SH>> I think Mark and I know what we are talking about.:-)

 CA> Everyone who _posts_ messages thinks they know what they are
 CA> talking about and a few of them actually do. ;-)

in some cases, yes... in others, folk end up talking at angles to each
other... part of the problem comes from one's interpretation of certain
details and steps and one's understanding of how things work... overcoming
another's understanding of things can be a problme when someone endevor's
to teach what's really happening and/or taking place...

CA>>> People often do not think of dialup Internet access as
CA>>> 'networking' nor do they recognize Winsock as having
CA>>> anything to do with networking. :-)

SH>> Hopefully that is changing.

 CA> Why would you be concerned?

i was wondering what the difference was... any form of attaching to another
computer can be considered networking... the real determination depends on
the protocols used, not the method of attachment... ie: in africa, they do
TCP/IP over HF radio links... slow as molasses but functional for what they
need and when "stronger" links are available, there's not much to
change and to the users, nothing's any different other than the speed...

SH>> Seven or eight years ago we never worried much about virii
SH>> and could see ourselves as not being a part of the network.
SH>> Now most of us know better ...

 CA> I still don't worry about it very much. I've only had _one_ in
 CA> over 20 years.

and i've had none but i've captured quite a few... last time i counted, i
had over 30 of the buggers... don't know if i even still have that archive
around anymore...

CA>>> The 'networking' Marc is referring to is NDIS, TelApi,
CA>>> DHCP, and others that are used for intranets (not
CA>>> Internets).

SH>> I think one has to be careful about what something is used
SH>> for. See my note below.:-)

 CA> I don't think anyone will lose their life in the process.

intranet, internet... doesn't matter... "net" being the poerative
portion of the words/phrases...

)\/(ark