Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Richard Zidlicky
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 12:18:57AM +0100, Roy Wood wrote: No we won't. Look. No one has to pay for SMSQ/E twice. If you have a copy of SMSQ/E for your platform then upgrades are free. I feel that many of you think that the rule that binaries should not be distributed for free applies to

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Richard Zidlicky
On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 01:06:31AM +0100, Roy Wood wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Roy Wood wrote: CAN WE APPROACH A SOLUTION HERE ??? Note that I said I 'was' in favour. Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. I seriously thought you were interested in a

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Claus Graf
On Wed, 22 May 2002 01:06:31 +0100 Roy Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Roy Wood wrote: CAN WE APPROACH A SOLUTION HERE ??? Note that I said I 'was' in favour. Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. I seriously thought you were

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Wolfgang Uhlig
On 22.05.2002 20:44:07, Claus Graf wrote Come to your senses, Roy! This is not your list and you are not allowed to repeatedly throw dirt on others in public. If you cannot make a reasonable point, shut up. Telling lies and slander about a person is not how a discussion is held. If you are not

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Roy Wood
Roy you are playing with fire. You might consider beeing more careful, if the substance of your disagreement with Peter ever goes public it might be not very favourable for you. No I am not playing with fire at all. I refused point blank to pay Peter some money I owed him. I agreed that I owed

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Roy Wood
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Claus Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Wed, 22 May 2002 01:06:31 +0100 Roy Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Roy Wood wrote: CAN WE APPROACH A SOLUTION HERE ??? Note that I said I 'was' in favour.

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-22 Thread Roy Wood
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Zidlicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 12:18:57AM +0100, Roy Wood wrote: No we won't. Look. No one has to pay for SMSQ/E twice. If you have a copy of SMSQ/E for your platform then upgrades are free. I feel that many of you think that

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-21 Thread Peter Graf
Roy Wood wrote: CAN WE APPROACH A SOLUTION HERE ??? Note that I said I 'was' in favour. Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. I seriously thought you were interested in a solution. I'm sure all Q40 and Q60 users will appreciate your helpful attitude. Peter

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-21 Thread Roy Wood
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Roy Wood wrote: CAN WE APPROACH A SOLUTION HERE ??? Note that I said I 'was' in favour. Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. I seriously thought you were interested in a solution. I'm sure all Q40 and Q60 users will appreciate your

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-20 Thread Peter Graf
Roy wrote: I have two proposals for a compromise, that take the commercial needs of Jochen Merz and Roy Wood into account: Proposal 1: Keep the appointed resellers. Make sure that nobody can get their support, without purchasing the binary from them! E.g. this could be done by registering

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-20 Thread Peter Graf
Dilwyn Jones wrote: Peter, one other possibility with this is NOT to sell the binaries as such. Rather, if you want support, you buy a support contract and are given a unique identifier you quote when you want help from Roy or Jochen or DD or Claus/Peter, plus the OFFICIAL SMSQE the only one for

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-20 Thread Roy Wood
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes We will make no money from this. Of course you will, if you offer nice support and handbooks. Folks have no other way to get your support and handbooks except purchasing the binary from you!!! Don't underestimate that. There

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-20 Thread Peter Graf
Roy Wood wrote: As I said I was in agreement with your proposals. Others were not and did not trust you. I have not decision in this. I was asked my opinion and I gave it. Thanks. It's kept in secret who exactly turned me down, but it's good to know that at least on of the persons ruling in

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-19 Thread Roy Wood
Oh dear here we go again. I have two proposals for a compromise, that take the commercial needs of Jochen Merz and Roy Wood into account: Proposal 1: Keep the appointed resellers. Make sure that nobody can get their support, without purchasing the binary from them! E.g. this could be done by

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals

2002-05-19 Thread Peter Graf
Roy wrote: Oh dear here we go again. I have two proposals for a compromise, that take the commercial needs of Jochen Merz and Roy Wood into account: Proposal 1: Keep the appointed resellers. Make sure that nobody can get their support, without purchasing the binary from them! E.g. this could