Re: [RollTideFan] Netscape vs Outlook 2K (non-Bama)(ANOTHER advantage)

[William H Evans]

First off: My apology to the RTF membership for arguing with Hugh.  I *know* better.     Service Patches on Win 2k (Not to be confused with 'Patches' by Jerry Reed): Since I am not running XP to run a 'Windows Update' on, I would have had to have read about it to have even known they existed.  I need to be more up to date than that.  There have been three complete computing revolutions since Thursday.   The sheer volume of patches available should be a big clue that it isn't stable yet, Hugh.     Win XP = Version 5.1?:  This is bammer math, isn't it Phil?  If NT 4/Win 95 are loosely considered version 4, and Win ME/Win 2000 are loosely considered version 5, wouldn't you consider the union of ME/2K version 6?     SQL Server: Reread what I said.  You agreed with me and called it a 'new one'.     Personal Attack: Yes, whatever floats my boat.  I would rather be thick skinned than go crying to Mama every time someone disagrees with me.  That *is* my choice, just as only you can choose what you will do.   Since you called me a 'bumbling fool', let me ask you this: Did you read *any* of the replies to your e-mail last week?  Just wondering.       bill evans Hartselle, AL [EMAIL PROTECTED]     On Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:58:16 -0500 "Hugh Wolfgang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: << LOL - Whatever.  They (Microsoft) only finalized the 'gold' code about 8-10 weeks ago and I have already seen many holes already exposed by writers and none fixed by Microsoft.>>   Actually, there were NINE patches released by Microsoft on Thursday. <<  In addition, you know exactly what I mean:  Never, ever trust a XX.0 release.  Always wait for a service pack, unless you don't value your work.  >>   Windows XP is not a XX.0 release.  It’s version 5.1.  Oh, and there are other “unofficial” fixes floating around the Internet too, many of which will constitute the upcoming SP1.     <<  And don't tell me that MS SQL Server 2000 requires Win XP.  I know better.  It prefers Win 2000 and can even be made to run on NT 4.>>   That’s a new one.  Our database in Dallas is SQL Server 2000 based, and has been for months, on Win2k Server.  I’ve only got VERY limited experience with SQL 2k on XP.   <<  As for your 'bumbling fool' comment, I am not going to claim 'PERSONAL ATTACK! PERSONAL ATTACK!', unlike yourself.  I can take it.>>     Whatever floats your boat.