From: Ginny Caughey on
Very cool, Mark!

--

Ginny Caughey
www.wasteworks.com



From: Geoff Schaller on
You are so totally correct!

One of the models put to Brian was just that we paid for annual patches.
$150 each per year or so. I believe part of the problem here was the
agreement he had with CA but I am sure there are creative ways around
that.

The issue for Brian is that Vulcan is all his - no royalty to CA - hence
it makes commercial sense for him to concentrate on Vulcan and that is
exactly what he has done. The reason he originally opted not to have a
VO only subscription in the early days was because HE KNEW he would not
get enough support for Vulcan. Most of us only had a passing interest in
Vulcan because we wanted VO supported first.

So VOPS was used to fund Vulcan (instead of the agreed 50:50
arrangement) on the grounds that Brian assumed we'd all just cross over
to the Dark Side when the time came and would be subsequently happy.
Well history has proven me, Ed, Oskar and others right. It isn't what
the majority wanted.

Geoff



"richard.townsendrose" <richard.townsendrose(a)googlemail.com> wrote in
message
news:9fd3704f-8c14-4145-84a6-98c634478817(a)v37g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:

> Hi all
>
> the fact is that it is easier to �100 off 1,000 people thatn to take
> �1,000 off 100 - ask any taxman.
>
> the fact is that Brian planned on �1,000 from 1,000 and that just
> didn't happen.
>
> my first business plkan for tdoc was �1,000 for 1,000 companies
>
> the current one says take �2,000 off 100 companies EVERY year as
> annual maintenance
>
> so i would be very happy to be one of the 1,000 users who pay brian
> �100 a year
>
> however brian doesn't see it that way ... but it really would help if
> he made sure that VO was FINISHED off - like pdf in reportpro etc, AND
> took his �100 pa - but he doesn't so there we are
>
> richard
>
> richard

From: richard.townsendrose on
Geoff

100% agreed ....

Richard

[not often ... but ...]