Are you still open to discussing LTProf? I’ve just come across it but have found very little documentation on how to interpret the results.

Also the space owner might be willing to develop a rich set of templates one for the application that could be shared across a variety of events. They might be willing to look at a “pay per use” model either as a cost they absorb to differentiate their service, or just as a pass through that would almost be de minimis for large parties. You are also enabling them, in conjunction with your existing or perhaps new printer relationships, to offer an additional service.

Folks who make their living as wedding planners (or event just event planners) might also be interested in a “professional version” of the product. There are probably some additional ancillary revenue streams that you could enable that their clients would view as taking “friction” (e.g. delay and transcription error) out of the process.

There is at least one player in the SaaS market http://www.toptableplanner.com/ and they segment between personal at $20 for six months and $80 for a year (multiple logins). Strangely they don’t segment on size (and claim unlimited size), where I would think they would have more trouble than you do because of the limitations of a browser based approach over a fully installed application. It doesn’t appear that they let you enter constraints on seating folks and they don’t appear to create a “placement.” I would think on the professional end in particular you would save folks a lot of time that’s more difficult to bill.

I have been thinking quite a bit about segmentation. Watch this space.

I am less convinced about a web version (although not ruling it out completely), but I am slowly adding web-enabled features to the software.

1-200 (probably people don’t buy it unless they have at least
some minimum 60? 80?)
200-600
600-1200

Also it would seem that there would be an opportunity for a SaaS version of this product, especially for organizations that are doing a number of banquets and want to make the “in progress” view available.

>which shouldn’t take much work at all sense you use Qt

It’s always easy when you aren’t the one that has to do it. ;0)

Anyway, I don’t intend to spend the hard cash required to buy a Linux licence for Qt any time soon. A 2 platform Qt licence is expensive enough thanks. Especially given that the worldwide market for commercial table planning software on Linux is approximately 0.

If you are using STL with Visual Studio you might want to try:
/D_SECURE_SCL=0

(via http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?design.4.575235.3 )