Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-27 Thread sheywood
On 26 Jan 2002 11:13:35 Christof Lange wrote: >> These modems would be not merely too slow but >> would be completely unusable for the Internet if the ISP rejects any >> connection < 14.4K. > Is this a wide-spread behaviour of ISPs to reject connections with > low speed? According to the "offic

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-27 Thread cce . zizkov
On 25 Jan 02 at 22:58, owner-arachne-digest@arachne wrote: >Reply to Sender: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply to List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >These modems would be not merely too slow but >would be completely unusable for the Internet if the ISP rejects any >connection < 14.4K. Is this a wid

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-25 Thread Sam Ewalt
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 04:26:05 -0500 (EST), Thomas Mueller wrote: > You got a steal! I saw two 486's at a flea market going for $200 and $275, with > Win95 running. I don't know how much RAM. Maybe some buyer might not realize > how outdated those computers are? I even saw a new (I guess that m

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-25 Thread Thomas Mueller
from Sam Ewalt: > For awhile New Deal was trying to peddle their package to school systems to take advantage of the piles of older hardware that schools often have. But even the schools in the low budget farm area I live in are tossing out their 486's. I just got three Dell 486's with mo

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-24 Thread Glenn McCorkle
On 23 Jan 2002 00:05:00 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hallo Glenn, > Hello Glenn, > Du meintest am 20.01.02 um 21:26 zum Thema "(OT) NewDeal==BadDeal": > You wrote: >> Well, I got fed-up with trying to D/L a newer version of NewDeal >> than the one I

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-21 Thread Daniel Pruitt
And the "Deletion" of some "legal" entanglements with MyTurn's GlobalPC. I think for the best info check out thier list at yahoo and www.breadbox.com who has made many GEOS apps for all GEOS users On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:15:15 -0500 (EST), Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2002

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-21 Thread Steve
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Or Botton wrote: > The optimist view would say that the newer version is only availble > commercialy. However, the more passimistic (and unfortunatly realistic?) > view would say that NewDeal havent been upgraded for a long time now, > period. > > Whats your take on it? new

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-21 Thread Daniel Pruitt
I own a copy of New Deal. In short they have had financial dificculties and the newest version was never fully distributed. ND2000 is perported to have JS. I would like a copy but due to legal ties and complications, there is little liklihood of seing it available. I use the old one 3.2a (upg

Re: (OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-21 Thread Or Botton
Newdeal -was- pretty good for its day, but it could use a major upgrade. Unfortunatly, if they upgraded it, its certinly not visible in the shareware version. The optimist view would say that the newer version is only availble commercialy. However, the more passimistic (and unfortunatly realisti

(OT) NewDeal==BadDeal

2002-01-20 Thread Glenn McCorkle
Well, I got fed-up with trying to D/L a newer version of NewDeal than the one I already had. So, I did a little digging and found that the one I have is the newest available. :( It is now here... http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/ (after linking to the front page, append newdeal3.zip to the