RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates
From: Bob Rasey (brasey@americasmart.com)Date: 03/20/02
- Previous message: emann@questinc.org: "RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates"
- In reply to: emann@questinc.org: "RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates"
- Next in thread: Jackson, Ben (DPH): "RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Bob Rasey <brasey@americasmart.com> To: focus-ms@securityfocus.com Date: 20 Mar 2002 17:28:14 -0500
And since I can't think of any reason why anyone would need more than
640KB of RAM, why support more?
On Wed, 2002-03-20 at 15:17, emann@questinc.org wrote:
> In the grand scheme of this category of products, and I mean the category as
> a whole, yes, win9x/me needs to be considered, as would UNIX variants, but
> HFNetChk is a product designed specifically for Microsoft's business level
> operating systems. Many of the readers here deal with homogenous Microsoft
> environments I'm sure, so they really are not concerned with anything aside
> from MS operating systems. And since this product was designed for business
> level operating systems, which win9x/me are not, there would be no such
> support in this particular product, nor would I see a huge need for it any
> other package in this category of products that was Microsoft-only based.
> The Win9x platform was never suited well for business IMHO, and it is vastly
> old and outdated, and I can fully understand why someone would not invest
> the time to provide support in this type of product for it.
- Previous message: emann@questinc.org: "RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates"
- In reply to: emann@questinc.org: "RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates"
- Next in thread: Jackson, Ben (DPH): "RE: HFNetChk Pro vs. other means to push out updates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|