From: "Robert Comer" 

> ... just that the current web distribution isn't even
> close to current and that even though I had to patch it I consider having
> to
> patch it twice to be totally uncalled for.

Now that I agree on.

- Bob Comer



"Geo"  wrote in message
news:428b17f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> "John Beckett" 
wrote in message
> news:428b05bc.2088803{at}216.144.1.254...
>
>> Of course when .net is fully debugged, and when it can inspire a little
>> more confidence, it will be terrific (if it proves more robust than, say,
>> IE).
>
> It will be more secure than IE just by it's very nature. And just so
> everyone knows I wasn't complaining about the fact that it needed patches
> since it was written, just that the current web distribution isn't even
> close to current and that even though I had to patch it I consider having
> to
> patch it twice to be totally uncalled for.
>
> It's like "can we make it any more obnoxious to get secure and stay
> secure"..
>
> Geo.
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5