Difference between Zero Point Q and Ultima

Questions and Comments
#1

Hi guys,

Since my semester is over, I thought to come over to write an update on my journal, and I found that SubClub has developed a newer version of the program called Zero Point (ZP). Great. I appreciate that you guys are constantly researching and coming up with new programs.

Unfortunately, I could not find how ZP is different from Q and Ultima. I get that it’s a different program (thereby requiring different listening routine), but I’d like to know how ZP is different in terms of the functionality.

For example, my understanding of Q and Ultima’s functionality is that Q is more geared towards deeper and longer term impact and change, while Ultima’s functionality is more geared towards faster and immediate change and impact. Zero Point? I don’t know, how does its functionality differ, and how is the program’s goal different from Q and Ultima?

1 Like
#2

Read these 3 articles and you will get the idea. If you are short on time, read the 3rd article. @Malkuth has explained it very well

3 Likes
#3

This article on the support site mentions a few differences between ZP and Q and Ultima. You can also try the How is ZP “better” than Qv2? article.

Edit: Looks like username @Lion beat me to the punch.

3 Likes
#4

@Lion and @Seeker

Thanks guys. That was helpful. After reading that, I’m like “do we need Q any more when we have ZP?”

2 Likes
#5

I’m thinking about this too. I really love my Q/Qv2 programs.

But as it stands, we still currently have a massive Q-store filled with wonderful modules.

And also, the Zero Point effect seems to extend to Qv2 programs and to enhance their results. It seems to align the ‘channels’ so that intentions, in general, bear fruit much more smoothly. A number of people are observing that their manifestation process is just more effective than it was before. And I’m among them.

For now, I’m looking at it this way: rather than rendering Qv2 programs obsolete, ZP is actually helping them to work even better. I’ll probably keep thinking of it that way until the day that all of the Q-Store is available in ZP format. (Hmmm…will it then be the ZP store?)

:sweat_smile: with the rapid rate of Saint’s and Fire’s ongoing innovations, I’m afraid I might wake up on Monday to an announcement that they just decided to get that Q-Store conversion done over the weekend or something.

4 Likes
#6

Just from time efficiency alone, ZP is the way. Personally I see QZP as the updated version of Q, and once the entire store is converted to ZP I don’t see a need to ever run Q.

Of course, I haven’t had the chance to run ZP as long as Q, so I’m saying this and assuming that ZP will work just as well as Q. Time will tell but according to other users here, it’s looking like that is the case.

2 Likes