[windows2000] Re: Sus and apache?
- From: "Costanzo, Ray" <rcostanzo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:57:39 -0400
I think that's a good point. W2K seems not as reliable because it seems
easier to use, so people who shouldn't be messing around aren't intimidated
the way they should be. When something seems intimidating, it's less likely
to get messed up by people who shouldn't be touching it.
Ray at work
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Combis [mailto:rcombis@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> W2K comes working right out of the box, but if you don't know
> what you =
> are doing, you can thoroughly screw it up very easily. Where
> as Apache =
> is initially much harder to set up, thus deterring much of
> the crowd who =
> would screw it up. Just my opinion....
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
==================================
To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
mode or view archives use the below link.
http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm
Other related posts:
