FotoDave@aol.com
Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:46:03 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 1/12/99 1:30:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
petermarshall@cix.co.uk writes:
> It's meant as a low cost alternative to the Xante etc, but still may be
> expensive.
Oh? I will definitely check it out. If it is considered an alternative to
Xante, then the density must be at least compatible or close.
The last time I checked Xante, it was expensive (don't remember how much now),
but I believe it was still reasonable if someone wants to use it for full-
time, professional, and/or commercial works.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41