SEE doesn't even own the piece of equipment he is complaining about. Only took 30 seconds to go back tp 1.19 and watch my emails. No problem, Thanks TenTec for all the nices extras you have given us
John, Widows is still buggy after 13 + years and I have no one to talk to at MicroSoft. So what's your point???? Version 1.23 is Fantastic! Thanks for the Quick Response Ten Tec!
Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX)
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 09:29:43 -0500
I'd agree. I recall loading and running Windows 1.01 and all the revisions that followed. Just recently I've changed to Windows XP from ME from 2000. Still have bugs that I recall were in V 3.1. Also
Whether or not I own a Jupiter, or whether or not I own a Ten-Tec radio at all, is totally irrelevant to this discussion. I, as an owner of Ten-Tec equipment and a potential owner of new equipment, r
Reminds me of the old saying.... Best price, High quality, Great service.. Pick two ! Count me in for charging for annual updates. Still cheaper than the postage to send a radio back. 73, kd0zv -- Or
Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX)
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 20:32:11 -0500
Hi Bob, I want to disagree with what you said in a recent post: "I'd agree. I recall loading and running Windows 1.01 and all the = revisions=20 that followed. Just recently I've changed to Windows X
-- Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX <RMcGraw@Blomand.Net> wrote: Absolutely true, but you have to wonder about the modern day "motor heads" who are tweaking these modules for various "performance" goals.
I do not like the idea of paying for software updates which are now free, without something in exchange. That something being a lower price on the hardware and an open source approach to the software
" I do not like the idea of paying for software updates which are now free, without something in exchange" That is kinda like saying I do not like paying for automobiles when walking is currently fre
That's a bad analogy. The updates are 'free' in the sense that I do not have to pay any additional money for them. Under the DMCA I can not legally reverse engineer TenTec's SW in order to make a mod
Bob, I am not sure if it is a good analogy or not, but all I am saying is I think we could expect more if we were paying for it. All I feel I am entitled to is what I got when I opened the box. Any i
I agree with you Rich, Another problem that arises when a company "sells" open software is support. Suppose Ten Tec sold the internal software license to we users. Now........being the expert program
Perhaps I've not been clear. I'm not asking them to take away from those who like a complete package. I never said it was unethical or unfair either. All I am looking for is a copy of the source code
Who started this willing to pay a yearly fee for firmware updates? Are all you let's pay more people out of your minds?! That is like asking the Boss to take 50 dollars a week out of your paycheck fo
I think the whole "lets pay more" is taken out of context. Lets look at the much bigger picture. First of all, let me turn my statement around and say. " I want more and I am willing to pay for it" A
Hi Keith and the group, LOL, LOL, LOL!! I have a reputation of being a very generous person, but you know, I've been amused reading this myself. I'm as fully perplexed by this non-sense as Keith. Who
"Who in the world would cheer on paying out more taxes or paying out of pocket for what is already cheerfully provided" Mike, you are assuming what they cheerfully provide" is even close to what it c
Very well stated. Also consider that there are two different levels of code writing involved here. One is control software and the other is the low-level DSP code. The control code for the computer c
Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX)
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 08:14:56 -0500
Rich: I'd agree. Typically companies do make initial "bug fixes" on a FOC basis. However, there is a point when most will start charging for software releases. These releases do include new enhanceme
Hi Bob, I want to disagree with what you said in a recent post: "I'd agree. I recall loading and running Windows 1.01 and all the revisions that followed. Just recently I've changed to Windows XP fro