Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

>For me the reference in my hobby is not Q40/60 or QPC, >it is QDOS/SMSQ and the man who developped QDOS/SMSQ >who is neither Claus or Marcel or Peter. And this man >decided that both QPC and Q40 were good enough platforms >for his life's work. Hence I have no preference between >Q4P0C either. And

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

For me the reference in my hobby is not Q40/60 or QPC, it is QDOS/SMSQ and the man who developped QDOS/SMSQ who is neither Claus or Marcel or Peter. And this man decided that both QPC and Q40 were good enough platforms for his life's work. Hence I have no preference between Q4P0C either. And wish

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

Hi Just a small addition: The fact that I happened to intervene after Marcel's comments DOES NOT mean that my reply was prompted by his comments only! Just to disperse a small misunderstanding... Wolfgang - www.wlenerz.com

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

On 22 Mar 2002, at 15:48, Marcel Kilgus wrote: (attacks on QPC) IIRC, I wrote 'c'me on, people grow up'. Lest this thing gets out of hand, I didn't single out Marcel or Peter or Claus or or or in that comment. I often don't comment when anybody on this list "attacks" anybody else - do not co

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

Michael Grunditz wrote: > Now stop this.. It might have already stopped if you hadn't answered... > I have recently entered the QL world. I bough myself a Q40 because I felt > that a native QL clone is what I needed. Which is a fine thing. Did anybody say anything against that? > If I disagre

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

Now stop this.. I have recently entered the QL world. I bough myself a Q40 because I felt that a native QL clone is what I needed. I dont have a pc to run QPC2 , and from my perspective, its more fun to develop operating system with real hardware then a emulator. If I disagree with someone on w

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

>> I think that it's time to put away the knives and recognize that >>QDOS/SMS/whatever will die out unless we all pull together. > >I Totally agree. > >Come on people, grow up. I would completely fall in with the idea that we all get on and work together. Indeed I have said this on many occasio

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

In article , Phoebus Dokos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >??? 20/3/2002 6:37:23 , ?/? Roy Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??: > > >One thing I would like to say... >In light of the fact that we are probably in front of one of the most >significant

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

Yes, of course, any kind of quarrel seems nonsense ! the problem is only to develop further, if possible, the system we have and would like to use more and more !

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

On 21 Mar 2002, at 6:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 100% agreement from me Phoebus. If people want the QL/QDOS/SMS industry, albeit >that it is small, to survive then there is no point in these protracted discussions >about which is right or wrong. We must ALL learn to accept that different p

RE: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

Peter, (RE Subject - I'm staying out of this one by the way !) I've not forgotten about the Trump Card - I just haven't found it yet :o) I'll let you know ASAP. Cheers, Norman. PS. ROY : I think it was Peter who said the list was a waste of time. - Norman

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

> ??? 20/3/2002 6:37:23 ìì, ?/? Roy Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??: > > > One thing I would like to say... > In light of the fact that we are probably in front of one of the most significant > breakthroughs in the QL world (Making SMS open), I would urge EVERYONE to put > their "battle cries",

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

??? 20/3/2002 6:37:23 ìì, ?/? Roy Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??: One thing I would like to say... In light of the fact that we are probably in front of one of the most significant breakthroughs in the QL world (Making SMS open), I would urge EVERYONE to put their "battle cries", "weapons" an

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Kilgus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >...another "discussion" which will lead to nothing. I'm sure you have >something to answer but don't be surprised if I will keep quiet. I >don't want to bore the others. > >Marcel > I 100% agree with the sentiments expresse

Re: [ql-users] "Q40 people" incompatible?

Claus Graf wrote: > You were the one who decided to introduce the incompatibility between Q40 > and QPC highcolor. a) There were already two different colour definitions (I wouldn't have introduced a second one in the first place, especially not a little endian one). The QXL one was easier to ad