I'll sign it! :)
The squeaky wheel gets the grease! ;)
BTW I'm on PT version 9.3 with Snow leopard and staying there until the smoke 
clears! 

CHUCK REICHEL
soundpicturerecord...@gmail.com
www.SoundPictureRecording.com
In GOD I Trust

On Jun 5, 2012, at 7:44 AM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote:

> I totally agree!  Slau?  What is your advice seeing you are working very 
> heavily, apparently with them on accessibility issues.  Oh, and thank you for 
> that by the way.  NO seriously, I'm not being sarcastic, I really genuinely 
> mean it.
> 
> I'd be happy to start the petition, but where then do I take it when we get 
> enough sigs?
> 
> BTW, would you also believe I can't even go back to mp9.  I forfitted my 
> M-Powered 9 ilok license when I got pt 10.  Avid refuse to help when I called 
> them.  All they gave me was get another ILok, and get another mp9 license 
> which we can sell you.
> 
> I wanted to say every word in the english book to them at that point plus 
> spit in their face!  How dare! they say that to me, after all the effort I 
> put forth to get PT in the first place.  I don't think my church would be 
> very happy at all seeing they're the ones who paid for both my macbook, and 
> my ProTools to start with, if they found out about this.  If anyone has mp 
> 9.05 and isn't using it, and is willing to transfer their asset, as they've 
> upgraded, may I add, with another iloc so as not to lose the 9.0 asset, let 
> me know.  I may wind up having no choice.
> 
> I'm warning you all now: 10.0 still works to a point, although there are some 
> noticeable problems.  Not many, but just enough for me to be deal breakers.  
> Speaking a which, no one ever told me that PT 10.2 took more ram than mp9.  
> Seeing I only got 2GB, and cannot afford to upgrade?  I barely could afford 
> the 3 easy payments through Sweet Water to Crossgrade to PT 10, let alone, 
> that.
> 
> I just hope my agent there can think of something to do in order to 
> compensate for my loss, as I'm one angry! son of a gun right about now!
> 
> Chris.
> 

Reply via email to