In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED] t>, extdgl42 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>But _nobody_ will take the time to write malware for QL platform! > >Doug L. 37830 USA > >That's precisely why I want to move as much of my daily business as >possible back to the QL in some form. Indeed, security is a good reason ... :-) >I am learning more about 'Net-QL possibilities in this exchange than >otherwise, in a long time. Thanks. It was reaching a new peak about 2 years ago, yet now seems to have quietened down again. That is the ambition to access from an enhanced black box QL, as described below. >-----Original Message----- >>From: Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Sent: Sep 12, 2006 2:22 PM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Tandata Modem Q Con + Q Mod >> >>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Neil Riley >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> ><...snip...> > >>Other people may correct me, yet I believe that the aim was to get a >>high end black box system to be able to do it - QL + Gold Card / Super >>Gold Card + Disk drives + upgraded serial SuperHermes + a 28K or 56K >>modem. Supported by QL oftware, yet not necessarily needing a hard >>drive. Not sure if SMSQ required rather than QDOS. >> >>This sort of specification would meet with a lot of equipment still in >>use. >> >>At the same time, though, PC's became cheaper and better specified so >>that a QL system would be the more expensive to set up for use. >> >>-- >>Malcolm Cadman -- Malcolm Cadman _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
