Wojciech,

Ok, so now that I am partially awake, I look in my PEDA folder, which
contains 7627 emails since 9/13/01, 1425 of which are still unread, and I do
a search of the words "file association".

I come up with 19 emails (about half of which are unread), under 6 different
subjects, none of which have a subject remotely related, although I do find
2 with a subject that simply states DXP, dated 9/5/02, both unread, that do
appear to address the subject.

With all due respect, I have just installed DXP (a week ago today), and
until then, I certainly have not been following all of the threads that deal
with DXP, especially when the subject just reads "DXP".

I do not have time to read everything that goes thru the forum, as 1425
unread emails should indicate, and unless the subject line has something to
catch my attention, I may never read it.

However, when DXP ate my file, that got my attention.

I still have not found anything else that addresses the issue, unless it was
in the other 17 emails that appear to really be unrelated (although I have
not read them either).

Firstly, please don't take things for granted, especially when it comes to
attributing motives to me, and the next time I start a thread on something
that has already has been discussed, rather than assume that I have seen it,
please simply say "so and so discussed that here a few weeks back, and you
might want to read his post . . . ". It surely would cut down on a lot of
the excess here in the forum, and I would not waste my time carrying on a
dialog when someone is just pulling my chain.

Secondly, if this (the 2 emails I found in the search) was a warning to
others in the forum about DXP changing file associations, which was designed
to let all of the Protel 99 SE users out there to beware of DXP opening your
Protel 99 SE files, then it failed miserably to do that with such a simple
subject ("DXP"). Perhaps the others that you are thinking about, have a
little more attention getting warning.

Actually, in view of this last paragraph, I think that it is safe to say
that Protel 99 SE users were not in fact previously notified of the
"problem", as I am sure that most of actually now are.

You know I really am not an Adam Henery (AH) all of the time ( just most of
the time), and I really do not always have ulterior motives.

Thanks for the input anyway,

JaMi

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wojciech Oborski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 6:42 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Warning to DXP Users re P99SE files


> JaMi,
>
> <snip>
>  > The point here is that the purpose of my original post was to warn
other
>  > users so that the same thing doesn't happen to them. Please don't read
>  > anything into it beyond that.
> <snip>
>
> I'm afraid I did, I'm sorry.
>
> Short explanation:
> The "issue" of DXP grabbing file assotiations from Protel appeard, I
guess,
> 2 times on this forum before your post. And I thought that you, as an
active
> participant of this forum should have noticed that.
> So I judged your post as another complaint, not warning.
>
> I apologize if you felt offended by this, that wasn't my intention.
>
> Wojciech Oborski
>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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