meaning the vendors can triple the price of their product, so long as they use open source backends that have negligible costs? And they still provide indemnity insurance - maybe the insurance won't cover open source ? Seems to be a push by some IT professionals for some proprietary products, so maybe there is a commission paid to the vendors for using such products. Or maybe the RAD tools like access, delphi, visual foxpro and powerbuilder are just too easy to use , and open source stuff is either one level too basic - i.e. too loosely bound to a db product , has strings attached , or aimed at a few levels too high, and all require too much homework , so it was and still is , easier to knock up a cottage industry item using proprietary tools. I just had a look at pracsoft and I was a bit shocked about how little it lets you do e.g. I wanted to get an estimate of the year's billings for insurance quote, but couldn't do it in pracsoft. thought that was a shocker of a narrowing of application scope. Was wondering, anyone daring enough to use a spreadsheet for financials , or is it all myob ? what besides practice management software, what other accounting packages are used alongside, or are some practice management software complete in themselves. It's to do with the taxation rules compliance expertise, isn't it, which marks out myob's scent ?
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 21:23 +0800, john hilton wrote: > On Wednesday 28 March 2007 9:11 am, Simon James wrote: > > > Hi Horst, > > > > This is all fine if you're starting from scratch, but the vendors with > > approximately 95% of the Australian GP/Specialist market have products that > > date back into the early-mid nineties. Unlike now, I doubt there was as > > much separation between the database and development environments back in > > the day, or any quality FOSS SQL servers. > > > > Even if these "legacy" vendors did the programming to allow > > mysql/postgres/firebird to be used instead of proprietary database > > applications, the task of migrating practices and supporting dozens of > > extra combinations (SQL flavour x clinical software version) would be huge > > and the payoff to the vendors negligible. > > > > Regards, > > Simon > > > > > > How negligible would it be if the software vendor saved the user $10K in > database fees, some more in "office' fees and further down the line, some > more in OS fees; --and teh user was happy to pay half the difference to the > software vendor? > > Is there an unspoken standover tactic by a major OS seller to developers? > > jh > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
