Why is mention of Win2000 excluded in download page for /core?

cell

included. I don't have win2k here so I cannot confirm, but I assume YES. #1 on rebol home page it says: IOS runs identically on: Windows (95, 98, NT, 2000, ME, XP), Linux, Solaris, BSD, AIX, HP/UX, and many more. #2 http://rebol.com/releases.html Windows 95/98/NT iX86 2.5.0.3.1 #3 As I understand it, Win2000 is just renamed NT5, but it took M$ 3 years or something to make the upgrade from NT4SP3++. Whenever I see something runs on 95/98/NT it is pretty safe it will run across the board. What about XP ?? Is XP = Win2002 ? I thought so, maybe someone can clarify. For any given REBOL/Core what are the system dependencies? I thought REBOL had minimal dependenci handling network prorocls nativley itself. But there must be some.. Anyone answer this? Alas, there are _lots_ of things which should be on the rebol.com site which are not..{sigh} The site is poorly maintained and a lousy demo of what rebol can do. Great shame, but RT's resources are slim and applied to other tasks. The other reason it is not mentioned explicitly on rebol.com is probably because it is taken for granted that it works and that anyone can test so easily. Rebol is so easy to install, no registry mess, tiny, multiple personal installations are quite easy to do. But I wonder if your ISP is not much more worried about crashing her win2000 than crashing your rebol? Why does'nt she just try it out? If you have FTP with some login shell access why don't you? Just upload and run. let us know how it works out ./Jason

As I do....

I saw that..... and THAT should tell the ISP that (since /core is "core") there should be no problem (building a case here :-)

<Sigh>No mention of 2000</sigh>

For my experience, I've run rebol on win95/98/NT and (mostly) linux. I've seen maybe one difference (resolving pathinfo in cgi), and that's about it...

For those of us who have rebol's best interest in mind, because it is in our best interest, maybe RT wouldn't be too proud to ask for a little "grunt" work. Maybe just a little content revision huh?

In defense of the ISPs, one should never assume until it's tested....

I think she's a penguin-lover :-)

That would be not be a good idea on my part. I wouldn't do anything behind a sysadmin's back. She (and other sysadmins) have to answer to managers, who want some evidence of portability. It would take like 5 seconds to add win2000 to the content. Thanks. (And she's set me up on a linux machine) -- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com http://www.johnsons-web.com

I'm now using Windows/XP for home, and Rebol/Core and Rebol/View work just fine. Andrew Martin ICQ: 26227169 http://valley.150m.com/

It runs on Linux as well (I have been for WELL over a year). -jn- -- ; sub REBOL {}; sub head ($) {@_[0]} REBOL [] # despam: func [e] [replace replace/all e ":" "." "#" "@"] ; sub despam {my ($e) = @_; $e =~ tr/:#/.@/; return "\n$e"} print head reverse despam "moc:xedef#yleen:leoj" ;

Hey Joe:

And for me too (and on servers), but that's not the point. :-) My original post was to solicit (or to find) some kind of RT documentation that would support /core's portability to win2000. See the original post. In a word, RT could improve on its advertising..... I don't care myself because I can always find a Linux server, but they are kind of cutting themselves out of some of the M$oft market by not just stating somewhere in their site that rebol is compatible with win2000. Thanks -tj

-- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com http://www.johnsons-web.com

Have win2000 with Core - it is working fine with Apache as a host and I don't seem to have any problems. Core has never crashed Windows, or Apache 1.3.22 I am also running View side by side quite happily. James.