Adjournments - love them or hate them?

What do people think of adjournments for matches that start in an evening - good thing or bad thing? Why?

I'm against adjournments because, chess betwixt humans, should also be a question of duration. After reading about the first Karpov/Kasparov WC, I think it was a bad decision to end the match.

What about for games between 'normal humans' like us? ;)

Evening games with adjournments are common in league chess in the UK - do other countries have the same system, or do you get games over with in one night?

Yes, I had read in the forums that the UK has this approach. But, I'm against it

What's the solution used elsewhere then?

Does it happen elsewhere?

The rest of the chess players in the world have more balls.

@ dunce: so what time limits do you play, for example?

I thought adjournments wouldn't be existing anymore since every player has a PC with Fritz, Shredder or Rybka at home ... even if you take the scoresheets from them, stronger players would certainly remember the exact position, so the next move would certainly be a good one ...

@ DonnieDarko1980: That is indeed one of the major issues. In practice everyone does stick the position on Fritz so it's a bit like going back to the opening for the beginning of the second session - both sides know what they're doing because the computer has told them how to play it.

I used to enjoy adjourned games, but I think this is the minority view. One of my dislikes is the time control and with no adjournments its two time controls in the evening and finish, all a bit pressured. Analysing a game in progress over a week was great. I think the counter argument is folks use computers to analyse. My counter counter is computers cant win from a lost position. Also unfortunately some did abuse matters by making people travel back to finish a won game. 

Overall I miss adjournment's.

>:) 

Adjournments is a good thing. Like a exam that was extended to another day and you have all the materials, stuff that you need to reviewed.