Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:46:19 +, John Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: John You are wrong. Quanta does not own the copyright to the Jan Jones book and never has. Again, I refer my copy of the Quanta reprint sitting in my hot little hands, and it clearly states: "Copyright 1989 Quanta" This is from the "Quanta Reprint Limited Edition" of July 1989. If Quanta does not own the copyright, then why did Quanta state that it does, in the book. Tim Swenson ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:53:59 -, Dilwyn Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ah, now that is good news. So if someone was perverse enough to scan it, could it be made generally available, or does the Quanta rights restrict it to members only (leaving aside the sales issue for a moment)? I started work in this book back in early 2000. I have scanned in the first 10 chapters and have a number of them cleaned up and finished. One stumbling block for me was how to do the graphic drawings in Word. So, the project just came to a halt. I did contact the Quanta leadership to see if they wanted to me to finish the scanning for them, but I never got a reply. Scanning the document is real easy, the clean up work is the hard part. I am willing to finish the scanning and help with the clean up work. Tim Swenson ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Jan Jones Book
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:07:31 +,Î(Î) Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: Yet being a member of Quanta isn't that bad :-) ... a small subscription a year helps to oils the wheels a bit. Oh I understand, but the problem is that all I can see is a bit of... ermmm... kind of e... squabbling :-) I always suspicious of someone who says ... never ... :-) I am a man of conviction what can I say :-P (Now of course I am not going to mention what kind of conviction it is... suspended, on parole etc ;-) hehehe I hope that you will never refuse to buy me a beer if we ever meet up in person ... :-) ! I would NEVER refuse a beer to anyone ;-) (okay maybe Dubya ;-) We need to just lighten up a bit and all enjoy what we do have. Yes, absolutely... that's why I am going to play a nice game of QWord :-P (PLLGG) Phoebus ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Jan Jones Book
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Phoebus Dokos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:58:59 +,() John Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /wrote: I am very sorry for all of that but Quanta itself is not without fault. A little while ago I mentioned in this list that I repeatedly contacted Quanta when I re-attached my self to the QL community back in 1997 to become a member, but nobody bothered to answer my letters (which I know where received because I tracked them through the Greek Post Office -as I was in Greece at the time-). In any case, if you don't want a new member ONCE, I'd rather not be your member 1000 times! It's simple as that. I am sure I am not the only case and definitely not the last. But I will NEVER apply for membership again with Quanta even if QUANTA pays me... not after that treatement regardless of reason. Yet being a member of Quanta isn't that bad :-) ... a small subscription a year helps to oils the wheels a bit. I always suspicious of someone who says ... never ... :-) I hope that you will never refuse to buy me a beer if we ever meet up in person ... :-) ! We need to just lighten up a bit and all enjoy what we do have. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Jan Jones Book
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:58:59 +, John Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. Are Quanta actually allowed to sell to non-members in that case? Assuming sales to non-members are allowed, tax would presumably have to be paid. And you'd have to keep records. It wouldn't matter. A solution such as the one I propose would have someone else making the actual sale :-) Quanta is registered as a 'Friendly Society' and as such is exempt from VAT and Corporation Tax provided all trade is internal. Should Quanta be found to be trading with the general public then corporation tax becomes due on ALL profit. That is why no charges are made for entry to workshops. Keeping tax records is already done and an Inland Revenue return is made every year. In that case, it is a good job that I remain a Quanta member whilst I continue to purchase second hand items from Quanta for sale to both members and non members alike :-) If the Jan Jones book were sold through a third party, then the third party would have to hold the agreement, not Quanta. The current agreement is with Quanta for books printed and sold by Quanta. You could say, that the agreement was made with Quanta on the understanding that Quanta sold to it's members, avoiding that, whichever way you choose, would in my understanding be inadmissible. I do not understand this argument - in principle, using an online publisher to print copies on demand, would only be the same as Quanta using a publisher to produce say 100 copies of the book. If Quanta had to limit sales to members only, then so be it (presumably as a member, I could purchase copies for resale, as I do with the second hand items). Otherwise, if Quanta are not willing to do this themselves, then perhaps they would write to Jan Jones and explain the situation and ask her to contact myself directly, in which case I would offer the book for sale and have it printed on an on demand basis. The other option would be for the book to be distributed by Quanta as a PDF file only - this would incur no printing costs whatsoever (other than the cost and time of providing a link to a downloadable version to buyers). <> This may sound unpalatable, but it needed saying. The secretary has asked for nominations for the three officers and up to six other committee members. Is anybody doing anything? No idea - If health permitted, I would join the committee, but then 90% of all committee meetings and workshops are now held south of London which is too far for me to travel at the moment. Seems as though I will miss the 21st anniversary meeting as well for the same reason... -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services 26 Oak Road, Shelfield, Walsall, West Midlands WS4 1RQ http://www.rwapservices.co.uk/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Jan Jones Book
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:58:59 +,Î(Î) John Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. Are Quanta actually allowed to sell to non-members in that case? Assuming sales to non-members are allowed, tax would presumably have to be paid. And you'd have to keep records. It wouldn't matter. A solution such as the one I propose would have someone else making the actual sale :-) Quanta is registered as a 'Friendly Society' and as such is exempt from VAT and Corporation Tax provided all trade is internal. Should Quanta be found to be trading with the general public then corporation tax becomes due on ALL profit. That is why no charges are made for entry to workshops. Keeping tax records is already done and an Inland Revenue return is made every year. All this is understood and has been exhausted as a subject. I agree the British Revenue code is foreign to me but how different can that be from not-for-profits everywhere (or societies or clubs or whatever they may be) If the Jan Jones book were sold through a third party, then the third party would have to hold the agreement, not Quanta. The current agreement is with Quanta for books printed and sold by Quanta. You could say, that the agreement was made with Quanta on the understanding that Quanta sold to it's members, avoiding that, whichever way you choose, would in my understanding be inadmissible. That I understand, but given that Quanta has the only means of communication with Mrs. Jones, it would be Quanta's job to pose the question... as we mere mortals cannot. There's no agreement per se with entities such as Cafepress, other than they provide the service and get a cut of the profits. Ie if Quanta would convince Mrs. Jones to agree to such an arrangement, Mrs. Jones would get all the profits, not Quanta. I understand that Quanta has survived following the rules to a T (not my cup of tea but nonetheless respectable) and potential complications out of a direct involvement of Quanta in such a setup would be problematic, however SURELY Quanta could accomodate the users by intermediating between some entity (or at least convincing Mrs Jones to go at it alone.. which as I said is not such big a hassle -ie the procedure is pretty straightforward-). Now of course QUANTA can chose not to do any of the above (which I suspect will be the end result anyway) but I don't see any gain in that for the QL community (Quanta members and not) at large by such inaction. If it were up to me, I would bend the rules a bit (as noone would be actually breaking a law there's no harm in that! - but that's just my opinion -) I am sorry if I am a wet blanket but I have felt for a long time that there is a serious lack in the perception of what Quanta is and what Quanta is not. Dilwyn made the point that Quanta membership was based on a subscription to the magazine. Nothing could be further from the truth. The subscription is for membership to Quanta, period. Having paid, YOU are Quanta. This does confer certain rights, such as a magazine and attendance at AGM's It also involves accepting some responsibilities, and this is where the members tend to be lacking. If members fail to support Quanta it starts to fall, then it is blamed, but who should you blame? Quanta is YOU. It is not just a committee. If you feel the committee is at fault, then that too is your fault, it is your committee. I am very sorry for all of that but Quanta itself is not without fault. A little while ago I mentioned in this list that I repeatedly contacted Quanta when I re-attached my self to the QL community back in 1997 to become a member, but nobody bothered to answer my letters (which I know where received because I tracked them through the Greek Post Office -as I was in Greece at the time-). In any case, if you don't want a new member ONCE, I'd rather not be your member 1000 times! It's simple as that. I am sure I am not the only case and definitely not the last. But I will NEVER apply for membership again with Quanta even if QUANTA pays me... not after that treatement regardless of reason. Phoebus ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] Jan Jones Book
Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. Are Quanta actually allowed to sell to non-members in that case? Assuming sales to non-members are allowed, tax would presumably have to be paid. And you'd have to keep records. It wouldn't matter. A solution such as the one I propose would have someone else making the actual sale :-) Quanta is registered as a 'Friendly Society' and as such is exempt from VAT and Corporation Tax provided all trade is internal. Should Quanta be found to be trading with the general public then corporation tax becomes due on ALL profit. That is why no charges are made for entry to workshops. Keeping tax records is already done and an Inland Revenue return is made every year. If the Jan Jones book were sold through a third party, then the third party would have to hold the agreement, not Quanta. The current agreement is with Quanta for books printed and sold by Quanta. You could say, that the agreement was made with Quanta on the understanding that Quanta sold to it's members, avoiding that, whichever way you choose, would in my understanding be inadmissible. I am sorry if I am a wet blanket but I have felt for a long time that there is a serious lack in the perception of what Quanta is and what Quanta is not. Dilwyn made the point that Quanta membership was based on a subscription to the magazine. Nothing could be further from the truth. The subscription is for membership to Quanta, period. Having paid, YOU are Quanta. This does confer certain rights, such as a magazine and attendance at AGM's It also involves accepting some responsibilities, and this is where the members tend to be lacking. If members fail to support Quanta it starts to fall, then it is blamed, but who should you blame? Quanta is YOU. It is not just a committee. If you feel the committee is at fault, then that too is your fault, it is your committee. This may sound unpalatable, but it needed saying. The secretary has asked for nominations for the three officers and up to six other committee members. Is anybody doing anything? John Taylor ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] PE bug?
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:22:53 +0100,Î(Î) Marcel Kilgus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: Phoebus Dokos wrote: is it just me or the Menu windows of the PE (not the regular windows) have a corner of darker shadow on the lower right side? Yes, that can happen. Phew I thought I was blind (which is not far from the truth anyway ;-)) for a sec Well, after all it did take you over 2 years to spot that ;-) Actually I just found an email to you on that matter when I was sending you the icons for the PE... but as I use the PE very infrequently apart from QD (which I always run at full screen so there's no shadow anywhere) I really didn't look after that and as a matter of fact completely forgot about it... until today :-) Phoebus ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] PE bug?
Phoebus Dokos wrote: >>> is it just me or the Menu windows of the PE (not the regular >>> windows) have a corner of darker shadow on the lower right side? >> Yes, that can happen. > Phew I thought I was blind (which is not far from the truth anyway ;-)) > for a sec Well, after all it did take you over 2 years to spot that ;-) Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:53:59 -,Î(Î) Dilwyn Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: Do you have any idea on what the likely minimum print run might be? I think it was thought that a new run of keyboard membranes might be too expensive and demand not there but from what I know it happened and they sold. Obviously, if you had to doa minimum run of 1000 it might not be viable, but a smaller run at slightly higher cost might be viable. The minimum print run using Cafepress is ... 1 :-) As for the keyboard membranes I know as I worked for them to become a reality :-) Ah, now that is good news. So if someone was perverse enough to scan it, could it be made generally available, or does the Quanta rights restrict it to members only (leaving aside the sales issue for a moment)? As seen on a later message, Quanta has no copyright on Mrs. Jones book Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. Are Quanta actually allowed to sell to non-members in that case? Assuming sales to non-members are allowed, tax would presumably have to be paid. And you'd have to keep records. It wouldn't matter. A solution such as the one I propose would have someone else making the actual sale :-) Finally, apologies if the layour of this email is all over the place, Lookout Excess has had a brainstorm and it looks very messy as I type this because the cursor and what gets typed seem out of sync. :-( If you had a decent mailer ;-) (hehe) it would look fine as it looks from where I stand ;-) -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
John Mason wrote: I notice that "Phoebus Dokos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Friday 17 Dec 2004 20:48:19 -0500, suggested that consideration be given to a further reprint of "QL SuperBASIC" by Jan Jones - Sounds a good idea in principle, and I am quite willing to cause it to be investigated; but until the likely order of cost can be determined no commitment to do so can be given. Do you have any idea on what the likely minimum print run might be? I think it was thought that a new run of keyboard membranes might be too expensive and demand not there but from what I know it happened and they sold. Obviously, if you had to doa minimum run of 1000 it might not be viable, but a smaller run at slightly higher cost might be viable. Touching briefly on how it might be reproduced - yes it could be OCR'd etc., but it is likely to be cheaper to photo-scan, and then print it using lithography However, the copyright of this book rests in QUANTA, who acquired it from Jan Jones for the benefit of Quanta members. Ah, now that is good news. So if someone was perverse enough to scan it, could it be made generally available, or does the Quanta rights restrict it to members only (leaving aside the sales issue for a moment)? Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. Are Quanta actually allowed to sell to non-members in that case? Assuming sales to non-members are allowed, tax would presumably have to be paid. And you'd have to keep records. The positive answer for those who are not at present QUANTA members is to join QUANTA and pay an annual subscription of £14 which includes a free bi-monthly magazine, and the right to buy goods such as Jan's book. At the same time you are strengthening the only voice that is competent to speak for users as a whole of the QL and its derivatives Not to mention software library, helpline, workshops... It might be easy to take the odd pot shot at Quanta, but without Quanta there'd almost certainly be less to the QL than there is now. Will have to look it up to be sure, but I thought technically that membership to Quanta was by subscription to its newsletter, so in that sense (splitting hairs I suppose and certainly NOT having a go at you, John) technically the newsletter isn't free, although of course there's so many potential benefits to Quanta membership that it's really neither here nor there. Finally, apologies if the layour of this email is all over the place, Lookout Excess has had a brainstorm and it looks very messy as I type this because the cursor and what gets typed seem out of sync. :-( -- Dilwyn Jones May I wish all "ql-users" a Joyful Christmas and a Happy New Year John Mason ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:13:31 -0500,Î(Î) Phoebus Dokos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: That's what I figured (the copyright matter) however all this doesn't change the fact that the basis of reprinting on a one-off basis from a on-demand printer is not feasible. Of course here I meant : FEASIBLE ;-) (My bad) ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:46:19 +,Î(Î) John Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: John You are wrong. Quanta does not own the copyright to the Jan Jones book and never has. The agreement was that Quanta had permission to print additional copies in return for a royalty based on the number printed and not on the number sold. That's what I figured (the copyright matter) however all this doesn't change the fact that the basis of reprinting on a one-off basis from a on-demand printer is not feasible. What's even better, (and that applies not only to Jan Jones' book but in general) by using such a schem Quanta doesn't: a. Have to lose any money! b. Have to MAKE any money! (So you keep your not-for-profit status) Since as revealed Mrs. Jones doesn't want her contacts divulged, Quanta could act as an intermediary. As a matter of fact if Mrs Jones would (under the persuasive efforts (?) of Quanta was to consider a solution like that, she would get directly all royalties for each book sold and at no cost to her (time or money-wise). As I said, I am willing to convert the book to electronic form (without any alterations to the content) and provide it to Quanta which then would intermediate :-) As I said again, I can see no reason why someone wouldn't want to make money :-) I do not wish to discourage the committee from doing a further reprint but as sales would be limited you ought to show a far better understanding of what you are proposing. That's not true, because it would require NO financial COMMITMENT whatsoever from Quanta! If it is of any help, the last reprint Quanta did of the Jan Jones was photo copied and ring bound for less than Â7.00, with little or no profit to Quanta as a later committee reduced the selling price. So what's the difference if for the same price you get a bound book at far better quality... and at NO COST? A far better approach would be for Quanta to reprint copies of Rich Mellors manual which includes far more and is readily available as I believe Rich, or the printer, still has the files. Rich's book is still being converted (will be done in the next few days) to a far more flexible format than Text87... BTW: Not to speak for Rich, but he could go to an outlet like Cafepress directly and bypass QUANTA altogether. IMHO since Rich Mellor is still actively involved, Quanta shouldn't be involved unless asked by Rich; however it should be involved in making obsolete material available to Qlers instead. (Just my 2 cents) Phoebus ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] PE bug?
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:59:07 +0100,Î(Î) Marcel Kilgus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: Phoebus Dokos wrote: is it just me or the Menu windows of the PE (not the regular windows) have a corner of darker shadow on the lower right side? Yes, that can happen. Phew I thought I was blind (which is not far from the truth anyway ;-)) for a sec Phoebus ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] PE bug?
Phoebus Dokos wrote: > is it just me or the Menu windows of the PE (not the regular windows) have > a corner of darker shadow on the lower right side? Yes, that can happen. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] PE bug?
Hi all, is it just me or the Menu windows of the PE (not the regular windows) have a corner of darker shadow on the lower right side? If I am not seeing things that is probably because the bottom part of the shadow extends more to the right than it should (and I am saying the bottom part as it is a matter of perspective ;-) could be the top part as well ;-) Phoebus -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
John You are wrong. Quanta does not own the copyright to the Jan Jones book and never has. The agreement was that Quanta had permission to print additional copies in return for a royalty based on the number printed and not on the number sold. Any other form of publication would require a new agreement. It was also stipulated that no correspondence as to the books contents, syntax or understanding was to be considered, neither was the whereabouts or contact details to be divulged to any person who might want to make use of them. This is the second time in as many weeks that you have guessed incorrectly and then stated it as fact. I do not wish to discourage the committee from doing a further reprint but as sales would be limited you ought to show a far better understanding of what you are proposing. If it is of any help, the last reprint Quanta did of the Jan Jones was photo copied and ring bound for less than £7.00, with little or no profit to Quanta as a later committee reduced the selling price. A far better approach would be for Quanta to reprint copies of Rich Mellors manual which includes far more and is readily available as I believe Rich, or the printer, still has the files. John Taylor On Thursday, December 23, 2004, at 12:28 PM, john mason wrote: I notice that "Phoebus Dokos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Friday 17 Dec 2004 20:48:19 -0500, suggested that consideration be given to a further reprint of "QL SuperBASIC" by Jan Jones - Sounds a good idea in principle, and I am quite willing to cause it to be investigated; but until the likely order of cost can be determined no commitment to do so can be given. Touching briefly on how it might be reproduced - yes it could be OCR'd etc., but it is likely to be cheaper to photo-scan, and then print it using lithography However, the copyright of this book rests in QUANTA, who acquired it from Jan Jones for the benefit of Quanta members. Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. The positive answer for those who are not at present QUANTA members is to join QUANTA and pay an annual subscription of £14 which includes a free bi-monthly magazine, and the right to buy goods such as Jan's book. At the same time you are strengthening the only voice that is competent to speak for users as a whole of the QL and its derivatives May I wish all "ql-users" a Joyful Christmas and a Happy New Year John Mason ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
ÎÎÎ Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:28:31 -,Î(Î) john mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ/wrote: I notice that "Phoebus Dokos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Friday 17 Dec 2004 20:48:19 -0500, suggested that consideration be given to a further reprint of "QL SuperBASIC" by Jan Jones - Sounds a good idea in principle, and I am quite willing to cause it to be investigated; but until the likely order of cost can be determined no commitment to do so can be given. There's nothing easier than that : go to CafÎPress: http://.cafepress.com/> The prices are fixed and they do even a single copy print (That's the beauty of on-demand printing in the information age) Touching briefly on how it might be reproduced - yes it could be OCR'd etc., but it is likely to be cheaper to photo-scan, and then print it using lithography For a solution as the one I proposed, the book HAS to be in electronic form. They use digital lithography (ie digital offset printers) that generate their plates via the electrophotographic method (Imagine it as an extremely expensive laser printer in principle) However, the copyright of this book rests in QUANTA, who acquired it from Jan Jones for the benefit of Quanta members. I thought that Jan Jones retained the copyright? You surely mean printing rights. Because if Quanta indeed has the copyright there's no reason why an on-demand printing scheme cannot be done. Plus it does have the benefits that once it is put "out-there" real financial benefit befalls CafÎPress, not Quanta. And as such all the problems outlined below... disappear :-) (Plus CafÎPress is a US company which means that the UK tax authority won't even touch it with a stick ;-) Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. The positive answer for those who are not at present QUANTA members is to join QUANTA and pay an annual subscription of Â14 which includes a free bi-monthly magazine, and the right to buy goods such as Jan's book. At the same time you are strengthening the only voice that is competent to speak for users as a whole of the QL and its derivatives May I wish all "ql-users" a Joyful Christmas and a Happy New Year Phoebus ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] good superbasic book?
I notice that "Phoebus Dokos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Friday 17 Dec 2004 20:48:19 -0500, suggested that consideration be given to a further reprint of "QL SuperBASIC" by Jan Jones - Sounds a good idea in principle, and I am quite willing to cause it to be investigated; but until the likely order of cost can be determined no commitment to do so can be given. Touching briefly on how it might be reproduced - yes it could be OCR'd etc., but it is likely to be cheaper to photo-scan, and then print it using lithography However, the copyright of this book rests in QUANTA, who acquired it from Jan Jones for the benefit of Quanta members. Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for the benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them. The positive answer for those who are not at present QUANTA members is to join QUANTA and pay an annual subscription of £14 which includes a free bi-monthly magazine, and the right to buy goods such as Jan's book. At the same time you are strengthening the only voice that is competent to speak for users as a whole of the QL and its derivatives May I wish all "ql-users" a Joyful Christmas and a Happy New Year John Mason ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Detecting GD2 - revisited
Once it's settled and everyone stops arguing about it, I'll see about adding it to display_cde. Seems straightforward enough, the only real difference is that your code assumes #0 if no channel is specified, display_cde insists on a channel parameter IIRC. Given that there is some uncertaintly about some of the code used, what I might do is add it as an extra function rather than replace the existing one for now. The code is similar enough that once we're all happy it works as it should, it should be simple enough to integrate into display_cde. Rich - you asked about articles about this type of subject matter being made available, if you can come up with a list of what should be generally available or which you'd like to try to consolidate as general documentation material, I'll see what I have on disk here from past Toadies and send them to you once I've asked Marcel, Jochen, Wolfgang and anyone else whose articles fall into your list. Indeed, if you chaps are listening, would it be OK for Rich to have the material to see what he can come up with in terms of collating material with a view to public availability. Or, if you prefer, I could send what material I have to Rich once he tells me what he wants and he can ask you on a case by case basis. Looking ahead slightly, what I may do is to purt such material relating to SMSQ/E and GD2 specifically onto a separate page on my website and if Wolfgang or Marcel (or anyone else for that matter) want to add any or all of it to dedicated websites or general documentation they can then feel free to grab whatever material they require from my website and put it into whatever formats suits their needs. Dilwyn Jones - Original Message - From: "Rich Mellor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 7:21 PM Subject: [ql-users] Detecting GD2 - revisited Thanks to Marcel's comments, I have amended the RW_GD2 function to work on Minerva, standard smsq/e for Gold Card (v3.07 tested) and high colour smsq/e (v3.03 for Gold Card and latest QPC2 version tested). The code appears below for comment or criticism. Hopefully I have interpreted this all correctly. The only real change from Dilwyn's Display_cde is earmaked "NEW CODE". Though Dilwyn, you need to check the parameters passed to IOP.SLNK in your display_cde version as I have not looked myself. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Happy Holidays
Same goes for me - lets hope everyone has a really good Christmas, and comes back rfreshed in the new year, ready to take the QL forward that little bit further... With the release of QDT and internet ability for Q40/Q60 (and QPC2 I believe), 2005 should be a good ywar With that note (as I continue working on everyone's Christmas present at 4 am here), wishing everyone the best for their holiday and looking forward to a really good year! Cheers, jim ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Happy Holidays
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:49:59 +0100, Sinclair QL ES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... and a prosperous new year for all the international QL community !!! Javier Guerra from Badajoz, Spain ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Same goes for me - lets hope everyone has a really good Christmas, and comes back rfreshed in the new year, ready to take the QL forward that little bit further... With the release of QDT and internet ability for Q40/Q60 (and QPC2 I believe), 2005 should be a good ywar -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services 26 Oak Road, Shelfield, Walsall, West Midlands WS4 1RQ http://www.rwapservices.co.uk/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] Happy Holidays
... and a prosperous new year for all the international QL community !!! Javier Guerra from Badajoz, Spain ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
RE: [ql-users] Problems with SMSQ/e
>Rich Mellor wrote: >>well that's one out of 3 I guess - presume you also get the high colour >>mode (DISP_TYPE=33). 2 out of 4 now as I have no problem with it either & am still only on 3.03 on the Q60. Yes Disp_type returns 33, just checked. Also it might be a legacy in the other twos boot from earlier versions of smsq/e - I had the disp_size command in my boot to be used only if I booted with 2.98 which was in the rom & not configurable & 2.99 which was LRESPRed Duncan Neithercut -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rich Mellor Sent: 22 December 2004 10:33 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ql-users] Problems with SMSQ/e On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:31:49 +0100, JÃrÃme Grimbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rich Mellor wrote: >> I have now spoken with two people who say that they have configured >> SMSQ/e for the Q40/Q60 to start in 1024x512 resolution with high >> colour drivers, but it does not start up in that mode. They have to >> issue a >> > > I'm using a Q40, previously with 3.01, now with 3.07 (no intermediate > version), homebuilt (using Qmac). (Rom still in 2.98) > I have no trouble starting in 1024x512, once the file has been > configurated with menuconfig. well that's one out of 3 I guess - presume you also get the high colour mode (DISP_TYPE=33). > Nevertheless, I did tried to put the 3.01 on Eprom, but they never boot > the Q40. So, there is probably an issue and something broken somewhere. > (And yes, I know how to program correctly the eprom, I had no trouble > getting, modifiying and updating the 2.98 image... ) > I have not yet tested 3.07 on eprom, but given that patch trace, I have > barely any hope. Yes, this is something else that apparently needs to be fixed. Any volunteers ?? >> Also (I have not checked this myself) but someone with SMSQ/e v3.03 >> for the Gold Card (high colour version) has said that their boot >> program which just has LRESPR win1_smsq_gold now cycles - in the past >> it would not try to re-load smsq/e on top of itself. > > Well, my Q40 boot file starts with something along > 100 IF VER$(1)=="2.98" THEN LRESPR ... > > So at the second boot, there is no lrespr to do. I know that work around, but it should not ne necessary Certainly standard Gold Card smsq/e just ignores the LRESPR and goes to the next line - but the high colour v3.03 doesn't. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services 26 Oak Road, Shelfield, Walsall, West Midlands WS4 1RQ http://www.rwapservices.co.uk/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QDT icons
Forgot to mention, any icon graphics submitted must be available for free distribution with QDT releases and from the QDT website. If you are borrowing the graphic from another source, you will need to point me to notification that it is available for reuse, modification, and distribution. If you are the owner of the graphic, please let me know. Also note that the icons will be distributed with QDT and eventually posted on the QDT website for QDT users to download for their personal use with QDT. A note of course will be included as to author, source, and usage limits. There is unfortunately no payment for any graphics submitted or distributed with QDT. Thanks, jim On Dec 23, 2004, at 1:04 AM, James Hunkins wrote: This is my last call for graphics for QDT icons before the upcoming release. If anyone has a favorite program (especially their own) that they want a custom icon for in QDT for, you need to get it to me by Dec 31st at the latest (I would appreciate them before then if possible). I can import any major format. Ideally they should be 40 by 40 pixels but in many cases, I can reduce them with Photoshop from as high as 48x48 unless there is too much tiny, critical detail. If you want to design your own and you are using Photoshop or equivalent, please head to my web site to pick up the Photoshop color swatch with the colors that QDT uses. You can directly download it at: http://www.jdh-stech.com/QDT/Resources/QDT_Icon256.aco For transparency, please use the last color in the swatch [named transparent] (my conversion routines will swap it into transparency). If you have any questions about icons and QDT, please contact me at the email address given on the website. http://www.jdh-stech.com/ Thanks, jim ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] QDT website - major upgrade
Guys, I have uploaded a huge update on the QDT website. Not only does it have details of the huge amount of progress done lately, but it has updated screen shots, two User's Manuals (more to come), Errata notes on the upcoming demo disk, etc. Please take a look and give my your feedback if you feel so inclined. http://www.jdh-stech.com/ This is the primary link into everything including the QDT sections I have created direct links from the top of this page directly into the QDT section for your convenience. Thanks, jim ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] QDT icons
This is my last call for graphics for QDT icons before the upcoming release. If anyone has a favorite program (especially their own) that they want a custom icon for in QDT for, you need to get it to me by Dec 31st at the latest (I would appreciate them before then if possible). I can import any major format. Ideally they should be 40 by 40 pixels but in many cases, I can reduce them with Photoshop from as high as 48x48 unless there is too much tiny, critical detail. If you want to design your own and you are using Photoshop or equivalent, please head to my web site to pick up the Photoshop color swatch with the colors that QDT uses. You can directly download it at: http://www.jdh-stech.com/QDT/Resources/QDT_Icon256.aco For transparency, please use the last color in the swatch [named transparent] (my conversion routines will swap it into transparency). If you have any questions about icons and QDT, please contact me at the email address given on the website. http://www.jdh-stech.com/ Thanks, jim ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
