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 *