Re: [ql-users] £ 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!)
I haven't answered on this thread until now mainly because (in the first attempt...) I wasn't sure whether that kind of money would conceivably around in this matter. Now that Geoff has given more details, here's my 2 cents' worth. I don't know whether offering something like 1000 pounds for software would be a good idea. The reason is that it is, in my mind, too much and too little. Let me explain. It is too little. If you want to finance a software author, 1000 pounds will get you - what? A month' worth of work? Look at what Peter has told us on this list - if he were offered 2000 pounds for his ongoing work, he wouldn't accept it, because it would be far from what the software would be worth... This is a point of view I can share. So, thibking that a professoinal would do some real work for this amount of money is, IMHO, just too optimistic. So, if it were to finance some software author, it would be -either for a professional who actually is doing this on his spare time, as a hobby and then gets some benefit from it (but then, whhy 1000, and not 500, or 2000 etc...) - or for some kind of hobby programmer (such as myself). And then, it would be too much. Why should you pay 1000 pounds for some kind of amateur programmer? That wold probably leave some kind of hardware project. But, remember - all hardware projects also require some kind of software (driver etc) to go with it. So, instead of asking what kind of projetcs **might** be financed by that amound, I'd like to modify the question and ask: What would YOU be prepared to do for 1000 pounds? Answers, anyone? Wolfgang
[ql-users] Hyperbrowser
Hi Tarquin, I had looked at your browser efforts briefly as I was looking for a Help solution for QDT (haven't found one yet) and am still interested. Still would be interested in using it with some added capabilities (pointer, simple graphics, perhaps a few other things). Unfortunately no money but it would get distributed. Of course it would also be, after the update, be available for everyone to use. I am planning on putting together, if I go this way, an Help sub-architecture that anyone could tap into to add help that can be called from QDT. Got a ways to go before I get there but am constantly looking for things. If interested, please contact me off list : email links on my website - www.jdh-stech.com. Also, if anyone would like to help with this if Tarquin is up to this or wants to work on a hyperlink type capability for something else, also please contact me. Cheers, jim ~~ Jim Hunkins JDH Software Technologies ~~ In a message dated 15/03/2004 17:59:49 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Four years a go I became a QLer and started writing a web browser on a emulator (QLay), but the PC I did this on no longer exists and the emulated environment limited development. So I decide to buy a QL system to continue development on, over £1000 later (cost mounting) and still no working system. This is why HyperBrowser development stalled, I even tried cross-development on M$ Windoze and Debian Linux. A refund plus damages, or small claims court action are looming. This all could have been avoid, but the ball has not been in my half of the court, so I could do nothing. Tarquin, Everything aside, what would it take for you to finish the HyperBrowser ?? I am sure there are plenty of people who would be interested in this enough to assist you if you still want to progress the project -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services 35 Chantry Croft, Kinsley, Pontefract, West Yorkshire, WF9 5JH TEL: 01977 610509 Visit our website at URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk Stuck with ordinary dial up internet connection ?? Read our review of internet accelerators and broadband at: URL: http://www.rwapadventures.com/Services/reviews.html
[ql-users] Re: [ql-users] £ 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!)
- Original Message - From: Wolfgang Lenerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ql-users] £ 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!) SNIP I don't know whether offering something like 1000 pounds for software would be a good idea. The reason is that it is, in my mind, too much and too little. Let me explain. It is too little. If you want to finance a software author, 1000 pounds will get you - what? A month' worth of work? Look at what Peter has told us on this list - if he were offered 2000 pounds for his ongoing work, he wouldn't accept it, because it would be far from what the software would be worth... This is a point of view I can share. So, thibking that a professoinal would do some real work for this amount of money is, IMHO, just too optimistic. SNIP Thanks for this contribution. I can agree with most of what you write. Obviously £1,000 is peanuts for a professional programmer's time. All we would be doing if we paid for software is giving the author a generous present as a token of gratitude. Nevertheless, there is a long history of people in the QL community doing a lot of work for little reward. Look at the traders who are prepared to make a yearly loss because of their belief in the QL. With Just Words! I do this quite coldly and calculatingly. There is a level I am prepared to go to and no further. (Hence the anger of last year.) The result is that for the first time in years I am now in control of the deficit, Just Words! remains in existence and if nothing else QL Today gets a bit of advertising money. (But not yet Quanta - they have yet to prove their reliability - famous last words - Just Words! will be financing the QL2004 advertising in the Quanta Magazine - however you will get the principle.) All I am asking is whether a little money would provide a little oil to a machine that is slowly rusting to a standstill. (There is, I believe, the precedence of the colour drivers.) The question you ask, What would you do for £1,000? should be considered by everyone. Thanks to everyone for their contributions. They are all being carefully noted, although unfortunately I have not yet seen much that I can recommend to Quanta. (Some good ideas would fail for legal and practical reasons.) I am very concerned about the future of Quanta. Most of its money is spent on workshops, which I suspect are becoming more and more burnt out, or the magazine whose problems are obvious. The one thing Quanta has is financial stability. How can we use that for the benefit of its members and the QL community? Geoff
Re: [ql-users] £ 0.00 to spend! (1st attempt)
Tarquin Mills wrote: [snipped] A refund plus damages, or small claims court action are looming. Peter Graf wants me to point out D D Systems would be liable not him. This all could have been avoid, but the ball has not been in my half of the court, so I could do nothing. -- Tarquin Mills Norwich Sinclair and Clones Show (ORSAM 2004) http://www.speccyverse.me.uk/orsam/ http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Sinclair/petition.html (Bring Back YS)
[ql-users] Re: [ql-users] 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!)
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 19:22:18 +0100, Wolfgang Lenerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't answered on this thread until now mainly because (in the first attempt...) I wasn't sure whether that kind of money would conceivably around in this matter. Now that Geoff has given more details, here's my 2 cents' worth. I don't know whether offering something like 1000 pounds for software would be a good idea. The reason is that it is, in my mind, too much and too little. Let me explain. It is too little. If you want to finance a software author, 1000 pounds will get you - what? A month' worth of work? Look at what Peter has told us on this list - if he were offered 2000 pounds for his ongoing work, he wouldn't accept it, because it would be far from what the software would be worth... This is a point of view I can share. snip Regarding what Peter said (and to what Timothy and Bill added) I tend to believe that it is a reasonable idea to offer Tony a sum in the area of 1.000-2.000 (After all how many SMSQ/e's will be sold in the coming years?) with the provision that SMSQ/e could be placed under the GPL or some modified version of the GPL license (GPL would be ideal for reasons explained previously in length) as long as it is completely open and beyond any control. The modified GPL license would not prohibit payment of royalties when a dealer sells a copy of SMSQ/e (as it is now) as for Marcel and QPC, I believe they will still be covered under the previous pre-existent agreement (I believe Marcel has mentioned something like that or I could be wrong as usual ;-) . In any case that would keep everybody happy and we could see QlwIP as part of the OS and even more developments further ahead. In a solution like that, Tony retains his copyright, still gets royalties (plus he gets a lump sum in anticipation of future royalties that may -or may not- happen). He has opened SMSQ/e (after a fashion) already anyway and from what I understand he even considered to open it completely (again I may be wrong), so what's the harm? Phoebus (back from Florida... btw for anyone coming get a swimsuit ;-) -- Visit the QL-FAQ at: http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/faq/ (Still uploading stuff!) Visit the uQLX-win32 homepage at: http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlx.html Visit the uQLX-mac home page at:http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlxmac.html
Re: [ql-users] Hyperbrowser
Rich Mellor wrote: Everything aside, what would it take for you to finish the HyperBrowser ?? While people are surfing, a Internet (not web) Browser con never be finished. Also when you think of the size of Mozilla it cannot be finished. However HB can certainly be improved significantly. I am sure there are plenty of people who would be interested in this enough to assist you if you still want to progress the project Any help would be gratefully excepted, and speed things up. I need to port the C version, then other people can write character set files (no programming knowledge needed). The configuration files can also be improved calls to graphic and other viewers. The fetcher needs to be ported, it uses BSD sockets or replace by a plug compatible fetcher. Jonathan Dent my a copy of his TCP/IP stack, but I cannot access the email with it attached. So a new of copy SoQL being sent to me would be helpful. This is just simple stuff to get us started, the real question is what is need in what priority. I am guess inline graphics will make the most woah factor, to draw in punters. Make HB a GUI program is another thing that needs doing, it may make inline graphics easier and stop work being done twice. Fonts, gopher+, etc Testing, Bug fixs, snippets of code. -- Tarquin Mills Norwich Sinclair and Clones Show (ORSAM 2004) http://www.speccyverse.me.uk/orsam/ http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Sinclair/petition.html (Bring Back YS)
[ql-users] Re: [ql-users] Re: [ql-users] £ 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!)
Geoff, You have said that Quanta is heading towards a £1000 a year structural profit. I am also interested in how much Quanta has in realisable assets. The reason I ask, is that as has been pointed out, the pond is now a puddle and rapidly drying out. What good are those assets while they aren't being used to good effect? I suggest that Quanta decides to work on the basis that it is going to die in N years anyway, and plans to liquidate its assets by investment in good projects over that time. This could breathe new life into both the QL, and into Quanta, and actually ensure that it keeps going for longer than if it just keeps its assets in the bank. I for one would rejoin if I thought they would actually do something useful with my subscriptions. £1000 would actually only pay for one week's work for a programmer in my industry. Jeremy - Original Message - From: gwicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 7:52 PM Subject: [ql-users] Re: [ql-users] £ 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!) - Original Message - From: Wolfgang Lenerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ql-users] £ 1000 to spend! (2nd attempt!) SNIP I don't know whether offering something like 1000 pounds for software would be a good idea. The reason is that it is, in my mind, too much and too little. Let me explain. It is too little. If you want to finance a software author, 1000 pounds will get you - what? A month' worth of work? Look at what Peter has told us on this list - if he were offered 2000 pounds for his ongoing work, he wouldn't accept it, because it would be far from what the software would be worth... This is a point of view I can share. So, thibking that a professoinal would do some real work for this amount of money is, IMHO, just too optimistic. SNIP Thanks for this contribution. I can agree with most of what you write. Obviously £1,000 is peanuts for a professional programmer's time. All we would be doing if we paid for software is giving the author a generous present as a token of gratitude. Nevertheless, there is a long history of people in the QL community doing a lot of work for little reward. Look at the traders who are prepared to make a yearly loss because of their belief in the QL. With Just Words! I do this quite coldly and calculatingly. There is a level I am prepared to go to and no further. (Hence the anger of last year.) The result is that for the first time in years I am now in control of the deficit, Just Words! remains in existence and if nothing else QL Today gets a bit of advertising money. (But not yet Quanta - they have yet to prove their reliability - famous last words - Just Words! will be financing the QL2004 advertising in the Quanta Magazine - however you will get the principle.) All I am asking is whether a little money would provide a little oil to a machine that is slowly rusting to a standstill. (There is, I believe, the precedence of the colour drivers.) The question you ask, What would you do for £1,000? should be considered by everyone. Thanks to everyone for their contributions. They are all being carefully noted, although unfortunately I have not yet seen much that I can recommend to Quanta. (Some good ideas would fail for legal and practical reasons.) I am very concerned about the future of Quanta. Most of its money is spent on workshops, which I suspect are becoming more and more burnt out, or the magazine whose problems are obvious. The one thing Quanta has is financial stability. How can we use that for the benefit of its members and the QL community? Geoff
Re: Re: [ql-users] £ 0.00 to spend! (1s t attempt)
Personally, the lack of Internet access for the QL/Q40 is not an issue for me. I have a PC for most of my Internet use (dial up) and use the system at work for larger downloads (T-1). I look at the QL as a nice hobbiest computer. I find it fun to use and to work on. I find learning more about the QL interesting and useful towards learning other computers. The QL can't compete with a full blown PC for capabilites, but it really should not. How many other computers can you still use today that you've been using for almost 20 years. Tim Swenson
