It didn't go sequentially like that, win2000 was a direct descendent of NT4. If I remember right the kernel versions for everything in the first release of XP are directly one number higher than 2000.
ME was an evolved version of 98SE and a dead end. On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, if you want to be picky, 4 (NT) was 4, and 2000 was 5 and ME was... > an abomination that should've never existed. > > But who says you have to start at 1 anyway? > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 4 was 98; 5 was ME, 6 was Vista. >> >> But that's software. We're talking hardware versions. >> >> bp >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> >> On 12/12/2015 8:09 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: >> >> But not 4, 5, 6... >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> On Dec 12, 2015 11:07 AM, "Bill Prince" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> But there was a Windows 1 and 2. >>> >>> bp >>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>> >>> >>> On 12/12/2015 8:04 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: >>> >>> There wasn't a Windows 94, 93, 92, etc... >>> >>> >>> Josh Luthman >>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>> 1100 Wayne St >>> Suite 1337 >>> Troy, OH 45373 >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Bill Prince < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> And if there was a P7, there surely must have been P6, P5, P4, P3, P2, >>>> and P1... >>>> >>>> bp >>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12/11/2015 8:10 PM, George Skorup wrote: >>>> >>>> I think the first set of radios we bought were P8 5700BHs running >>>> v3.something in early 2003. Obviously there was P7 before that. Maybe late >>>> '02? >>>> >>>> And I believe Charles Wu put up those P8s, BTW. :) Pretty sure I still >>>> have those stashed in the cabinet, too. >>>> >>>> On 12/11/2015 9:58 PM, Adam Moffett wrote: >>>> >>>> When did Canopy hit the shelves? 2003? Is there a PMP product out >>>> there with a longer lifespan? Even with better options on the market I >>>> know some WISPs have no plans to drop it completely because you still can't >>>> beat it for long range reliability. >>>> >>>> Right. And Neptune was the end of the road for the Voyager probes. >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* George Skorup <[email protected]> >>>> *Sent:* Friday, December 11, 2015 9:17 PM >>>> *To:* <[email protected]>[email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Graph 450 Airtime Utilization >>>> >>>> No, FSK did not get frame utilization in 13.4. I believe Matt or Aaron >>>> said the hardware won't support it. And 13.4.1 is the end of the road for >>>> PMP100. >>>> >>>> On 12/11/2015 8:32 PM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: >>>> >>>> Does this new OID feature work on old PMP100 serires? >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:55 PM, George Skorup < <[email protected]> >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It was there in 2.4.something and my graphs broke after going to 2.5 >>>>> and 2.5.1. Not sure about 2.5.2 yet. I thought they moved some OIDs back >>>>> around that got changed for some reason. >>>>> >>>>> And it is/was also raw values, not percents yet, AFAIK. >>>>> >>>>> On 12/11/2015 1:52 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Not yet but soon (TM) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Josh Luthman >>>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>>> Suite 1337 >>>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Adam Moffett < <[email protected]> >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Is there a similar OID for the ePMP? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/11/2015 2:42 PM, Steve Utick wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Frame Utilization downlink: .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.1.12.1.1.0 >>>>>> Frame Utilization uplink: .1.3.6.1.4.1.161.19.3.1.12.1.2.0 >>>>>> >>>>>> We are graphing it here, requires 14.1.x software before the data is >>>>>> there though. Works great, quick way to tell how full your A/P's are, >>>>>> that's for sure. REALLY turns up the effect of crappy installs. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Matt < >>>>>> <[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> If I recall there is a way to graph on 450 the total airtime >>>>>>> utilization? What is the SNMP string to do that? Anyone doing it >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> if so how well does it work? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
