[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[New search]
To: Greg Hurrell <gh@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <framers@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: OS X (was Re: Windows ME)
From: Elizabeth Ross <beth@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 10:47:30 -0400
In-Reply-To: <B6021A34.611F%gh@wincent.org>
Sender: owner-framers@xxxxxxxxx
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
I have not had that issue with Frame on my Mac at all. It's wonderfully stable, so much so that I use the Mac rather than the Win98 box to run Frame on a regular basis. It sounds like something is wrong with your system and/or setup. -- Elizabeth Ross Senior Technical Writer, V3 Semiconductor Corp. beth@vcubed.com http://www.vcubed.com Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum. > From: Greg Hurrell <gh@wincent.org> > Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 11:44:53 +0930 <snip> > > If there's one thing that bugs me about the Mac OS, it's the crashes. I > would gladly go without some feature additions if it could mean that I could > run Frame natively in an OS that didn't crash (eg. OS X). So for me, > Carbonisation is at the very top of my wish-list. > > Perhaps Windows users could see what I mean if they were offered the > following choice: using an old, buggy, degraded, crash-prone copy of Win 95 > to do their FrameMaker work; or using a tight, clean install of Win 2000. > The former promises as many as two, three or more crashes a day, while the > latter promises weeks of trouble-free running at a time. I'd go for the > latter any day, even if it did mean waiting longer for features. ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com ** ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body. **