All of you XP users might want to go and see this: http://grc.com/UnPnP/UnPnP.htm
---Phil TH> I haven't experimented with it but I think MS was/is trying to simplify some TH> networking setup features, especially for the home networkers (and gamers TH> too). Windows ME was supposed to address that but failed miserably and W2K TH> didn't really try. So maybe third time is a charm? TH> Seems that adding hardware is now hands free, just plug it in and the OS TH> takes care of it transparently (for the most part). Don't have XP myself TH> but that is what I observed on another system. TH> regards, TH> Tim Hutcheson TH> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Don Ingram [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 7:20 PM >> To: Protel EDA Forum >> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel 99 se SP4 on Windows XP Home >> >> >> Sorry to cover old ground... >> >> What was the actual problem with 99SE on XP pro? >> >> From our brief play with it on a friends pc it looks just like >> W2K with more >> bloat to carry the 'pretty' front end. I realise that there will be some >> change to allow for better backwards compatibility for gamers etc. >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Don Ingram >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Geoff Harland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:44 AM >> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel 99 se SP4 on Windows XP Home >> >> >> > > > Altium is working investing in getting Protel to work in >> > > > XP. I don't know what >> > > > you guys think, but Protel is a commercial application >> > > > product. I don't think it has >> > > > any business working in XP. Even Altera says that their >> > > > Quartus will only be >> > > > certified to work in Win2K. They dropped the idea of trying >> > > > to get it certified to >> > > > work in XP. Honestly, the price of these type of packages >> > > > sometime may demand that >> > > > you work with a specific OS. >> > > > I'm all for Protel being supported in as many OSs as >> > > > possible, but I do not think >> > > > that non XP support would really affect Altiums customer >> > > > base. Sure, if Protel was a >> > > > video game, Altium would lose customers without XP support. >> > > > I don't Altium should >> > > > spend their programmer's time supporting consumer grade XP >> > > > when it work fin in Win2K >> > > > Professional & WinXP Professional. >> > > > >> > > >> > > The only problem with this is that it may come to the point where one >> tool >> > > is certified for Win2k, and another is certified for XP. Then you'll >> have >> > to >> > > run one in an uncertified environment (and probably unsupported >> > > environment), or dual boot with all the associated hassles. >> Or even buy >> a >> > > dedicated machine for each operating environment. >> > > >> > > Matthew van de Werken >> > >> > This has overtones of the transition from Win 3.x to Win 95, >> i.e. from 16 >> > bit Windows to 32 bit. Protel 3 could run on Win 3.x, but the >> next version >> > (Protel 98) needed a 32 bit version of Windows. >> > >> > Maybe Phoenix will be able to run on all 32 bit versions of Windows. But >> > sooner or later, I am picking that MS's requirement for issuing MS >> > certification for any application (that it is able to run on the most >> recent >> > version of Windows) will imply that earlier versions of 32 bit Windows >> OS's >> > will no longer be supported by thus certified applications. >> > >> > It is not totally out of the question that Phoenix will not run on >> > "consumer" versions of Windows, such as Win 95, Win 98, and Win >> ME; as it >> > is, Altium's attitude is that Protel 99 SE should preferably be run on a >> > "professional" version of Windows. >> > >> > Altium could be in for a shock if there is less than expected >> interest in >> > even trying out trial versions of future versions of Protel, which could >> > well come about if the versions of Windows being used by would-be >> evaluators >> > at such times are not up to muster for running such trial versions. >> > >> > Onwards through the fog... >> > >> > Regards, >> > Geoff Harland. >> > ----------------------------- >> > E-Mail Disclaimer >> > The Information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally >> > privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this >> > e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended >> > recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken >> > or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be >> > unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this e-mail are >> > confidential and not for public display. >> > >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
