Thanks Rob for your comments on my posting.
> Like I said, migration to a pseudo client/server
> mode where the system hosting the log is the
> "server" and everyone else connects to this box
> via TCP/IP using a broadcast/handshake should
> yield a very stable environment.
I think the ideal situation would be probably
similar to what exists today. Instead of a
single, centralised server based architecture,
one where all systems essentially have a replicated
version of the database may tend to be more
robust. Of course - need again to defer to Wayne
visa vis this architecture discussion.
Re: Windows 98 ... indeed we are already there today.
USB support is poor to non-supported in the first
version; most vendors won't support their USB devices
connected to anything other than Windows 98SE or later.
> I guess what I am saying is that it may be time
> to think about migration before WL is forced to
> due to technology changes. It is better to be
> ahead of the curve than left behind.
Ayup.
And just like there are plenty of people that are
using legacy hardware and legacy software ...
those systems could continue to use a legacy version
of WriteLog as well. I would fully support a future
WL version that was only supported on XP, utilised
TCP/IP networking, etc.
Bob W1QA
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
|