Re: White Pine CUSeeMe Version 3.1.1

Grattan Colvin (Wahoo25@m1.sprynet.com)
Sat, 18 Apr 1998 09:47:47 -0700


Scott Lacroix wrote:
>
> Well, I wasn't going to respond... But I came in late tonight, and (like
> everyone else it seems) I'd had my Wheaties so I was all fired up...
> *sigh*
> This is gonna be a long one... I combined alot of messages on a common
> thread into one resonse.
>
......snip.....

I would like to thank Scott for his very reasoned response to the recent
posts re compatibility. What he says makes sense to me. I certainty
don't want to offend anyone, but I would like to point out that the
carping about Cornell vs WP doesn't sit well with me. Like many others,
I have downloaded many shareware and freeware applications. I have loved
some and been unhappy with others. But, I always understood that I had
gotten something for free and if it was imperfect, well, it didn't cost
me anything. To chastise a company for failing to make their commercial
products (clients, servers or whatever) completely compatible with
freeware versions strikes me as being patently unfair. Hell, even when
two for-profit companies offer completely different products, there may
be incompatibility issues. As an example, I offer the fact that
Netscape's (actually First Floor Software's) SmartMarks will not run on
a system that also has VitalSigns' Net.Medic installed. Both are good
but they will not run on the same system, and the last time I checked,
neither company could (or was willing to) figure out why and fix the
problem. People who have purchased both have a very legitimate bitch.

Enough already. Just another $.02 worth.

My regards to the list.

Skip