Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!matt.ksu.ksu.edu!sac
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Netware vs. Lantastic, sigh...
Message-ID: <1991Apr29.180812.22805@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>
From: sac@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Stuart Alan Craig)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 91 18:08:12 GMT
Sender: news@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu (The News Guru)
References: <29323@rouge.usl.edu> <1275@mephisto.edu> <1991Apr22.200015.14389@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu> <1991Apr28.154255.6119@jpradley.jpr.com>
Organization: Kansas State University
Nntp-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Lines: 32

mwb@jpradley.jpr.com (Michael Brown) writes:

>>As of 10/15/90, Windows-386 was not recognized as compatible due to the
>>diversity of all the products involved.  Lantastic will not recognize a
>>product as compatible unless it is FULLY compatible.  However, I have 
>>heard the some people have gotten windows to work with lantastic, but
>>to what degree I 'm not sure.
>>
>>-Stuart Craig
>>

>The Artisoft Technical Bulletin on Lantastic and Windows says the following:

>"Windows 3.0, 3.0a (3.0X) have been tested in house and are compatible with
>LANtastic 3.XX, however, Windows will not run in enhanced mode on a LANtastic
>server. Attempting to do so may result in a loss of network functionality,
>server disconnects or lockups. ...[deleted].... While claiming Windows 3.0X
>and LANtastic 3.XX are compatible, Artisoft is not responsible for the 
>compatibility of any other application(s) running within Windows unless
>otherwise noted"

>The bulletin is dated 02/22/91.

So are we not saying the same thing?

-Stuart Craig

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stuart A. Craig                           | "To iterate is human, to
|       Internet: sac@matt.ksu.ksu.edu      |  recurse divine."
|       Bitnet:   sac@ksuvm                 |            -Dennis M. Ritchie