On Thursday 29 March 2007 6:42 am, Simon James wrote: > > How negligible would it be if the software vendor saved the user $10K in > > database fees, > > Hi John, > > Can you substantiate that figure with an example? There are decent, > integrated packages that don't require any where near that level of spend > on the underlying database.
OK The medical software I am preparing to change to uses a database that will cost me ...actually, I find i have have exaggerated. Re-reading the quote, it is 3/4 of that figure for the db licenses and software combined, excluding the annual fees.. > > > some more in "office' fees and further down the line, > > Yes, this is a hidden cost and creates an opportunity for vendors to > differentiate themselves by integrating their products with Open Office or > similar. > > But perhaps this is already possible... > > EG - Genie has its own letter writer, but allows letters to be outputted to > Microsoft Word, then sucked back in after editing. On my Mac running Genie, > I simply set the default application to open .doc files to NeoOffice (a Mac > Open Office build). > > The "round trip" worked fine as I suspect Genie simply tells the Operating > System to open the exported temporary .doc file using it's default > application. > > Does a similar arrangement (changing the default application) work with > other clinical software or is the integration more tightly coupled? The old software I have been using since 1999 uses Word for letter writing. Maybe I am out of touch. > > > some > > more in OS fees; --and teh user was happy to pay half the difference to > > the software vendor? > > General practice isn't moving to Linux en mass. Sorry. From where I sit, I can't see why not. I use it 100% at home, and it seems natural to me. I'm sure the change to major new versions of windows is as big for joe average user as the change would be to a KDE desktop. Sure there are some file incompatibilities with the microsoft wider world, but these are few. Some 3rd party applications won't run on linux, but these, perhaps, shouldn't be on work desktops. Building a new system is usually part of changing to a new software package. A hell of a lot of users really wouldn't notice ! > > > Is there an unspoken standover tactic by a major OS seller to developers? > > No, but if you're in the software business you can either write programs > for an established market or create a new one. History (in the OZ > GP/Specialist segment) has proven the former is more viable. > > It's a chicken and egg scenario and I doubt anyone has the money or the > starch to be a rooster. Well, one well-known chap has started a new medical software suite in the past couple of years, built ostensibly "from the ground up" and had the chance to differentiate it'self and become cross-platform.. jh > > Cheers, > Simon > > > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk -- Hiding in the wings forever We'll take the stage, cos it's now or never And the whole thing reeks of cheap striptease The matinee idylls they all fall to their knees Split Enz - 129 (P Judd, T Finn) _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
