From owner-freebsd-isp Wed Jan 29 11:08:44 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA15635 for isp-outgoing; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:08:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from super-g.inch.com (super-g.com [204.178.32.161]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA15627 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:08:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (spork@localhost) by super-g.inch.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA02840; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:09:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:09:42 -0500 (EST) From: spork X-Sender: spork@super-g.inch.com To: Terry Lambert cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC 1323 default settings (was Re: progress report on connection problems) In-Reply-To: <199701291723.KAA12168@phaeton.artisoft.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Terry Lambert wrote: > Isn't this considered a bugfix, not an "upgrade"? Sorry if I was a bit harsh, but my blood boils whenever I think of these people. I would call it a bugfix, but the coincidence here is that it is fixed in the newer release (supposedly), so their opinion is "Hey, go buy the new release; you get more features *and* bugfixes"... Go to their page sometime and look at release notes; they are funny. In 9.2.something, you can crash an annex by fingering it.... Nice. > In any case, it seems that it's not a very good idea to calculate > the price of Annex hardware without including the cost of a "software > upgrade contract" in the total when comparing them to their competition. The simple thing to do is just to not buy their product. It is merely "OK" at best, and a nightmare on a bad day. One klunky 486 and 72 ports seems to be a bit of a stretch. Charles > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. >