[TRLog] TRLog in the RTTY Sprint (long)

[LogWindows@aol.com]

Ken,

This is NOT what I said.

First, Windows is a stable O/S, much more stable than dos. In my previous 
life, I wrote Operating System code for The Software Link, on the 
Multiuser/Multitasking version of DOS called PC-MOS. From that experience, 
and my time with Microsoft and my friends at Microsoft, I do know that both 
the 9X and NT based versions of Windows are much better code than DOS ever 
was.

Second, the goal would have been to create a functionality equivalent of 
TRLog for the Windows O/S. While some features would be changed (i.e 
networking, etc), it would just take time to have a full featured version.

The reason we didn't proceed with the project is that after I compiled the 
results of the survey, most users wanted a DOS version of TRLog that worked 
well under Windows. Many of the users didn't want to pay one dime for the 
Windows upgrade, even though I was going to invest over $100,000 to do it.  

Also, Tree would have gotten a royalty and W4SCO (owner of Log Windows) would 
have gotten a royalty from each sale (as they should), so I didn't see any 
way to repay the investment or even look at making a profit, if the current 
userbase wanted the Windows version for free or didn't want it all.

And if any if you think that there is a profit in writing ham software, you 
may want to rethink you assumptions.  :) The ham market is such a tiny 
market, even as compared to hobby markets like Stage Magic and woodworking.

Rick - W4PC



In a message dated 10/15/2001 9:48:27 AM Central Daylight Time, 
kharker@cs.utexas.edu writes:

> The proposed port of TR Log to Windows would have been done by W4PC and
>  others at Creative Services Software - not by Tree.  W4PC did a little 
>  research and concluded that TR Log users would not be likely to switch
>  from a stable, feature-rich product on a real-time OS to something that 
>  (at least for a while would be) a developing, feature-poor product on an
>  unstable OS.  You could argue that a better market to target would be 
>  those who are not already invested in TR Log, but nonetheless, that's 
>  why W4PC claims to have dropped the project.
>  

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/trlog
Submissions:              trlog@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  trlog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-trlog@contesting.com
Feature Wishlist:	  http://web.jzap.com/n6tr/trwish.html