Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!jethro!Sun.COM!tjonz
From: tjonz@Sun.COM (Todd Jonz)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: ZINC 2.0 WINDOWS VERSION
Message-ID: <4314@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
Date: 7 Jun 91 22:23:46 GMT
References: <678379158@f344.n632.z3.fidonet.org> <1991Jun6.203950.4356@b11.ingr.com>
Sender: news@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM
Reply-To: todd.jonz@1.com
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 13

In article <1991Jun6.203950.4356@b11.ingr.com>, winefred@b11.ingr.com (Winefred Washington) writes:

|> I have upgraded to Zinc 2.0 and have found it to be better than version 1.0.
|> The Windows version is still a little rough but I have been able to generate
|> a Win3.0 and Dos app from essentially the same source.  If you do decide to
|> upgrade, GET THE SOURCE.  You will be able to feature things out better
|> if you have the source to refer to.

I recently upgraded to Borland C++, and I believe that Borland has sold their mailing
list to Zinc.  Just yesterday I received promotional literature for Zinc 2.0 in the
mail.  As part of the promotional deal, you receive the source code free if you order
before a certain date (August 1 if I recall correctly.)  Being a satisfied C++/Views
user, however, I filed Zinc's literature in the bit bucket....