[Logic] Re: LOGic digest, Vol 1 #390 - 9 msgs
[email protected]
[email protected]
Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:15:38 -0400
Dear logic-request,
--
Best regards,
Scott A. Blystone
Amateur Radio Station NY2A
mailto:[email protected]
ICQ #201506666
Tuesday, July 8, 2003, 3:58:01 PM, you wrote:
lrmqn> Send LOGic mailing list submissions to
lrmqn> [email protected]
lrmqn> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
lrmqn> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
lrmqn> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
lrmqn> [email protected]
lrmqn> You can reach the person managing the list at
lrmqn> [email protected]
lrmqn> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
lrmqn> than "Re: Contents of LOGic digest..."
lrmqn> Today's Topics:
lrmqn> 1. Re: Latest version of Logic??? (K1UQ)
lrmqn> 2. Re: Latest version of Logic??? (rojomn)
lrmqn> 3. The Future of LOGic (was Test) (Bob Johnson)
lrmqn> 4. RE: The Future of LOGic (was Test) (Dave)
lrmqn> 5. RE: The Future of LOGic (was Test) (AB2E Darrell)
lrmqn> 6. Re: Latest version of Logic??? (Bob Johnson)
lrmqn> 7. Re: Latest version of Logic??? (Bob Johnson)
lrmqn> 8. RE: Latest version of Logic??? (Robert Carroll)
lrmqn> 9. RE: The Future of LOGic (was Test) (rojomn)
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 1
lrmqn> From: "K1UQ" <[email protected]>
lrmqn> To: <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
lrmqn> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 07:23:51 -0400
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Tough? you bet. I just can't understand why the version number isn't part of
lrmqn> the filename.
lrmqn> This is so very typical in the CAD software industry. As part of my job,
lrmqn> I'm responsible to ensure latest versions including patches are downloaded
lrmqn> from our software supplier sites. They all include as a minimum (a) version
lrmqn> number as part of the downloadable filename (b) downloadable files (patch
lrmqn> and / or full release for recent releases) (c) downloadable text file
lrmqn> specifying what's been fixed, changed or added, etc. for each release.
lrmqn> The above is always organized in a table, with at least the current version
lrmqn> and its patches as well as prior version (example ver 5 and 4 for one
lrmqn> product we use and ver 3,2 & 1 for another that we use). Everything is
lrmqn> clearly demarcated.
lrmqn> Regards, Bill K1UQ
lrmqn> ----- Original Message -----
lrmqn> From: "Carl Smidt" <[email protected]>
lrmqn> To: <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 14:58 PM
lrmqn> Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
>> Yes, it appears to be the latest.
>>>> 73, Carl VE9OV
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "C.M. Christensen" <[email protected]>
>> To: "Logic" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 3:11 PM
>> Subject: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
>>>>>> > I am running Logic 6.0.162. Is this the latest version? Sure is tough
>> > to tell what version you are downloading from the site until you install
>> it.
>> > --
>> > 73,
>> > Chris, AC�M
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > LOGic mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
>> >
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> LOGic mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 2
lrmqn> Date: 2003年7月08日 06:56:12 -0500
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> From: rojomn <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> At 06:23 AM 7/8/2003, you wrote:
>>Tough? you bet. I just can't understand why the version number isn't part of
>>the filename.
>>>>This is so very typical in the CAD software industry. As part of my job,
>>I'm responsible to ensure latest versions including patches are downloaded
lrmqn> This has been requested over and over but totally ignored by the author. I
lrmqn> don't understand it either but we just have to live with it. Apparently he
lrmqn> is for some unfathomable reason strictly opposed to doing it. He does not
lrmqn> say way, just totally ignores it. This is the only case of poor customer
lrmqn> relations I can point to with logic, very strange?
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 3
lrmqn> Date: 2003年7月08日 14:13:37 -0400
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> From: Bob Johnson <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Hi:
lrmqn> Yes, the list has been very quiet lately.
lrmqn> I also notice a large number of familiar names I used to see on
lrmqn> this list are conspicuously absent. I've been a list member since
lrmqn> 1997 or 1998 and have noticed a general decline in posts.
lrmqn> Is LOGic still being made? I would say YES, based on their web site.
lrmqn> Will LOGic still be made in the future is the real question !!!
lrmqn> I know of at least 3 copies of LOGic 5 that the owners have removed
lrmqn> from their computers and basically thrown away. The owners say they
lrmqn> have absolutely no intention of ever upgrading to LOGic 6 !!!
lrmqn> Once a software company starts to get a reputation of being
lrmqn> unresponsive to its' users problems and have their suggestions and
lrmqn> help requests go ignored, the customers tend to become "Former customer"
lrmqn> and migrate to Software that does give the support they expect !!!
lrmqn> Will this happen to LOGic ??? Only time will tell.
lrmqn> Personally I think LOGic is a great program with a LOT of potential.
lrmqn> However, it has a number of "Basic Logging Problems" that go un-addressed
lrmqn> year after year. In MY opinion the first thing a logging program must do
lrmqn> is log and log correctly with a minimum of operator intervention. All
lrmqn> other things are bells and whistles.
lrmqn> On a bright note, after downloading LOGic 6 DEMO the other night I found
lrmqn> that the DX Calculator has been fixed to the extent that it will now
lrmqn> calculate distance and bearing for adjacent close in grid squares such
lrmqn> as EM73ja to EM73jb. This function never worked in LOGic 5 DEMO, LOGic 5,
lrmqn> or LOGic 6 Beta. Many complaints.
lrmqn> Now if we could only get the data from the "Info Window" transferred to
lrmqn> the "Log Window". Oh, Well !!!
lrmqn> 73
lrmqn> Bob, K1VU
lrmqn> At 12:45 PM 07/07/03 , you wrote:
>>This is a test!
>>>>I have not receive any e-mail from anyone, is Logic software no longer being
lrmqn> made?� The lattest upgrade is June 3rd?
>>>>73's
>>>>DE WA4CVV
>>>>Jennifer
>>>>>>---------------------------------
>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only 29ドル.95 per month!
>>>>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>>multipart/alternative
>>� text/plain (text body -- kept)
>>� text/html
>>The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
>>or had an attachment.� Attachments are not allowed.� To learn how
>>to post in Plain-Text go to:
lrmqn> <http://www.expita.com/nomime.html>http://www.expita.com/nomime.html� ---
>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>><http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/mail
lrmqn> man/listinfo/logic
>>
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 4
lrmqn> From: "Dave" <[email protected]>
lrmqn> To: <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: RE: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
lrmqn> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 13:41:00 -0500
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Hi Bob:
lrmqn> I guess I'm a little confused when a user talks about lack of support. =
lrmqn> First
lrmqn> of all I am running Ver. 6.0.162. If nothing else, this says there has =
lrmqn> been
lrmqn> 162 fixes to the original Ver.6 since it came out. I wonder why the =
lrmqn> author
lrmqn> would make this many corrections to a program they don't support. And if =
lrmqn> you
lrmqn> really want support, call Microsoft and ask them a question about =
lrmqn> Windows 95
lrmqn> and see what they tell you. When is the last time you have contacted =
lrmqn> Dennis
lrmqn> and asked him to fix a problem or do you just sit around and wait for =
lrmqn> other
lrmqn> users to do it for you?
lrmqn> You also mention "it has a number of "Basic Logging Problems" that go
lrmqn> un-addressed year after year". Please elaborate; maybe I don't know what
lrmqn> "Basic Logging Problems" are.
lrmqn> You say you know 3 LOGic owners that removed LOGic 5 from their =
lrmqn> computer.
lrmqn> Make that 4; I removed it when I upgraded to LOGic 6 and have never =
lrmqn> looked
lrmqn> back. Any problem that I have ever had I referred to Dennis and it was
lrmqn> resolved. If you really want to bash something, why don't you post the =
lrmqn> facts
lrmqn> instead of a bunch of hearsay that doesn't mean anything?
lrmqn> LOGic6 is still one of the best General Purpose logging programs =
lrmqn> available
lrmqn> today at any price.
lrmqn> Jacques
lrmqn> Email [email protected]
lrmqn> -----Original Message-----
lrmqn> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] =
lrmqn> On
lrmqn> Behalf Of Bob Johnson
lrmqn> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 1:14 PM
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Subject: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
lrmqn> Hi:
lrmqn> Yes, the list has been very quiet lately.
lrmqn> I also notice a large number of familiar names I used to see on
lrmqn> this list are conspicuously absent. I've been a list member since
lrmqn> 1997 or 1998 and have noticed a general decline in posts.
lrmqn> Is LOGic still being made? I would say YES, based on their web site.
lrmqn> Will LOGic still be made in the future is the real question !!!
lrmqn> I know of at least 3 copies of LOGic 5 that the owners have removed
lrmqn> from their computers and basically thrown away. The owners say they
lrmqn> have absolutely no intention of ever upgrading to LOGic 6 !!!
lrmqn> Once a software company starts to get a reputation of being
lrmqn> unresponsive to its' users problems and have their suggestions and
lrmqn> help requests go ignored, the customers tend to become "Former customer"
lrmqn> and migrate to Software that does give the support they expect !!!
lrmqn> Will this happen to LOGic ??? Only time will tell.
lrmqn> Personally I think LOGic is a great program with a LOT of potential.
lrmqn> However, it has a number of "Basic Logging Problems" that go =
lrmqn> un-addressed
lrmqn> year after year. In MY opinion the first thing a logging program must =
lrmqn> do
lrmqn> is log and log correctly with a minimum of operator intervention. All
lrmqn> other things are bells and whistles.
lrmqn> On a bright note, after downloading LOGic 6 DEMO the other night I found
lrmqn> that the DX Calculator has been fixed to the extent that it will now
lrmqn> calculate distance and bearing for adjacent close in grid squares such
lrmqn> as EM73ja to EM73jb. This function never worked in LOGic 5 DEMO, LOGic =
lrmqn> 5,
lrmqn> or LOGic 6 Beta. Many complaints.
lrmqn> Now if we could only get the data from the "Info Window" transferred to
lrmqn> the "Log Window". Oh, Well !!!
lrmqn> 73
lrmqn> Bob, K1VU
lrmqn> At 12:45 PM 07/07/03 , you wrote:
>>This is a test!
>>=20
>>I have not receive any e-mail from anyone, is Logic software no longer
lrmqn> being
lrmqn> made?=A0 The lattest upgrade is June 3rd?
>>=20
>>73's
>>=20
>>DE WA4CVV
>>=20
>>Jennifer
>>>>>>---------------------------------
>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only 29ドル.95 per month!
>>>>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>>multipart/alternative
>>=A0 text/plain (text body -- kept)
>>=A0 text/html
>>The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
>>or had an attachment.=A0 Attachments are not allowed.=A0 To learn how
>>to post in Plain-Text go to:
lrmqn> <http://www.expita.com/nomime.html>http://www.expita.com/nomime.html=A0 =
lrmqn> ---
>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>><http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/ma=
lrmqn> il
lrmqn> man/listinfo/logic
>>=20
lrmqn> _______________________________________________
lrmqn> LOGic mailing list
lrmqn> [email protected]
lrmqn> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 5
lrmqn> From: "AB2E Darrell" <[email protected]>
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Subject: RE: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
lrmqn> Date: 2003年7月08日 14:48:53 -0400
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> I have experienced nothing but fast and timely support from Dennis. He
lrmqn> always responds to my emails (usually in 24hours or less) and has always
lrmqn> solved any of the issues I have had with Logic ( I am a Logic 5.3 user at
lrmqn> the moment).
lrmqn> Bravo to Dennis! Keep up the great work!
lrmqn> 73 Darrell AB2E
>>From: "Dave" <[email protected]>
>>Reply-To: [email protected]
>>To: <[email protected]>
>>Subject: RE: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
>>Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 13:41:00 -0500
>>>>Hi Bob:
>>>>I guess I'm a little confused when a user talks about lack of support.
>>First
>>of all I am running Ver. 6.0.162. If nothing else, this says there has been
>>162 fixes to the original Ver.6 since it came out. I wonder why the author
>>would make this many corrections to a program they don't support. And if
>>you
>>really want support, call Microsoft and ask them a question about Windows
>>95
>>and see what they tell you. When is the last time you have contacted Dennis
>>and asked him to fix a problem or do you just sit around and wait for other
>>users to do it for you?
>>>>You also mention "it has a number of "Basic Logging Problems" that go
>>un-addressed year after year". Please elaborate; maybe I don't know what
>>"Basic Logging Problems" are.
>>>>You say you know 3 LOGic owners that removed LOGic 5 from their computer.
>>Make that 4; I removed it when I upgraded to LOGic 6 and have never looked
>>back. Any problem that I have ever had I referred to Dennis and it was
>>resolved. If you really want to bash something, why don't you post the
>>facts
>>instead of a bunch of hearsay that doesn't mean anything?
>>>>LOGic6 is still one of the best General Purpose logging programs available
>>today at any price.
>>>>Jacques
>>Email [email protected]
>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>Behalf Of Bob Johnson
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 1:14 PM
>>To: [email protected]
>>Subject: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
>>>>Hi:
>>Yes, the list has been very quiet lately.
>>>>I also notice a large number of familiar names I used to see on
>>this list are conspicuously absent. I've been a list member since
>>1997 or 1998 and have noticed a general decline in posts.
>>>>Is LOGic still being made? I would say YES, based on their web site.
>>Will LOGic still be made in the future is the real question !!!
>>I know of at least 3 copies of LOGic 5 that the owners have removed
>>from their computers and basically thrown away. The owners say they
>>have absolutely no intention of ever upgrading to LOGic 6 !!!
>>>>Once a software company starts to get a reputation of being
>>unresponsive to its' users problems and have their suggestions and
>>help requests go ignored, the customers tend to become "Former customer"
>>and migrate to Software that does give the support they expect !!!
>>>>Will this happen to LOGic ??? Only time will tell.
>>>>Personally I think LOGic is a great program with a LOT of potential.
>>However, it has a number of "Basic Logging Problems" that go un-addressed
>>year after year. In MY opinion the first thing a logging program must do
>>is log and log correctly with a minimum of operator intervention. All
>>other things are bells and whistles.
>>>>On a bright note, after downloading LOGic 6 DEMO the other night I found
>>that the DX Calculator has been fixed to the extent that it will now
>>calculate distance and bearing for adjacent close in grid squares such
>>as EM73ja to EM73jb. This function never worked in LOGic 5 DEMO, LOGic 5,
>>or LOGic 6 Beta. Many complaints.
>>>>Now if we could only get the data from the "Info Window" transferred to
>>the "Log Window". Oh, Well !!!
>>>>73
>>Bob, K1VU
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>At 12:45 PM 07/07/03 , you wrote:
>> >This is a test!
>> >
>> >I have not receive any e-mail from anyone, is Logic software no longer
>>being
>>made?� The lattest upgrade is June 3rd?
>> >
>> >73's
>> >
>> >DE WA4CVV
>> >
>> >Jennifer
>> >
>> >
>> >---------------------------------
>> >Do you Yahoo!?
>> >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only 29ドル.95 per month!
>> >
>> >--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>> >multipart/alternative
>> >� text/plain (text body -- kept)
>> >� text/html
>> >The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
>> >or had an attachment.� Attachments are not allowed.� To learn how
>> >to post in Plain-Text go to:
>><http://www.expita.com/nomime.html>http://www.expita.com/nomime.html� ---
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >LOGic mailing list
>> >[email protected]
>> ><http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/mail
>>man/listinfo/logic
>> >
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
>>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
lrmqn> _________________________________________________________________
lrmqn> Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
lrmqn> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 6
lrmqn> Date: 2003年7月08日 15:05:49 -0400
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> From: Bob Johnson <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Hi:
lrmqn> This is one of my pet peeves with LOGic also. It makes no sense to
lrmqn> me either. I can't see that it would do any harm and it would sure
lrmqn> makes things easier for the user to know where he is version wise.
lrmqn> As far as the "Only case of poor customer relations", there are many
lrmqn> where the questions and inquiries are just go ignored, no reply at all.
lrmqn> 73
lrmqn> Bob, K1VU
lrmqn> At 07:56 AM 07/08/03 , you wrote:
>>At 06:23 AM 7/8/2003, you wrote:
>>>Tough? you bet. I just can't understand why the version number isn't part of
>>>the filename.
>>>>>>This is so very typical in the CAD software industry.� As part of my job,
>>>I'm responsible to ensure latest versions including patches are downloaded
>>>>This has been requested over and over but totally ignored by the author. I
>>don't understand it either but we just have to live with it. Apparently he
>>is for some unfathomable reason strictly opposed to doing it. He does not
>>say way, just totally ignores it. This is the only case of poor customer
>>relations I can point to with logic, very strange?
>>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>><http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/mail
lrmqn> man/listinfo/logic
>>
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 7
lrmqn> Date: 2003年7月08日 15:11:42 -0400
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> From: Bob Johnson <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> HI:
lrmqn> I agree !! It's always nice to be able to go to the archives and see just
lrmqn> versions of updates you have just in case a problem pops up and you have
lrmqn> to drop back to a previous version.
lrmqn> 73
lrmqn> Bob, K1VU
lrmqn> At 07:23 AM 07/08/03 , you wrote:
>>Tough? you bet. I just can't understand why the version number isn't part of
>>the filename.
>>>>This is so very typical in the CAD software industry.� As part of my job,
>>I'm responsible to ensure latest versions including patches are downloaded
>>from our software supplier sites.� They all include as a minimum (a) version
>>number as part of the downloadable filename (b) downloadable files (patch
>>and / or full release for recent releases) (c) downloadable text file
>>specifying what's been fixed, changed or added, etc. for each release.
>>>>The above is always organized in a table, with at least the current version
>>and its patches as well as prior version (example ver 5 and 4 for one
>>product we use and ver 3,2 & 1 for another that we use).� Everything is
>>clearly demarcated.
>>>>Regards,� Bill� K1UQ
>>>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Carl Smidt" <[email protected]>
>>To: <[email protected]>
>>Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 14:58 PM
>>Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
>>>>>>> Yes, it appears to be the latest.
>>>>>> 73,��� Carl�� VE9OV
>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "C.M. Christensen" <[email protected]>
>>> To: "Logic" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 3:11 PM
>>> Subject: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
>>>>>>>>> > I am running Logic 6.0.162.� Is this the latest version? Sure is tough
>>> > to tell what version you are downloading from the site until you install
>>> it.
>>> > --
>>> > 73,
>>> > Chris, AC�M
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > LOGic mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> >
lrmqn> <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/mailma
lrmqn> n/listinfo/logic
>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LOGic mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>>lrmqn> <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/mailma
lrmqn> n/listinfo/logic
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>><http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/mail
lrmqn> man/listinfo/logic
>>
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 8
lrmqn> From: "Robert Carroll" <[email protected]>
lrmqn> To: <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: RE: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
lrmqn> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 15:20:16 -0400
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> I vote for the version number. I have never seen any "basic" problems =
lrmqn> with
lrmqn> it but a few elusive ones that seemed to affect only me or a very small
lrmqn> number of users. These are tough to reproduce or track down but they =
lrmqn> have
lrmqn> always been solved. I have also suggested things to put on the "wish =
lrmqn> list"
lrmqn> and many of them have made it in later versions or updates.
lrmqn> I have known a few hams who have shied away from Logic because it is too
lrmqn> complex. From my viewpoint it is the complexity that gives it the
lrmqn> flexibility and power. To each his own.
lrmqn> Bob W2WG
lrmqn> Bob W2WG
lrmqn> -----Original Message-----
lrmqn> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] =
lrmqn> On
lrmqn> Behalf Of Bob Johnson
lrmqn> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 3:06 PM
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> Subject: Re: [Logic] Latest version of Logic???
lrmqn> Hi:
lrmqn> This is one of my pet peeves with LOGic also. It makes no sense to
lrmqn> me either. I can't see that it would do any harm and it would sure
lrmqn> makes things easier for the user to know where he is version wise.
lrmqn> As far as the "Only case of poor customer relations", there are many
lrmqn> where the questions and inquiries are just go ignored, no reply at all.
lrmqn> 73
lrmqn> Bob, K1VU
lrmqn> At 07:56 AM 07/08/03 , you wrote:
>>At 06:23 AM 7/8/2003, you wrote:
>>>Tough? you bet. I just can't understand why the version number isn't =
lrmqn> part
lrmqn> of
>>>the filename.
>>>>>>This is so very typical in the CAD software industry.=A0 As part of my =
lrmqn> job,
>>>I'm responsible to ensure latest versions including patches are =
lrmqn> downloaded
>>>>This has been requested over and over but totally ignored by the =
lrmqn> author. I=20
>>don't understand it either but we just have to live with it. Apparently =
lrmqn> he=20
>>is for some unfathomable reason strictly opposed to doing it. He does =
lrmqn> not=20
>>say way, just totally ignores it. This is the only case of poor =
lrmqn> customer=20
>>relations I can point to with logic, very strange?
>>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>LOGic mailing list
>>[email protected]
>><http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic>http://mailman.qth.net/ma=
lrmqn> il
lrmqn> man/listinfo/logic
>>=20
lrmqn> _______________________________________________
lrmqn> LOGic mailing list
lrmqn> [email protected]
lrmqn> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> Message: 9
lrmqn> Date: 2003年7月08日 14:52:07 -0500
lrmqn> To: [email protected]
lrmqn> From: rojomn <[email protected]>
lrmqn> Subject: RE: [Logic] The Future of LOGic (was Test)
lrmqn> Reply-To: [email protected]
lrmqn> At 01:48 PM 7/8/2003, you wrote:
>>I have experienced nothing but fast and timely support from Dennis. He
>>always responds to my emails (usually in 24hours or less) and has always
>>solved any of the issues I have had with Logic ( I am a Logic 5.3 user at
>>the moment).
lrmqn> I can pretty much say the same thing. He responds to fix problems but is
lrmqn> not very open to suggestions for function or design. I have very seldom had
lrmqn> to wait more than 2 days for a reply, but often had to wait MUCH longer for
lrmqn> a fix. I put the support level of Logic near the top of the list.
lrmqn> It is still the best General Purpose program but it cannot cone anything
lrmqn> close to holding a candle to the FREE DXLABS suite if you interest is DX.
lrmqn> In that case the DXLAB suite wins hands down, if you have XP and a
lrmqn> reasonable size machine to run it. It SHINES in dual monitor support.
lrmqn> As for support , there is no program in existence commercial or free that
lrmqn> comes even close to the level of support given to DXLAB users. It is not
lrmqn> days, it is OFTEN minutes and usually less than a day until a fix is out if
lrmqn> needed. I don't know how he does it and I DO NOT expect Dennis to do that.
lrmqn> He is in it for money and he cannot give that kind of time and still do his
lrmqn> day job.
lrmqn> I have only one real complaint and that is that the latest version is
lrmqn> impossible to recognize without download and install. There is NO EXCUSE,
lrmqn> NONE IMHO at least for not giving the file a mnemonic name.
lrmqn> Nevertheless, for now Logic is till my General Purpose program, but who
lrmqn> knows for how long. I am very unlikely to spend any more money on it.
lrmqn> I feel sorry for Dennis and anyone else that is trying to make a commercial
lrmqn> program today for Ham Radio. The market is small and there is a HUGE amount
lrmqn> of GOOD free software, so why pay?
lrmqn> --__--__--
lrmqn> _______________________________________________
lrmqn> LOGic mailing list
lrmqn> [email protected]
lrmqn> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
lrmqn> End of LOGic Digest