Re: iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?

From: David Lesher (wb8foz@nrk.com)
Date: 05/06/00-08:47:27 PM Z

• Next message: David Lesher: "Re: iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?"
• Previous message: I Opened It: "Win98 question?"
• In reply to: David Nesting: "iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?"
• Next in thread: David Lesher: "Re: iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?"

Unnamed Administration sources reported that David Nesting said:
>
> The iOpener list S/N ratio has improved dramatically. Can anyone
> see any additional benefit to keeping the ihack list around? It
> seems redundant at this point.

With the V3's arriving in quantity; will it STAY good?

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

• Next message: David Lesher: "Re: iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?"
• Previous message: I Opened It: "Win98 question?"
• In reply to: David Nesting: "iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?"
• Next in thread: David Lesher: "Re: iopener s/n better -- keep ihack?"