Hello Maurice.

06 Nov 03 15:16, you wrote to me:

 RT>> the proffesional version is shall we say, possibly more useful.

 MK> Possibly?  Why only possibly?  You don't sound too sure about that.

Yes possibly from my point of view, that is, if you are a MS-Windows fan then 
there definitely are good reasons to go with the Professional version, and 
not the crippled Home version, but I dislike the lack of a boot disk, to get 
me in and allow me to "fix" things when they invariably go
"wrong", tho I do 
believe it is possible to create boot disks (3-4 ???) it is nowhere easy to 
do so, as MS have delibrately made this task difficult, also I don't 
like/trust servers and such written by MS, I trust them no further than I can 
throw their HQ building(s) uphill with both hands tied behind my back, they 
also IMHO, are not respecters of my privacy, so even less reason to trust 
them, or have my MS-Windows box directly connected to the Internet.

 MK> I've heard that it has (both versions) backwards compatibility
 MK> problems and thus most/all software needs to be replaced or upgraded.
 MK> That calls into question whether compilers are capable of producing
 MK> suitable executables for XP would it not?  Also I have witnessed file
 MK> corruption wrt floppies and USB devices, specifically files from a
 MK> 3com handheld, so one has to wonder if a BBS might experience this
 MK> problem as well.  Has anyone tested this?

Well I am busy downloading OpenWatcom compiler right now, and might put XP on 
long enough to test if stuff (Maximus) compiled on WIN98SE will run on XP or 
not, and wether it gives different compile errors to those I expect to get om 
WIN98SE.

Should really tie down what compilers will be (attempted to be) supported on 
the MS-WIN and OS/2 platforms.

Personally, I will stick with WIN98SE, runs well enough, crashes occasionally 
on my system, and the only Internet task it performs is web browsing, 
sometimes, and lives permanatly behind a Linux firewall.

Russell

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7