[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: States' suits unconstitutional? Hardly.

To: dski@cameonet.cameo.com.tw, Multiple recipients of list AM-INFO <am-info@essential.org>
Subject: Re: States' suits unconstitutional? Hardly.
From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 10:30:16 -0600
In-Reply-To: <199807290543.NAA23116@cameonet.cameo.com.tw>

Well, there ARE some companies that either have feature-itis or are
not good at writing selective install routines. But, well, bad software
abounds.

--Brett


At 02:07 AM 7/29/98 -0400, Dan Strychalski wrote:
 
>Brett!!! When was the last time you installed commercial application
>software on a system running a mass-market Microsoft o.s.? I always look
>very carefully at the results of such an installation, and I always find
>tons of drivers for devices I don't have, didn't say I had, and wouldn't
>dream of installing. (I should note that almost all my experience is
>with software distributed on floppies.)

References:
- Re: States' suits unconstitutional? Hardly.
  - From: Dan Strychalski <dski@cameonet.cameo.com.tw>

Prev by Date: Re: Caught in the act?????
Next by Date: Re: Caught in the act: Microsoft just fixed its page.
Prev by thread: Re: States' suits unconstitutional? Hardly.
Next by thread: Caught in the act: Microsoft just fixed its page.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread