p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca (Rob Slade) (03/15/91)
MICKLE@CSMCMVAX.BITNET (David K. Mickle) writes: > I got my copy through our PC vendor, Microage of Beverly Hills. They > obtained it at my request from their IBM rep who downloaded it from an > IBM internal service. The version number 1.51 is correct. My understanding is that, until March 8th, the correct "public" version of IBM's VIRSCAN product was 1.3, 1.51 being a corresponding "internal" product. However, I believe version 2.00.01 is now available for both internal and public use. I'm sure David will correct any errors i've made :-) ============= Vancouver p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca | You realize, of Institute for Robert_Slade@mtsg.sfu.ca | course, that these Research into (SUZY) INtegrity | new facts do not User Canada V7K 2G6 | coincide with my Security | preconceived ideas
CHESS@YKTVMV.BITNET (David.M.Chess) (03/22/91)
p1@arkham.wimsey.bc.ca (Rob Slade) writes: >MICKLE@CSMCMVAX.BITNET (David K. Mickle) writes: > >> I got my copy through our PC vendor, Microage of Beverly Hills. They >> obtained it at my request from their IBM rep who downloaded it from an >> IBM internal service. The version number 1.51 is correct. > >My understanding is that, until March 8th, the correct "public" version >of IBM's VIRSCAN product was 1.3, 1.51 being a corresponding "internal" >product. However, I believe version 2.00.01 is now available for both >internal and public use. Quite right. David's vendor's IBM rep apparently downloaded the internal version (at that time numbered 1.51) instead of the product version (at that time numbered, on a different track, 1.3). The now-converged numbering should have (finally!) fixed this sort of thing! So we should soon be able to stop taking up space on VIRUS-L with it... *8) DC