Other than a memory hog, I think DW 2004 is much better than the MX version.
Clint Tredway
www.digital12studios.com
Original Message:
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wed Oct 15 05:01:13 2003
>Received: from houseoffusion.com [64.118.64.245] by mail16.crystaltech.com with SMTP;
> Wed, 15 Oct 2003 05:01:13 -0700
>Received: from LOCALHOST by LOCALHOST
> with ESMTP id CC7A93AA65EDD64AAC91A95603BA6CE8
> Wed, 15 Oct 2003 08:01:13 -0400
>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:00:34 +0100
>From: "Adam Reynolds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Giving up on DW 2004 MX
>To: CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="_NextPart_000_1066204874_CFX_iMSMail_396336621"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>
>Anybody else got this far. The product is flaky and some very basic stuff
>falls over.
>
>Oh well back to DW. Hope the first patch sorts out a load of stuff.
>
>Adam
>
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
