Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re:Bobcad 17 Review should be vector something by now??

A properly done review should bring out the merits/fault of the item under
review, not compare it to similar products. Since the author mentioned
other products and their faults by name....replies concerning the others
should have been expected.

Smoke
-----Original Message-----
From: ron ginger <ronginger@...>
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 3:45 PM
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re:Bobcad 17 Review should be vector
something by now??

>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Am I the only one who noticed the last several messages in this
>> thread have NOTHING to do with Bobcad 17 ???
>>
>> It's been all vector for awhile, but no subject line change??
>>
>> Ballendo
>
>Did you also notice that the first severl replies were not about Bobcad
>either, but were picking on the first line or two where he mentioned
>QuickCad?
>
>I thought this was a strange thread. First was posted what I though was
>a very good review of many aspects of Bobcad. I thought it was a very
>well written reivew.
>
>Then follow a bunch of nits about the ability of QuickCad.
>
>The someone asks a question about the discouint price and we get Fred
>all over it like a blankt.
>
>Almost no discussion of the points of the review.
>
>ron
>
>Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the

discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.

>
>Addresses:
>Post message: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com
>Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@egroups.com
>Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@egroups.com, wanliker@...
>Moderator: jmelson@... [Moderator]
>URL to this page: http://www.egroups.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>bill,
>List Manager
>
>
>