473,325 Members | 2,774 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,325 software developers and data experts.

About Trolltech QT OpenSource license.

Hi to all,

i am coming from the Microsoft (.net) world and at the quest of
finding the right GUI toolkit that i can use from Python, i have two
obvious choices to choose from: wxPython and Qt.

Both are looking very good. Qt has Qt designer, a tool that really
reminds me of the forms designers that we have in VS.Net.The
productivity someone can gain from tools like these can be really
astonished.
I saw at the forum here that a lot of debate is coming from the
"strange" interpretation of it's Open Source Edition lisence.
After a lot of reading i was under the impression (and many others
with me) that even a stand alone developer working in-house at company
cannot use Qt OS Edition and must buy the commercial lisence.

I sent an emai to them today and i think their response is
interesting, so i appose it here;

################################################## ###
Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Qt Open Source Edition.

The open source edition may be used for either your own private use or
for an application used only internally by your company if the
application is developed by you on company time. With internal
company use under the GPL it is absolutely imperative that the
application not be distributed outside of the legal entity. If this
happens then the GPL source distribution requirements (as well as all
other GPL
requirements) will take effect. The internal use by the company falls
under the "private modification" exception to the GPL.

Please note that if you begin your application development with the
GPL version, that application must be GPL licensed and Trolltech does
not permit developers to start with the Qt Open Source Edition and
later convert to a commercial license.

Good luck with your development and please contact sa***@trolltech.com
if your company wishes to purchase a commercial Qt license at some
point in the future.

Apr 10 '07 #1
21 1808
king kikapu napisa(a):
I saw at the forum here that a lot of debate is coming from the
"strange" interpretation of it's Open Source Edition lisence.
After a lot of reading i was under the impression (and many others
with me) that even a stand alone developer working in-house at company
cannot use Qt OS Edition and must buy the commercial lisence.
This is a bullsh*t. Qt is free (as in "free speech") on GPL. Nothing
stops you from using it in any commercial project if only it fits the
licensing terms (i.o.w. it's free software). This specially applies to
inhouse development, as in such case there's no "distribution".
I sent an emai to them today and i think their response is
interesting, so i appose it here;

################################################## ###
Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Qt Open Source Edition.

The open source edition may be used for either your own private use or
for an application used only internally by your company if the
application is developed by you on company time. With internal
company use under the GPL it is absolutely imperative that the
application not be distributed outside of the legal entity. If this
happens then the GPL source distribution requirements (as well as all
other GPL
requirements) will take effect. The internal use by the company falls
under the "private modification" exception to the GPL.

Please note that if you begin your application development with the
GPL version, that application must be GPL licensed and Trolltech does
not permit developers to start with the Qt Open Source Edition and
later convert to a commercial license.

Good luck with your development and please contact sa***@trolltech.com
if your company wishes to purchase a commercial Qt license at some
point in the future.
Hey, there's no such statement here. Where did you get this "must buy
the commercial lisence"?

Plus, this (sales)person forgot to state clearly, that GPL covers only
distribution, not the cost of software. If you manage to get some hot
cash for selling sources of your GPL-ed program, the license would not
try to stop you from doing that. ;)

--
Jarek Zgoda
http://jpa.berlios.de/
Apr 10 '07 #2

/ Jarek Zgoda :
king kikapu napisa(a):

This is a bullsh*t. Qt is free (as in "free speech") on GPL. Nothing
stops you from using it in any commercial project if only it fits the
licensing terms (i.o.w. it's free software). This specially applies to
inhouse development, as in such case there's no "distribution".
Hmmm...how a commercial software (that means i get paid for give it)
it will be consider "free software" ?
I ask because i surely do not understand correctly the GPL lisence and
all that stuff.
Hey, there's no such statement here. Where did you get this "must buy
the commercial lisence"?
Good point! I got it because at the last portion of my email, i asked
for it. I asked them that:
"And in the case i want to build something that i want to later sell
(as an individual)..."

so i got it back.

Plus, this (sales)person forgot to state clearly, that GPL covers only
distribution, not the cost of software. If you manage to get some hot
cash for selling sources of your GPL-ed program, the license would not
try to stop you from doing that. ;)
As i said, i do not fully understand all this license stuff. All i
want to ask is, i can make GPL software and gain money from this ? And
if that so, then why they "force" you to buy the commercial lisence in
such case ?

Apr 10 '07 #3
king kikapu wrote:
As i said, i do not fully understand all this license stuff. All i
want to ask is, i can make GPL software and gain money from this ?
Yes. Nothing in the GPL prevents you from developing and marketing an
application for as high a price as you can get from it.

HOWEVER:

you will have to distribute the source code to your application to
anyone who purchases a binary from you.

AND:

they will be permitted under the GPL to redistribute your application,
source code and all. The GPL would allow them to buy your application
from you and then redistribute it at no cost to others.

Most commercial shrink-wrap software depends on enforcing restrictions
on end users to compel a revenue stream: withholding some of the
application's functionality prior to payment, hiding the locking
algorithm inside obfuscated source code, and prohibiting modification
and redistribution of the application and/or its code. If this is your
business model, then the GPL is probably not for you.

If you use the GPL, you would have to make your locking alogrithim as
plain as day; someone out there would likely have the knowledge to patch
your software to work without the locking algorithm, assuming they
obtained the binary and source code legally (either by purchasing it
from you or obtaining it from someone who purchased it from you); and
they would be legally free to redistribute the patched application, with
or without cost.

Of course, there's no guarantee this will happen; such patching also
happens with closed-source software. But many commercial developers look
at the GPL and decide that this is a risk they do not want to take.

--Kevin

--
Kevin Walzer
Code by Kevin
http://www.codebykevin.com
Apr 10 '07 #4
king kikapu napisa(a):
>This is a bullsh*t. Qt is free (as in "free speech") on GPL. Nothing
stops you from using it in any commercial project if only it fits the
licensing terms (i.o.w. it's free software). This specially applies to
inhouse development, as in such case there's no "distribution".

Hmmm...how a commercial software (that means i get paid for give it)
it will be consider "free software" ?
I ask because i surely do not understand correctly the GPL lisence and
all that stuff.
The GPL is about distribution of software. If you provide your program
with sources and allow redistribution under provisions of GPL, it will
be free (as you provide some "freedoms" listed in the license
statement), even if you earn cash for it. It's "free as in freedom" (or
free speech), not as in "free beer". Please, contact your local FSF,
CreativeCommons or ISOC lawyer to get an advice if you feel you need a
lawyer's assistance. For the brief explanation of the problem, see
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html. This document should cover
most cases. ;)
>Plus, this (sales)person forgot to state clearly, that GPL covers only
distribution, not the cost of software. If you manage to get some hot
cash for selling sources of your GPL-ed program, the license would not
try to stop you from doing that. ;)

As i said, i do not fully understand all this license stuff. All i
want to ask is, i can make GPL software and gain money from this ? And
if that so, then why they "force" you to buy the commercial lisence in
such case ?
They cann't and the don't. If you obey GPL rules, you're right. The
(sales)person you had a conversation with is, well, just a salesperson.
Trolltech makes money from selling commercial licenses, so these persons
will always try to persuade you to buying a license or two, "just in
case". ;)

--
Jarek Zgoda
http://jpa.berlios.de/
Apr 10 '07 #5
On 10 Apr 2007 12:29:36 -0700, king kikapu <ab********@panafonet.grwrote:
Hi to all,

i am coming from the Microsoft (.net) world and at the quest of
finding the right GUI toolkit that i can use from Python, i have two
obvious choices to choose from: wxPython and Qt.

Both are looking very good. Qt has Qt designer, a tool that really
reminds me of the forms designers that we have in VS.Net.The
productivity someone can gain from tools like these can be really
astonished.
There is another alternative: Dabo, which wraps the wxPython toolkit.
It has a GUI designer, although not as polished as the Qt Designer.
Check out some of their screencasts to see their tools in action. You
can find them at http://dabodev.com/documentation

--

# p.d.
Apr 10 '07 #6

/ Peter Decker :
There is another alternative: Dabo, which wraps the wxPython toolkit.
It has a GUI designer, although not as polished as the Qt Designer.
Check out some of their screencasts to see their tools in action. You
can find them at http://dabodev.com/documentation
I am aware but i prefer to use PythonCard if i choose wxPython over
Qt. I think Dadbo has a lot of work to be done, it is surely very
promising, thanks!
@ Kevin and Jarek :
thanks for the enlightening of that GPL thing. So, if i understand, i
create my Python software using Qt as my GUI, i earn the money for it
with the obligation to release my source code and somewhere in my
files i explicilty write that this software is under the GPL lisence,
is that correct ?? And i am legal all the way out ??

So why these people at Trolltech have the word "Commercial" at their
mouth all the time ?? I can understand of course that money is all
about but becauce they released Qt under GPL they simply cannot
prevent anyone from gaining money using it.

Apr 10 '07 #7
king kikapu wrote:
>

@ Kevin and Jarek :
thanks for the enlightening of that GPL thing. So, if i understand, i
create my Python software using Qt as my GUI, i earn the money for it
with the obligation to release my source code and somewhere in my
files i explicilty write that this software is under the GPL lisence,
is that correct ?? And i am legal all the way out ??
That's correct, as far as I know. (IANAL)
>
So why these people at Trolltech have the word "Commercial" at their
mouth all the time ?? I can understand of course that money is all
about but becauce they released Qt under GPL they simply cannot
prevent anyone from gaining money using it.
In this case, "commercial" == "proprietary" == "closed-source." If your
source is released in complicance with the GPL, you don't have to buy a
license from Trolltech.

--
Kevin Walzer
Code by Kevin
http://www.codebykevin.com
Apr 10 '07 #8
@ Kevin and Jarek :
thanks for the enlightening of that GPL thing. So, if i understand, i
create my Python software using Qt as my GUI, i earn the money for it
with the obligation to release my source code and somewhere in my
files i explicilty write that this software is under the GPL lisence,
is that correct ?? And i am legal all the way out ??
This is correct... but you should also understand the GPL license aswell.
So why these people at Trolltech have the word "Commercial" at their
mouth all the time ?? I can understand of course that money is all
about but becauce they released Qt under GPL they simply cannot
prevent anyone from gaining money using it.
That is a mistake, the oposite of libre software is non-libre or
proprietary.
--
damjan
Apr 10 '07 #9
king kikapu wrote:
As i said, i do not fully understand all this license stuff. All i
want to ask is, i can make GPL software and gain money from this ? And
if that so, then why they "force" you to buy the commercial lisence in
such case ?
Others have given good answers. I would only like to clarify what I think is the
source of confusion here. While the FSF and many open source advocates make a
distinction between the words "commercial" (meaning that someone derives money
from distributing the software, whether it is GPLed or not) and "proprietary"
(meaning that the software is not being distributed under an open source license
but one that restricts user's rights), Trolltech abuses the term "commercial" to
mean "proprietary" in this case.

If you obey the terms of the GPL and still manage to derive money from it, you
don't need Trolltech's "commercial" license. Just be sure that you do obey the
terms of the GPL; it's not entirely trivial to build a business model around it.
Such a business will be somewhat different from one that uses proprietary licenses.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

Apr 11 '07 #10
On Apr 11, 10:56 am, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.comwrote:
Others have given good answers. I would only like to clarify what I think is the
source of confusion here. While the FSF and many open source advocates make a
distinction between the words "commercial" (meaning that someone derives money
from distributing the software, whether it is GPLed or not) and "proprietary"
(meaning that the software is not being distributed under an open source license
but one that restricts user's rights), Trolltech abuses the term "commercial" to
mean "proprietary" in this case.
Ok, i see...So i can use Qt OS edition and earn money from this as
long as i explicitly say (is a reference to a GPL in a readme text
file enough for this ?) that this software is under the GPL lisence
and i have the obligation to give the source code with it.
I will reply to that email of Trolltec's today and i will tell them
about the things mentioned here, basically just the sentence i wrote
above.
I see what they will reply and post it here...

Apr 11 '07 #11
On 11 Apr, 11:51, "king kikapu" <aboudou...@panafonet.grwrote:
>
Ok, i see...So i can use Qt OS edition and earn money from this as
long as i explicitly say (is a reference to a GPL in a readme text
file enough for this ?) that this software is under the GPL lisence
and i have the obligation to give the source code with it.
I'll leave the specifics of this case to one side and say that for any
software that you intend to distribute under the GPL, you should
provide references to the licence at least in some kind of text file
(I use COPYING.txt for this), but also in your source files (I
typically use module docstrings, but I imagine that comment lines
might be better in some respects), as well as a copy of the licence (I
use LICENCE.txt for this). You should find the licence text in any GPL-
licensed package as well as at the FSF site:

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html

The "making money" aspect can be simplified to this: you can sell
copies of your software, but anyone receiving that software is
entitled to the sources "at cost", and since they receive the software
under the GPL, they are entitled to redistribute it under the same
terms. One popular misunderstanding is that if a company is selling
GPL-licensed software, they have to give the sources away to anyone
who asks; in fact, only people who have received the software are
entitled to the sources:

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/license...anIDemandACopy

Various companies do, however, give away sources to anyone but then
make money out of the effort to turn such sources into executable
systems. For example, Red Hat make the sources on which their products
are based available to anyone, but since the effort in building them,
putting everything together, testing the result, and so on is non-
trivial, people pay them money to do that particular work.

As has been said elsewhere in this discussion, the specific use of the
term "commercial" in the case described may be aimed at a corporate
mindset which equates "commercial" to "proprietary", but Free (and
open source) Software can be the basis for commercial activities, too.

Paul

Apr 11 '07 #12
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 12:52, Kevin Walzer wrote:
Yes. Nothing in the GPL prevents you from developing and marketing an
application for as high a price as you can get from it.

HOWEVER:

you will have to distribute the source code to your application to
anyone who purchases a binary from you.

AND:

they will be permitted under the GPL to redistribute your application,
source code and all. The GPL would allow them to buy your application
from you and then redistribute it at no cost to others.
To add to the train of thought: While anyone who buys your GPL program (and
acquires the source) will be able to distribute copies of the source code
to MyGreatProgram, you can via *trademark law* (COMPLETELY different area
than copyright law) prevent them from calling it MyGreatProgram, or even
from saying publically "This program is just like MyGreatProgram." A name
can be owned (proprietary, if you will), even if the software itself is
under the GPL. Alfresco and MySQL are under the GPL, but if you made
massive (or any?) modifications to the source code, or wrote your own
versions from the ground up, and then tried to distribute them as Alfresco
or MySQL, I think you would hear from their lawyers. :)

I hope that doesn't add to the confusion, but provides further
clarification.

j

--
Joshua Kugler
Lead System Admin -- Senior Programmer
http://www.eeinternet.com
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ *ID 0xDB26D7CE

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Apr 11 '07 #13
king kikapu wrote:
On Apr 11, 10:56 am, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.comwrote:
>Others have given good answers. I would only like to clarify what I think is the
source of confusion here. While the FSF and many open source advocates make a
distinction between the words "commercial" (meaning that someone derives money
from distributing the software, whether it is GPLed or not) and "proprietary"
(meaning that the software is not being distributed under an open source license
but one that restricts user's rights), Trolltech abuses the term "commercial" to
mean "proprietary" in this case.

Ok, i see...So i can use Qt OS edition and earn money from this as
long as i explicitly say (is a reference to a GPL in a readme text
file enough for this ?) that this software is under the GPL lisence
and i have the obligation to give the source code with it.
It's a bit more complicated than that. There are good resources for
understanding the implications of the GPL on the FSF's site which other people
have pointed out. I also recommend Larry Rosen's (free) book _Open Source
Licensing_, particularly Chapter 6 for understanding the GPL:

http://www.rosenlaw.com/oslbook.htm
I will reply to that email of Trolltec's today and i will tell them
about the things mentioned here, basically just the sentence i wrote
above.
I see what they will reply and post it here...
I don't recommend it. You are talking to their salesman, not your lawyer. You
are being given a sales pitch, not legal advice.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

Apr 11 '07 #14
Ok, i see...So i can use Qt OS edition and earn money from this as
long as i explicitly say (is a reference to a GPL in a readme text
file enough for this ?) that this software is under the GPL lisence
and i have the obligation to give the source code with it.

It's a bit more complicated than that.
Why ? From the whole discussion here, i understand that ok, i will
give my source code with my program and i can sell this at the same
time and earn money.
If i mess with Qt, i will write software for myself, internaly at the
company i work for and maybe produce software and sell it by myself.
If you think that i am missing something, please let me know.
(Maybe i should stick with wxPython and PythonCard...)

Apr 11 '07 #15
Robert Kern <ro*********@gmail.comwrites:
I don't recommend it. You are talking to their salesman, not your lawyer. You
are being given a sales pitch, not legal advice.
On the other hand, he's stating Trolltech's policies and agreeing /
disagreeing on your understanding of their license. He's selling you his
product and stating how you can / can't use it.

I believe that this has some value in case they say you can't do one thing
that they told you could when you were acquiring their services.

I'd save those emails exchanged very carefully.

--
Jorge Godoy <jg****@gmail.com>
Apr 11 '07 #16

/ Robert Kern :
It's a bit more complicated than that. There are good resources for
understanding the implications of the GPL on the FSF's site which other people
have pointed out.
>From what i can understand, you can sell your product and you have to
give the source. Also you must state clearly somewhere in the software
that this is under GPL.
Are there other complications that comes to the party ?
(i really like Qt but if i have chances to mess with laywers, i show
stick to wxPython and PythonCard...)

Apr 11 '07 #17
Jorge Godoy wrote:
Robert Kern <ro*********@gmail.comwrites:
>I don't recommend it. You are talking to their salesman, not your lawyer. You
are being given a sales pitch, not legal advice.

On the other hand, he's stating Trolltech's policies and agreeing /
disagreeing on your understanding of their license. He's selling you his
product and stating how you can / can't use it.
Nothing the salesman has said about what one can and can't do disagrees with my
understanding of the license. There's just some vagueness in the terminology
used to *label* the not-open-source Qt license. The label is legally
inconsequential.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

Apr 11 '07 #18
king kikapu wrote:
Ο/Η Robert Kern *γραψε:
>It's a bit more complicated than that. There are good resources for
understanding the implications of the GPL on the FSF's site which other people
have pointed out.
>>From what i can understand, you can sell your product and you have to
give the source. Also you must state clearly somewhere in the software
that this is under GPL.
Are there other complications that comes to the party ?
All parts of the software have to be licensed compatibly with the GPL. The FSF
has a fairly comprehensive list of the licenses they believe are GPL-compatible.
The source that you provide needs to be the preferred form for making
modifications; i.e., you can't use a tool that obfuscates the code. You need to
provide the scripts that you use to build the software. You have to be careful
about using patented techniques in your code. The source code must be offered at
no extra charge (this part of the license is a bit tricky, so please read the
license and the commentaries).
(i really like Qt but if i have chances to mess with laywers, i show
stick to wxPython and PythonCard...)
You probably won't have to mess with lawyers, but with all software, even with
wxPython and PythonCard, you yourself should understand the legal implications.
You said that you "do not fully understand this license stuff," so I am trying
to give you the resources such that you can learn.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

Apr 11 '07 #19
On Apr 12, 1:02 am, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.comwrote:
All parts of the software have to be licensed compatibly with the GPL. The FSF
has a fairly comprehensive list of the licenses they believe are GPL-compatible.
The source that you provide needs to be the preferred form for making
modifications; i.e., you can't use a tool that obfuscates the code. You need to
provide the scripts that you use to build the software. You have to be careful
about using patented techniques in your code. The source code must be offered at
no extra charge (this part of the license is a bit tricky, so please read the
license and the commentaries).
Ok, i see...You said "All parts of the software have to be licensed
compatibly with the GPL". What if, let's say, my application's GUI is
made by Qt (Open Source edition that is indeed under GPL license) and
in this application i use some module(s) that i bought from some other
company and they aren't under GPL, do you see any implication to
this ?

Thanks you all again!

Apr 12 '07 #20
I dig a little bit more on the Trolltech's site and i think that this
page is telling all the truth:

http://www.trolltech.com/developer/downloads/qt/faq

So, this tells us all the good stuff people in this thread are talking
about, i think is clear enough.

Apr 12 '07 #21
king kikapu wrote:
On Apr 12, 1:02 am, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.comwrote:
>All parts of the software have to be licensed compatibly with the GPL. The FSF
has a fairly comprehensive list of the licenses they believe are GPL-compatible.
The source that you provide needs to be the preferred form for making
modifications; i.e., you can't use a tool that obfuscates the code. You need to
provide the scripts that you use to build the software. You have to be careful
about using patented techniques in your code. The source code must be offered at
no extra charge (this part of the license is a bit tricky, so please read the
license and the commentaries).

Ok, i see...You said "All parts of the software have to be licensed
compatibly with the GPL". What if, let's say, my application's GUI is
made by Qt (Open Source edition that is indeed under GPL license) and
in this application i use some module(s) that i bought from some other
company and they aren't under GPL, do you see any implication to
this ?
You will not be able to distribute your program if that module is under a
license which imposes more restrictions than the GPL does. The FSF maintains a
list of licenses which are compatible with the GPL:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

Apr 12 '07 #22

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

5
by: michael newport | last post by:
Oracle opens arms to Mozilla By Stephen Shankland and Alorie Gilbert, CNET News.com Oracle wants its applications to integrate better with Mozilla's open-source desktop software Oracle is...
14
by: HamorSth | last post by:
What does "open source" mean in the .NET platform while almost all "non-obfuscated" codes are "Open-Source"? Just yesterday i got an add-in for my ".NET Reflector" which saved the entire...
28
by: guru.slt | last post by:
Hi, Who can recommend a good IDE for C++ in Linux ? Thanks! Does the IDE use gcc compiler?
2
by: maadhuu | last post by:
i am really sorry to ask another question regarding Qt.last time, 2 people actually put up very helpful links...so this time , i seriously hope i will get some help....plssssssssssss. the problem...
385
by: Xah Lee | last post by:
Jargons of Info Tech industry (A Love of Jargons) Xah Lee, 2002 Feb People in the computing field like to spur the use of spurious jargons. The less educated they are, the more they like...
39
by: Kaarel | last post by:
I don't feel very confident when it comes to software licenses. But there are some cases I would like to make myself clear. What I am particulary interested in is when does GPL license become...
2
by: cracker | last post by:
Microsoft has dominated the world of computing for many years, with its heavily guarded 'code' being beyond reach to many in the developing nations. In some of the poorest countries the cost of...
2
by: yawnmoth | last post by:
The PHP license states the following: 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission from group@php.net. ...
0
by: danbst | last post by:
There are script languages compiled at runtime. So, we can download interpreter and code-file to run the program. Everybody knows it. here is my idea. I create redistributable package (for *nix...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, youll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
1
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
0
by: Vimpel783 | last post by:
Hello! Guys, I found this code on the Internet, but I need to modify it a little. It works well, the problem is this: Data is sent from only one cell, in this case B5, but it is necessary that data...
1
by: PapaRatzi | last post by:
Hello, I am teaching myself MS Access forms design and Visual Basic. I've created a table to capture a list of Top 30 singles and forms to capture new entries. The final step is a form (unbound)...
1
by: CloudSolutions | last post by:
Introduction: For many beginners and individual users, requiring a credit card and email registration may pose a barrier when starting to use cloud servers. However, some cloud server providers now...
1
by: Shllpp 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
0
by: Faith0G | last post by:
I am starting a new it consulting business and it's been a while since I setup a new website. Is wordpress still the best web based software for hosting a 5 page website? The webpages will be...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 3 Apr 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome former...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.