SPONSORED LINKS
---- Begin Forwarded Message
+OK 1847 octets
Return-Path: <owner-tp750@CS.UTK.EDU>
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.9/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
id TAA19837; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 19:45:39 -0800
Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
id WAA02911; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:38:18 -0500
X-Resent-To: tp750@CS.UTK.EDU ; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:38:17 EST
Errors-to: owner-tp750@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from get.hooked.net by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
id WAA02896; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:38:07 -0500
Received: from @hooked.net (get.hooked.net [199.2.134.2]) by
get.hooked.net (8.6.9/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA19217 for
<tp750@CS.UTK.EDU>; Sun, 18 Dec 1994 19:38:00 -0800
Message-Id: <199412190338.TAA19217@get.hooked.net>
X-Sender: jesse@hooked.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 19:39:50 -0800
To: tp750@CS.UTK.EDU
From: jesse@spine.com (jesse montrose)
Subject: WIN95: appropriate?
I'm running the win95 beta on my 'pad, and I've talked to a few others
about
a mailing list.
What's the general feeling, should I set up a separate mailing list for
win95 on thinkpad specific issues? Or is the win95: tag sufficient?
I think they're appropriate here, many of the issues with win95 affect
windows and NT users as well, and since many of you using win3.1 now, a
sneak peek of the potential problems and fixes may be useful :)
Mr. "Moderator" ? Whaddaya think?
P.S. I choked my .forward last night, so I apologize if I've been
bouncing
to the list all day.. at least it was on a sunday :)
________________________________________________________________________
____
jesse montrose jesse@spine.com
http://www.buzznet.com/people/jesse/
I don't recycle. I'm a consumer, damn it, I
consume
---- End Forwarded Message
Hi Jesse:
1) I think that Win95 will become a mainstream enough issue that it
should be tagged to the main Thinkpad list and not become the subject of
a new list.
2) On that note, by commiting to Win95 are you therefore unable to
upgrade to PCDOS 7.0 which I understand is also in Beta?
Thanks,
Michael