nanog mailing list archives
RE: win95 and IEAK6.0
From: "Patrick Muldoon" <doon () inoc net>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 15:25:45 -0500
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf
Of
Joshua Coombs Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 3:08 PM To: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: win95 and IEAK6.0 While it may be sooner than some would like, I've no qualms with Microsoft cutting off older versions of software. Just think how much smoother and stabler Win95 could have been if MS bit the bullet
and
dumped DOS/win 3.1 support? In any case, why do your customers HAVE to use the latest IEAK package to connect to your service? Is it not possible to keep older versions on hand for older systems?
I believe in the Microsoft Liscense for the IEAK. That when a new version is released you MUST upgrade to it in a reasonable amount of time. I am not sure about the exact wording as it has been a while since I messed with the IEAK. -Patrick -- Patrick Muldoon, Network/Software Engineer INOC, LLC doon () inoc net I am still waiting for the advent of the computer science groupie.
Joshua Coombs * jcoombs () gwi net - All opinions, statements and outright lies - contained within are copyright 2001 by - Joshua Coombs and shall not be reprinted - or publicly displayed without ignoring this - useless boilerplate.
Current thread:
- Re: win95 and IEAK6.0 Paul Timmins (Nov 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: win95 and IEAK6.0 James Smith (Nov 21)
- RE: win95 and IEAK6.0 Matt Levine (Nov 21)
- Re: win95 and IEAK6.0 Joshua Coombs (Nov 21)
- RE: win95 and IEAK6.0 Patrick Muldoon (Nov 21)
- Re: win95 and IEAK6.0 Joshua Coombs (Nov 21)
- RE: win95 and IEAK6.0 Patrick Muldoon (Nov 21)
- Re: win95 and IEAK6.0 Dave Stewart (Nov 21)
- RE: win95 and IEAK6.0 Vivien M. (Nov 21)
- Re: win95 and IEAK6.0 Dave Stewart (Nov 21)