>       Actually, the best tool for a Windows box is an Linux
> install CD.  ;-)

At times with Win9x and WinMe I thought it was the same fix for old
gas-guzzlers from the 1970s, a 5 gallon gasoline can and a match!  heh-heh

Considering how unstable the pre-Win2K/XP/2k3 O/Ses were I think the newer
ones are not all that bad.  But, having said that, once I get some more
VFP-PostgreSQL experience under my belt I plan to set one of my Dell Servers
up with Linux.  If nothing else it will be to escape the CAL fees for
concurrent connections.

Oh, back to the subject.  I have been using Norton Ghost (and previously the
pre-Symantec DriveImage)  apps for years to image Client Win PCs.  For Win
Serves I have used rtt's r_image.  Has anyone come across some decent
freeware imaging software for either Win client or server class O/S?  I have
some clients who are resistant to paying the nominal fees required to
Symantec or rtt.  Cheapskates!

TIA

Gil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ed Leafe
> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 10:13 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [NF] Free tools for dealing with WIN boxes
>
>
> On Dec 16, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Whil Hentzen (Pro*) wrote:
>
> >> <http://redmondmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=654>
> >
> > No sledgehammer included in this list?
>
>       Sledgehammers cost money. The subject says "Free tools".
>
>       Actually, the best tool for a Windows box is an Linux
> install CD.  ;-)
>
> -- Ed Leafe
> -- http://leafe.com
> -- http://dabodev.com
>
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to