Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!jaytee!bodleian!geoff From: geoff@bodleian.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc Subject: Re: Low Power AT adapter Message-ID: <3258@jaytee.East.Sun.COM> Date: 9 Nov 90 14:24:21 GMT References: <9010221234.aa24473@louie.udel.edu> <9010252113.AA14211@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <1990Nov5.043029.9299@mercury.cair.du.edu> Sender: news@East.Sun.COM Reply-To: geoff@east.sun.com (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top) Organization: Sun Microsystems PC-NFS Engineering Lines: 28 Quoth nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) (in ): #In article <1990Nov5.043029.9299@mercury.cair.du.edu> rbourass@diana.cair.du.edu (Mr. Photography) writes: # # When I asked Xircom to send me one of the old drivers while they # worked out the problems with the new ones, they told me that the # never had one that worked! # #Hmmm... They've been advertising that they have TCP/IP support. #Either they're not using a packet driver, or else they're guilty of #false advertising. They have a driver for PC-NFS, which I guess would count :-) By the way, Russ, I've been wondering about your "Boycott Xircom" thread. What in your view should Xircom do to make things right? Whether or not their misuse of your driver was deliberate or merely dumb (and I must confess that I would hesitate to trust almost any interpretation of the GNU copyleft verbiage), is there any action which they could take which would lead you to express yourself as satisfied with the outcome? Or are they damned for all time? Maybe you posted this, but I don't remember reading it. Just curious. -- Geoff Arnold, PC-NFS architect, Sun Microsystems. (geoff@East.Sun.COM) -- *** "Now is no time to speculate or hypothecate, but rather a time *** *** for action, or at least not a time to rule it out, though not *** *** necessarily a time to rule it in, either." - George Bush ***