On 4/1/21 6:48 AM, Volker Hilsheimer wrote:

But why should the Qt Project have to care? The Qt Project doesn’t sell into 
the medical or industrial automation market.
That's the market that really made Qt. Nokia sure as Hell didn't. The market was pursued.

If a medical device manufacturer makes a technology decision and choses Qt based on 
the policies of Qt "the Open Source” Project, then I’ll trust that they know 
what they are doing. And if they are not happy with how Qt “the Open Source” Project 
operates, then I’m sure they’ll check what The Qt Company can provide as a 
commercial service that fits their needs.

Perhaps that happens frequently already. That would explain the recent 
development of the Qt Company stock price...

What I'm seeing as a traveling consultant dealing with many medical device manufacturers is wholesale abandonment.

As everybody has learned during the Trump years, stock prices have no correlation with reality as long as the government is handing near zero dollar interest money to the brokerage firms and banks. Right now it is the world's largest Pump & Dump market.

You forget that I did two tours of duty writing trading floor systems for a major stock exchange.

Volker


PS: Roland, I was looking at your 
https://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/agile_book.html page, and judging by 
this sentence, I think your review process is broken. You should probably ask 
for your money back from your professional editors, or something… :P

"The author of this title has spent over 30 years in IT working on multi-country 
corporate applications before there was an Interent, to stock exchange trading floor 
systems, desktop applications, and even multiple medical devices."

The book was professionally edited. I put the page together with far less thought than I put into a post on here. You think it is a run-on sentence, so what? The book still sells and I've done very little marketing. Other than the occasional mention when answering a question for free, none really.

When the justification for letting 12 year old bugs exist in the bug database is:

that the code was too complex or that fixing the old bug would create new bugs

The code had just as much review before check-in as the page that you looked at.

--
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
http://www.logikalblog.com
http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog

_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Reply via email to