Yosef: sorry to have upset you. As you correctly state, I was just
trying to point out that the ITRC is capable of doing a good job.
And, Stan has pointed out that for his purposes on UX the ITRC sucks.
Many of the people on this list, like Stan, need information on
both platforms.

I did not intend to rub anything into anybody 8^).

--
Greg Cagle
gregc at gregcagle dot com



"rosenblatt, joseph" <[log in to unmask]> wrote in message news:9lh9p001hhs@enews2.newsguy.com...
> Greg Cagle wrote:
> > On the other hand, I find the ITRC content for UX to be pretty good.
>
> In response to Christian Lheureux's comment:
> > That being said, I could live with ITRC and its imperfections, including
> > (nut not limited to..) its lack of speed, etc, if the CONTENT (what
> > ultimately counts for me and what I depend on for my day-to-day
> activities)
> > was OK. Problem is, the content leaves much to be desired.
>
> My response is SO WHAT! No one was questioning or even talking about UX.
> That's like
> Ford telling me that the Taurus is a safe car when I want to know about the
> Explorer.
>
> We are all aware that HP does whatever it can to support its UX business.
> The question
> is what is doing for MPE support? Is it enough?  Christian seems to think
> not. Rubbing
> it in that some other platform has good support does not address the issue
> except to
> show us that HP knows how to do it. Which we all knew.
>
> I emphasis my normal disclaimer.
> The opinions expressed herein are my own and not necessarily those of my
> employer.
> Yosef Rosenblatt
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *