Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:49PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>>
>
>
>> I concur with whomever said that -biz was a wasteland; I'm
>> unsubscribing completely now; you guys have fun.
>>
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:49PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>
> I concur with whomever said that -biz was a wasteland; I'm
> unsubscribing completely now; you guys have fun.
>
GOOD.
___
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 03:00:49PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> ZOMG Sounds like a script kiddie. Profanity made you look
> unprofessional, and telling lies on the list is the last straw. I
> certainly would not do business with you.
You can't point, Steve, to anything I've said that is
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 15:00 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> Last point that should pretty much put your assertions to rest are
> that almost all IP and Hybrid PBXes are PCs. Ever open an NBX 100 or
> V3000? It is a PC complete with flash card, CPU, memory. The NEC IPK
> is the same although not wha
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 01:21:29PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> But the most compelling argument against your markup is the fact that
>> you must purchase support separately from the system, so how would
>> that affect th
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 13:56 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> How do you think his employers pay his salary, pray tell?
through support? Perhaps its through reliability.
--
Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel
Belfast +44 28 9099 6461US +1 516 687 5200
http://www.trxtel.com
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 01:21:29PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> But the most compelling argument against your markup is the fact that
> you must purchase support separately from the system, so how would
> that affect the price of the base system?
ZOMG.
The topic, Steve -- *my* topic: the thing I
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 13:21 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> But the most compelling argument against your markup is the fact that
> you must purchase support separately from the system, so how would
> that affect the price of the base system?
that isnt that uncommon, look at metaswitch, $500k and yo
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 12:42:19PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> I offered overhead as a reason for the high price 3Com was charging
>> and Jay used profanity to dismiss my explanation. Well if it isn't
>> overhead, then
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 12:42:19PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> I offered overhead as a reason for the high price 3Com was charging
> and Jay used profanity to dismiss my explanation. Well if it isn't
> overhead, then what is it Jay?
I didn't say it wasn't overhead, but it depends on what you cla
> is the norm.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lane
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Kohlsmith
> (lists)
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 10:23 AM
> To: asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
> Subject: Re: [asteri
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 09:39 -0700, Miles Scruggs wrote:
> couple links to bow out with:
>
> http://www.darkfire.net/~mrb/images/retarded.jpg
>
> and my favorite for Bret:
>
> http://www.xkcd.com/406/
heh, I wont say that it wasn't fun, but then I see no reason to lie
about that. It was fun, es
-Original Message-
From: Jay R. Ashworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June-05-08 12:11 PM
To: asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP Telephony Appliance)
> You sound amazingly like
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Andrew Kohlsmith (lists)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On June 5, 2008 12:04:36 pm Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
>> But hey you did do this to yourself, so you have no one to blame but
>> yourself. If you didnt lie, the lie wouldnt have been caught, it
>> wouldnt
EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Kohlsmith
(lists)
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 10:23 AM
To: asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz]PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP Telephony Appliance)
On June 5, 2008 12:04:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:22 -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith (lists) wrote:
> Bret/Jay... Can't you guys just *plonk* each other into your own personal
> killfiles and be done with it? I don't pretend to speak for the community
> here but I am willing to put money on the fact that it is you, Bret, and on
couple links to bow out with:
http://www.darkfire.net/~mrb/images/retarded.jpg
and my favorite for Bret:
http://www.xkcd.com/406/
On Jun 5, 2008, at 9:22 AM, Andrew Kohlsmith (lists) wrote:
> On June 5, 2008 12:04:36 pm Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
>> But hey you did do this to yourself, so
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:10 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> You sound amazingly like my girlfriend's 5-year-old, and I'm pretty
> tired of listening to you.
>
>
>
I can imagine, just like last time when you got caught lying here you
have opted to ignore me with a "plonk" although last time you
On Jun 5, 2008, at 9:10 AM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>
> You sound amazingly like my girlfriend's 5-year-old, and I'm pretty
> tired of listening to you.
>
>
Wow we made it this far did we, I guess when rational reason runs out
this is always a safe bet.
___
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 06:04:36PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> Yes you would have gotten this response from me when you lie, I find it
> amusing that you found so much time to write all this about your lies,
> but you couldnt find the time initially to just avoid it in the first
> plac
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:50 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 04:33:40PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > > I did, in fact, point out that the issue is reliability generally; I
> > > didn't say "provide support"; I said "doesn't break as much".
> >
> > wow and now y
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 04:33:40PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > I did, in fact, point out that the issue is reliability generally; I
> > didn't say "provide support"; I said "doesn't break as much".
>
> wow and now you will lie about it? Well I gotta remember who I am
> talking to,
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 16:43 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 06:05:51PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:31 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 07:58:44AM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > > > I will give Jay the benefit
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 16:41 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> That does not *forbid me from using it to refer to that protocol*, even
> in the practice of commerce.
>
that is an issue you have to take up with digium, they say it does give
them the right since they own that name and you dont.
>
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 06:05:51PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:31 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 07:58:44AM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > > I will give Jay the benefit of the doubt, but he is usually very quick
> > > to reply these k
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 06:01:33PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > They can't protect IAX and DUNDi that way, I'm pretty sure; the
> > *protocols* would be stock, and therefore not violate the license --
> > but since usage of those particular terms is almost certainly
> > nominative any
Gregory Boehnlein wrote:
>>> Horseshit, Steve. :-)
>> then please enlighten us as to what the correct reason for why prices
>> are that high.
>
> Because people will pay it. :)
Elegant in its simplicity, but does not address _why_ people will pay
it. There is a certain key respect in which de
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:31 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 07:58:44AM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > I will give Jay the benefit of the doubt, but he is usually very quick
> > to reply these kinds of messages. Maybe he is on vacation or
> > otherwise not interested or chec
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:34 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 05:15:49AM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > Basically it means if you remove something for reasons other than
> > porting or add anything for any reason you cant use their trademarked
> > words (among othe
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 05:15:49AM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> Basically it means if you remove something for reasons other than
> porting or add anything for any reason you cant use their trademarked
> words (among others: DIGIUM, ASTERISK, AsteriskNOW, IAX, and DUNDi)
> anywhere in t
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 05:17:09AM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 19:13 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > So to sum up Alex's very long winded explanation. It is the "status
> > quo" that Jay called BS. I guess some people are not ready for the
> > paradigm shift or t
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 07:58:44AM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> I will give Jay the benefit of the doubt, but he is usually very quick
> to reply these kinds of messages. Maybe he is on vacation or
> otherwise not interested or checking his email right now.
>
> Or possibly he does not care to eat
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Trixter aka Bret McDanel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 19:13 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> So to sum up Alex's very long winded explanation. It is the "status
>> quo" that Jay called BS. I guess some people are not ready for the
>> paradigm sh
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 19:13 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> So to sum up Alex's very long winded explanation. It is the "status
> quo" that Jay called BS. I guess some people are not ready for the
> paradigm shift or they were and now want to shift if back.
I concur that it is the status quo, at le
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 19:20 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> Then without running ABE, I can upsell all kinds of integration (even
> things the customer never thought of) and be a true VAR, not just a
> guy that sells a box.
Just be careful about calling it asterisk if you add or remove anything.
See
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Gregory Boehnlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Horseshit, Steve. :-)
>>
>> then please enlighten us as to what the correct reason for why prices
>> are that high.
>
> Because people will pay it. :)
>
Sort of like the question what is the dollar worth? Well the
> > Horseshit, Steve. :-)
>
> then please enlighten us as to what the correct reason for why prices
> are that high.
Because people will pay it. :)
___
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
T
Non-Commercial Discussion; Commercial
> and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
> Subject: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
> KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP Telephony Appliance)
>
> Sorry for the cross post but it seems appropriate.
>
> Steve, Check th
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Alex Balashov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Balashov wrote:
>
>> The price can float more freely,
> > far less anchored to the underlying production costs.
>
> To expand on this a little bit:
>
> Say you want to be a wheat farmer. Wheat doesn't have a lot of
>
D] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: Tuesday, 3 June 2008 7:04 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion; Commercial
and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP Telephony Appliance)
Sorr
Well this is getting silly
-Original Message-
From: Alex Balashov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 5:58 PM
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of
a KeySystem (3Com As
Alex Balashov wrote:
> The price can float more freely,
> far less anchored to the underlying production costs.
To expand on this a little bit:
Say you want to be a wheat farmer. Wheat doesn't have a lot of
differentiation points that have a grandiose impact on price. Sure,
there are differ
Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 15:26 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> You didn't read what *I wrote*. I'm discussing telephony markups
>>> (40-50%, traditionally) vs PC markups (10%, on a good day
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 15:26 -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You didn't read what *I wrote*. I'm discussing telephony markups
> > (40-50%, traditionally) vs PC markups (10%, on a good day, downhill,
> > with a tailwind).
>
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 02:45:16PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> >> > On Tue,
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 14:17 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > >> I would assume that's retail, yes.
> > >>
> > >> Computer people, and in my experience even Asterisk peopl
On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 02:45:16PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> >> >> I would assume that's
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Steve Totaro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>>> >> I would assume
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>> >> I would assume that's retail, yes.
>> >>
>> >> Computer people, and in my experience even A
On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> >> I would assume that's retail, yes.
> >>
> >> Computer people, and in my experience even Asterisk people, tend to
> >> forget how high the markup is on packaged telephony
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Trixter aka Bret McDanel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>> I would assume that's retail, yes.
>>
>> Computer people, and in my experience even Asterisk people, tend to
>> forget how high the markup is on packag
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:02 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> I would assume that's retail, yes.
>
> Computer people, and in my experience even Asterisk people, tend to
> forget how high the markup is on packaged telephony gear -- and more to
> the point, *why* it's that high.
ok, why not providing
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:23:07PM -0400, Dean Collins wrote:
>Ouch is it me or does this seem on the high side for a wholesale bundle (or
>is this retail and wholesale is 20-30% off dependant on volume).
I would assume that's retail, yes.
Computer people, and in my experience even Asteri
EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 3:04 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion; Commercial and
Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP Tele
On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
> Sent: Monday, 2 June 2008 5:04 PM
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion;
Commercial and
> Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
> Subject: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
KeySystem
> (3C
55 matches
Mail list logo
