Yes John.. I do agree and support what you are conveying. Sorry for the sidetrack - I'll sit humbly on the bench.
~Rick > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Tolmachoff > (Lists) > Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 8:50 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Windows Server 2003 Web edition debate. > > > > Excuse me.. but why even bother buying the product if all you can do is > > host > > web pages? Geeze I'll send you a free copy of Apache, which is far > > better, > > and more secure to host (unlimited) web pages. Sounds to me that the > > Micro$oft has a clear and concise licensing structure for there web > > edition.. so why even buy it? Don't try to circumvent there > licensing / > > usage structure because they are not team players. > > Rick, this is a discussion of whether or not Imail can be legally used on > Windows Server 2003 Web edition. It is not a discussion of the merits of > Windows Server 2003 Web edition and IIS 6.0 or any other web server or any > comparison between web servers. > > Yes, Microsoft does have a clear and concise licensing structure for Web > Edition. That is why there is such a thing as Web edition in the first > place. Would you expect any company to develop and sell a product > without a > clear and concise intended licensing structure? > > Trying to circumvent any ones licensing is wrong. > > John Tolmachoff > Engineer/Consultant/Owner > eServices For You > > ___________________________________________________________________ Virus Scanned and Filtered by http://www.FamHost.com E-Mail System. To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
