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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to