<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3492" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Michael,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You and Robin make some valid points. I'm usually diligent in making sure I
have the latest and greatest but there have been times when this has snuck up on
me, usually when I haven't fired up AP on the laptop for a week or two. As a
beta tester, I at least know not to report a problem unless I am running the
latest version. I've spent too many years working and programming computers not
to understand that requirement but can understand why that would be a concern
for others.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I intend to put 1.6 back on the machine for the very reasons mentioned,
however, "real" work in the field is the best test of the application as far as
I'm concerned, testing in combat stresses everything including the operator!
And, I find ver. 2 superior to 1.6 (and I thought 1.6 was great so my hat off to
Paul and all his hard work) so that's my preferred version now. I maintain
complimentary versions of software applications on my laptop just in case one
crashes and burns for whatever reason so as long as the laptop is running, I can
switch to something else if necessary. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Maybe rather then bypassing the expiration date, a set number of "grace"
launches could be set up so that after two or three or five (whatever value Paul
feels is reasonable) then the app does die. Of course, having the ability to use
AP to download the latest version is also an asset in case you don't have the
appropriate book mark set up in your browser.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>However, I'm easy to get along with in most cases so whatever the majority
feels (and Paul decides) is appropriate is fine with me.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mike -</DIV></BODY></HTML>