- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggested
I agree.
Which one do you want?
William Robb
ject: Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggested
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell"
Subject: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggested
> To me, truly obsolete is something that has been replaced
>
I agree.
Tom C.
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To:
Subject: Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggested
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:20:19 -0600
- Original Message - From: "Tom C"
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggested
No one asked for truly obsolete, just plain old obsolete. Obsolete is in
the mind of the beholder (user).
Then there is found obsolescence, where you
No one asked for truly obsolete, just plain old obsolete. Obsolete is in
the mind of the beholder (user).
Tom C.
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To:
Subject: Re: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggeste
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell"
Subject: MY defintion of obsolete - its way different than those
suggested
To me, truly obsolete is something that has been replaced
by something else that is equal or superior in EVERY
aspect for same or less money, CURRENT NEW COST.
6 matches
Mail list logo
