprehensive program are integrated.  There is a smooth feeling to act that makes interaction with it feel fluid. The contemporary interface gives Act! a polished finished look.

Even if you are not a “power user,” there is so much here that makes sense for people that need to do more than simply have a list of contacts.  The fact that you can connect large pieces of information with an individual, or group, fills a niche in contact management that consumer software has really not addressed.  Once you have been in the world of software like Act!, it is very difficult to depend on consumer based programs.  In short, they are limited.  Act! is expansive and highly customizable.

Being that Act! is a professional based program for sales, there are a plethora of sales management items within the program to keep track of interactions with individual and companies.  That has not changed. Reports, history lists, e-marketing, opportunities, all of that is there. There are also detailed search and view functions.  Much of what has made Act! popular on that front is still present.

act_welcome_screen Welcome to the help screen

In some respects, Act! is very onion like. The deeper you unfurl the program, the more there is to do with it to make handling contacts that much easier.  There is also an extensive online help system.  My recommendation is to start looking at online web instruction. There are numerous web videos that make accessing this program easier and unlock features that you need, but may not know exist.

Problems have plagued previous versions of Act!  Sluggish performance, memory consumption and other ills.  Act! 17 has not been plagued with such in my use.  However, it does have short comings.

Act 17 integrates with Outlook, that is Outlook 32 bit.  For 64 bit users, Act 17, not unlike previous versions, does not exchange data.  There is an included email client, but I found it impossible to configure.  It crashed frequently. It was easier to simply copy email addresses and mail from Outlook.

“Note: I have been informed that future releases will include integration with Outlook 64 bit.”

Moving towards an even tighter integration with the web, future versions of this venerable program are going to be subscription based.  It is possible that this maybe the last boxed version of the software.  That is still an uncertainty.  Support for existing customers will be continued.

clouds_act To the clouds we go as Act! becomes more cloud based.

In the constantly changing world of software, what is set today maybe changed tomorrow.  The Act! web site is focused on the subscription service plan.  It appears that is the new direction of the software.

Over the years Act! has changed and grown to accommodate the emergence of the web as being the centerpiece for contact interaction.  Even though the program has passed ownership several times, the core look, feel and functionality have evolved rather than dramatically changed.   However, as the new versions emerge, it will be interesting to see how this program alters over time.

For those that like the more traditional system of software ownership, Act! 17 is still a very viable option, even with its occasional idiosyncrasies.

Swiftpage-box-pair The box, it maybe a thing of the past as Act! goes subscription based.

System Requirements

2 GB available hard disk space (4 GB if product is downloaded)

SVGA (1024×768) or higher resolution monitor

Internet connection

1 GB system memory

1.8 GHz processor

Works With

Microsoft® Office 2007, 2010, and 2013 (32-bit version only) (Latest Service Packs Recommended)

Lotus Notes® 8.0 and 8.5

Internet Mail SMTP/POP3

Microsoft Internet Explorer® 7.0, 8.01, 9.01, 10.01

Citrix® software using Citrix XenApp® 5.0 and 6.0

Supported Operating Systems

Windows® XP SP32 (32-bit only)

Windows Server® 2003 SP2 (32-bit and 64-bit)

Windows Vista®3 SP2 (32-bit and 64-bit)

Windows Server 20084 SP2 (32-bit and 64-bit)

Windows Server 20084 R2 (64-bit)

Windows Server 2011 SBS (64-bit)

Windows Server 2012 (64-bit)

Windows Server 2012 R2 (64-bit)

Windows 7 SP1 (32-bit and 64-bit)

Windows 8 (32-bit and 64-bit)

Windows 8 Pro (32-bit and 64-bit)

Windows 8 Enterprise (32-bit and 64-bit)

Database Server:             Act! Premium uses SQL Server® 2008 R2 SP1 Express or your existing installation of SQL Server 2008 R2. Act! has also been certified against existing installations of SQL Server 2012 and 2014. If you would like to use a different edition of SQL Server other than the one provided, please consult Microsoft documentation for specific requirements for that edition.

System Requirements

2 GB available hard disk space (4 GB if product is downloaded)
DVD drive
SVGA (1024×768) or higher resolution monitor
Internet connection
1 GB system memory
1.8 GHz processor

Works With

Microsoft® Office 2003, 2007, 2010, and 2013 (32-bit version only) (Latest Service Packs Recommended)
Lotus Notes® 8.0 and 8.5
Internet Mail SMTP/POP3
Microsoft Internet Explorer® 7.0, 8.01, 9.01, 10.01
Adobe® Reader® 6.0, 7.0 and 10.x
Citrix® software using Citrix XenApp® 5.0 and 6.0

Supported Operating Systems

Windows® XP SP32 (32-bit only)
Windows Server® 2003 SP2 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Windows Vista®3 SP2 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Windows Server 20084 SP2 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Windows Server 20084 R2 (64-bit)
Windows Server 2011 SBS (64-bit)
Windows Server 2012 (64-bit)
Windows 7 SP1 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Windows 8 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Windows 8 Pro (32-bit and 64-bit)
Windows 8 Enterprise (32-bit and 64-bit)