count me in. I always use the newest version whay would anyone want to improve something if everyone used the old versions? no......ya cant blame me fer nuthin im using the new one and I aint bitchin either! if Arachne cant cut the mustard,then it's byby I will use sumptin else.
cu [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:26:35 -0400, Glenn McCorkle wrote: > On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:29:05 -0400, Clarence Verge wrote: >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 02:11:39 +0000, Bastiaan Edelman wrote: >>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:04:10 +0000 (UTC), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>> I haven't been able to pick up why Arachne listers stopped >>>> at 1.61 and 1.62 but I drive a 32-year-old car; its not much >>>> encouragement for Polak when he presses forward to 1.70 and to Linux >>>> but the mailers are all about recursively polishing some old mirror and >>>> trying to get seeing round corners with it. >> In my case it is largely esthetics. I liked the look of Arachne when I >> discovered it back around V1.4x. I would have preferred it remained the >> same in general appearance and I use parts of earlier versions to try >> to meet that requirement with V1.62/66/67. >> I'm not sure why I use 1.62 at home when 1.66 seems great at this office >> - - and I can turn off the scrollbars with it. >> I did try to switch to 1.67 at home but got my HD re-arranged by a crash, >> so I only use it for FTP uploads. > So..... why not start using v1.70;r.3 ??? ;-) > -- > Glenn > http://arachne.cz/ > http://freedos-32.sourceforge.net/ > http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ > http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/ -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
