> Or: I attempt to get the 'feel' of what people in the community want (as > oposed to what they need) and in effect this is, all told, a net zero > vector - so I just pack it in regarding any even slightly radical > developement, or even all developement altogether. At this moment, I could > solely concentrate on a few simple things i could do - an Ethernet board, a > simplified Qubide II of sorts - things that I know I can do because they > require comparatively less investment (parts available, 2-layer PCBs, etc). > Sales would be very limited, but so would the investment. Alas, even these > assume at least GC if not SGC. > > So, what should I do? > > N. 1. Qubide II - definitely. Whether QL expansion is SGC or whatever, Qubide remains the only option for hard disk expansion via IDE from a QL or Aurora systems.
2. Ethernet - no use for it myself, but people have said on this list they want it. 3. SGC-type expansion. Something is needed, whether you go down the "traditionalist" path for a plug in and go Miracle-style expansion, or a much more radical path. If in some way it was possible to produce a few more Super Gold Cards or similar stop-gap to satisfy those traditionalists who simply want a black box QL expansion it would mean you could skip to the next step. Any new QL hardware would have to be a pretty radical departure i think. Anyone who worries about compatibility as the main issue should stick to QL/Aurora+SGC+QDOS or go for something like QemuLator. There comes a point where you have to forget those who won't use Q60, QPC2, SMSQ/E because they don't like change or don't like pointer environment, since they won't be buying your hardware. You have to decide if you wish to go the "expansion" route (i.e. plug into QL or Aurora) or go for some completely new hardware such as the one you said you are developing for your employer. My personal view, and I'm sure others will disagree, is that the way forward is going to be: 1. Traditional expansion 2. Q60 and any similar closely related and very compatible desktop computers 3. Something radically new and different, largely compatible but throwing away many legacy issues. As long as you are open about this that advancement is the issue and you will not really pursue legacy compatibility issues (i.e. some software will run, some won't and I can't be bothered about the ones that don't) you will find your market develops around that standpoint. As far as I can see, path 3 is probably your course - go for something radically new and different and leave legacy and compatibility issues behind because those that want their computer to run a 1984 program will run it on a QL and reasonable efforts will be made to get it to work on a Q60 or an emulator. That way, as long as the relevant information is available, software writers will most likely follow you. The most important things to pursue most likely will be to try to make sure that the major development tools work or are updated for the new hardware - I'm referring to C68, Turbo, Easyptr, QLiberator, QPTR, Gwass and the like. I'm pretty sure you'll find that guys like me who like to get their hands on the latest stuff all the time will feel the urge to write for great new hardware if we can. > PS - in a recent mail someone said that most users that do not want to > upgrade to SMSQ/E don't want it because theyt would have to use the PE. To > my knowledge SMSQ/E does not come with a built in bomb that explodes if one > does not use thge PE part of SMSQ/E, I just don't see what part of it would > MAKE them use it? Oh, and I have no doubt that quite a lot of the same lot > use Windows on a daily basis.... am I the only one who sees this as ironic? I hadn't thought of it in these terms. You are of course perfectly right to see it like this. Only thing, next SMSQ/E update I get from Jochen by post, do I have to get him to write a "WARNING: BOMB ENCLOSED" safety sticker on the envelope ;o) I remember the days when I started using PE. I'd been a traditional QDOS keyboard user and been through a period of "I'm sticking with DOS, Windows gets in the way" when it came to PCs. I saw it as a more rigid regime that dictated the way you worked, and would stifle my QLing because of the time it would take to learn it (turned out to be incorrect but that was my view at the time) and only started seeing the benefits upon using the system enough the squash my original views. I've used the same "excuses" to avoid Prowess I think. Trying to push people towards PE was always a slog. The only thing in those days that helped was Norman Dunbar's PE Idiots Guide, an unashamedly ground level guide. It got people over that first step to a point where they could progress under their own steam more comfortably. Fear of the unknown and all that. I don't always agree with your views, Nasta, but your emails certainly make very interesting reading. Don't stop now. Dilwyn Jones _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
