How do you figure? Everything will eventually be SaaS... and it's a much
better model for both sides. The software stays updated and current and
bug fixes are instant. The initial cost to start with the software is
usually 1/10th what it would be to buy, and it allows people to use the
software from anywhere.
Many years ago, I was of the same opinion. Then I started to realize my
time (or anyone else's time) was better spent focusing on the product we
sold rather than installing/fixing/supporting someone else's software.
I know I personally spent at least 50+ hours over the previous 15 years
installing/fixing/supporting Quickbooks on our LAN. Getting it installed
on a server, setting up the shares, mapping drive letters, installing it
on each PC, etc. The software cost us $500 to buy, and then the yearly
updates were usually $200-$300. Or you can subscribe to the online
version for $39/month and be done with it. It's automatically backed up,
you don't have to host it on your own server, or worry about upgrade
issues or users with problems, etc.
Time is money. Spend your time doing what you know how to do, and hire
someone else to do the other tasks. :)
Travis
On 10/15/2014 9:31 PM, Tyler Treat via Af wrote:
True story.
___________________________
Mangled by my iPhone.
___________________________
Tyler Treat
Corn Belt Technologies, Inc.
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
___________________________
On Oct 15, 2014, at 10:30 PM, Jason McKemie via Af <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Yeah, SaaS is great for the company that owns it, not so great for
everyone else.
On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Travis Johnson via Af <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Nope... mainly SaaS companies and real estate. Best of both
worlds. :)
Travis
On 10/15/2014 3:40 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote:
Someone told me you were getting into manufacturing��
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com>
@aeronetpr
On 10/15/14, 5:31 PM, "Travis Johnson via Af" <[email protected]>
wrote:
It just depends on the day... :)
Involved in 11 companies now, and looking at a 12th.
Always stuff going
on. LOL
Travis
On 10/15/2014 3:16 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote:
Travis, are you getting bored at your current job? Lol!!
Great to see you active in the list!
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com>
@aeronetpr
On 10/15/14, 4:14 PM, "Travis Johnson via Af"
<[email protected]> wrote:
The other issue is p2p traffic between two people
on the same AP....
and
if you are doing bandwidth shaping in your
router, even at the tower,
you will never see these packets. Or in the case
the original poster
asked about, that customer could keep a high-def
window open of all
their video cameras at the other location, using
3-4Mbps of constant
traffic, and you would never see it.
Travis
On 10/15/2014 1:48 PM, George Skorup (Cyber
Broadcasting) via Af wrote:
When you forward SM-to-SM traffic upstream,
there's nothing the router
can do about it. Put the two locations on
different IP subnets so that
traffic between the two has to be routed. Or
turn off SM isolation.
I leave SM isolation off because I'm not that
paranoid. The biggest
risk is broadcast/multicast crap flying
around. So use the SM uplink
broadcast/multicast rate limiting. This is
one of the best features of
Canopy, IMO.
On 10/15/2014 2:23 PM, Christopher Tyler via
Af wrote:
We have a customer that has two SM's on
the same AP at separate
physical locations (home and office). The
have a DVR at each location
that they want to view. Everything is
configured properly on their
end to view the DVR's on port 80 through
their routers. Problem is
that we have SM isolation turned on with
option 2 to forward packets
upstream and they want to see the home
when at the office and the
office when at home.
So I set up a mangle rule in my Mikortik
to mark the packets with a
routing mark based on the SRC and DST
addresses, and then used a
static route for anything what that mark
and send it back to the AP
port. It doesn't work, what am I doing
wrong, any suggestions short
of disabling SM isolation?
