Hmm, I think you misunderstood what I was getting at.
1. I see very few chances of getting new folks to the QL. This is not a
bad thing, just reality.
2. I would like to see further development for the QL world. The recent
developments for TCP/IP and CD access are prime examples of what
development I am talking about. I don't see development to compete with
other OS's ("Gee, Linux has Gnome and KDE, let's get something for SMSQ/E"
or something like that)
3. Current users will demand more features. The QL world has done this in
the past (color drivers) and will do it in the future.
4. I am not proposing we not support the current developer. In fact I
propose that we expand the number of people developing SMSQ/E.
At work I have to worry about what other people want and need for their
computer needs. In some cases, what I use is dictated to me (I use a Win2K
system as my desktop machine).
QDOS and SMSQ/E are the only system that I have chosen to put a lot of time
and effort into, without pay. I gauge the future of SMSQ/E by my personal
needs. This may seems selfish, but I've got 16 years invested in this OS
and I'm pretty picky about making any major changes and forcibly putting in
features that I don't feel I need. I plan to use my QL systems for as long
as I can.
I look at my QL systems like a nice, well designed tool (such as a
hammer). I don't upgrade until I really need to. I won't buy a new hammer
until my old one no longer fits my needs. I guess this has been the main
reason I've used the QL for so long. I really fits my needs.
Tim Swenson
