Hello Derek

On 27-jan-00, you wrote:

> I have seen a number of people with problems using NC3; 

Yes, I have been one of them. My points of view below

> -MD2 still requires the collection of Y2k fixes as used with NC2

In order to behave like normal you need to download the latest version of
MD2, where it is fixed. I haven't used MD2 that much, since I'm kinda used
to YAM, but have only today started setting it up again, and three of my
accounts already run only on MD. So far, so good.

> -Contact manager still misbehaves

Personally I haven't had problems with it.

> -Octopus is questionable

You need to know what you can co or not. I have set it up to launch various
"docks" or however you call them, without problems. Maybe I have just been
lucky, but all I did was set up an icon, point it to the program I want it
to use, and it worked.

> -Web Vision is causing some people problems

Sorry, haven't found any use for it myself...

> Is NC3 more stable (i.e. as stable as
> NC2 *used* to be)?

Well, the first CD release certainly had its faults :(. Most of the programs
are as stable as NC2 used to be. This is of course on my system. Since no
two Amigas are the same, I can't guarantee it will work the same for you.
But I found that, with asking on this list, most if not all problems can be
solved.

> *Disclaimer
> In this instance, I am not having a pop at Active/Vapor/Wiles. Just
> geninly wanting to know!

*Disclaimer:
This is only a personal opinion. I will not give you a refund if you buy NC3
and decide you don't like it. The question of your subject line (is it
worth it?), is a hard question to answer. I must say I had expected a bit
more improvements in MD, and Voyager is still not as perfect as I would
like it to be, but I trust the Vapor guys to continue development, and hope
that every new update will bring me closer to the internet suite I want.

Dirk

_____________________________________________________________
NetConnect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send an 'unsubcribe'
message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to