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.
You
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 of the
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, this isnt
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 you will lie
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
place.
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.
plonk
Wow we made it this far did we, I guess when rational reason runs out
this is always a safe bet.
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.
plonk
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
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 12:22 -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 only
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 12:04:36 pm
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 have
-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 my
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,
-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: [asterisk-biz]PBX Functionality for Less than the Price of a
KeySystem (3Com Asterisk IP
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 class
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 what is
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 you
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 13:56 -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 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 the price
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 what
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 a
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.
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.
GOOD.
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, 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 least
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 shift or
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 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 they were
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 the
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 others:
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 checking
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 demand
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 anyway,
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 kinds of
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
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 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 packaged
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 gear -- and
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 that's retail,
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 Asterisk people,
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 retail, yes.
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 people, tend to
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, 2008-06-03 at
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).
You
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,
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
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
asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] PBX Functionality for Less than the Price
] 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)
Sorry
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
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 this out!
Give your customers IP PBX features at a price they can afford with
the new 3Com Asterisk
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
To
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
(3Com Asterisk IP Telephony Appliance)
Sorry
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 Telephony
54 matches
Mail list logo
