Terry, you risk not being taken seriously now - or is that your intention? Your comments are parallel to replacing a red broom with a new white broom and considering the white broom inferior because the color is different and the newer broom is made from different material. Yet they both work identically, are just as efficient, and perform the same function. Are you changing the comparison parameters?


>>How about answering the question!
>
>I read the reviews - when I read one that says it matches 100% in service (not neccessarily speed) and appearance - then I will.
>100% Service means:
>1) Hot Navigator
>2) One form
>3) Reverse select on Treeview (enter an existing id and highlight the tree node)
>
>It means every behavior of RIO must be precisely immitated.
>
>We are not playing horse shoes here - I'll set aside the "large" net footprint once someone posts a follow up that says the applications look and respond exactly the same. That means no extra forms - and all features correspond 100%.
>
>I am not interested in how close - I am interested in a precise mimic - down to the fox in the title bar.
>
>Then we can talk about performance and foorprint.
>
>>
>>
>>>>How about answering the question?
>>>They're not the same - if you cannot see the difference - get some new glasses!:-)
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Well I knew, and predicted, that you would not be able to resist slamming the rio.net conversion. How does it not deliver the same features? From what I saw, it looked to me to be the same.
>>>>>
>>>>>Then I have a VW Bug on a chopped frame with a fiberglass "Ferrari shell" that I would like to sell you - not at the price one would sell an old Dune Buggy - but at the price one would sell a Ferrari.
>>>>>
>>>>>Lets put em both on a monitor (side by side) at a DEVCON - maybe then you will "see" the difference.