Hi, I agree that they are working on the issue and for those of you who
think just labeling the QT application and rebuilding it in QT version 5
is all that it is it is a lot more. Basically from the QT software I
have taken a look at it is a complete rewrite and this process does take
time.
All, it certainly sounds as if people are doing their very best. I certainly
did not get the sense that we are being cast aside or blown off. As hard as
it may seem, patients may be the order of the day on this one. The response
Slau shared seems extremely levelheaded and basically fair.
--
Hi Ricky,
Just to clarify things a bit!
On our bimonthly conference call with Avid yesterday
BTW only Mike & Vin & myself were on the call this time!! ;)
the Pace subject came up as it usually does, and Lets just say the some higher
ups at Avid were contacted "AFTER!" the namm show by Pace.
Well this is exactly what I figured. That is why I did not write the company.
It is a level head that will prevail and the record shows that. Great work slau
I understand everyone's need to have access to the lock.we will just have to
wait I believe that the challenge avid sent out can serve us
Well, a speculative date and some detail is more than we had
previously, and to be blunt, it's more than complaints would have
gotten us. Thanks for passing this along and keeping the dialogue
alive. If nothing else, I believe that it is on the radar of their
engineers ahead of time, a good sign. I
Hey Slau:
Thanks much for your work that you've done on this issue: you're an exceptional
person.
Again, thanks all over the place.
-Original Message-
From: ptaccess@googlegroups.com [mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
Slau Halatyn
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 8:25 PM
T
