test On 7/14/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >=20 > Carl >=20 > > Further, this awful email technology is typically built on TCP, which > > is late 1960's technology that that does not really work very well... > > especially since packets are being processed by a lot of very complex > > server software. >=20 > The *age*of the technology is not the problem. >=20 > After all people will be travelling to DevCon2005 on planes [100 year old > technology] and trains [200 years] to hear lectures [at least 2500 years]= using > written [5000+ years] and spoken [at least 40 000 years] language. >=20 > "Not really working very well" is a better reason for something being > troublesome and worth avoiding, regardless of the age of the technology. >=20 > After all, while I type [about 200 years] on my computer [50 or more], Al= tme > REBOL3 [less than a year] and Developer/IOS [only a couple of years] both= seem > to be dead. >=20 > *** >=20 > One of the promised strengths of REBOL is that it can be the glue or > messaging language to bind and integrate a range of technologies. Many i= ntros, > including those of Carl's, use the one-line send email example as a stren= gth. >=20 > So if REBOl *can't* work with email very well, that's pretty big news. >=20 > Sunanda. > -- > To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to > lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject. >=20 >=20
--=20 ... nice weather eh -- To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
