^     All messages            2-17 of 17  1-1 >>
17 Deleted by topic administrator 07-21-2006 08:57 AM 16 Spence Trudell 03-06-2006 02:26 PM ET (US) Our denominational church has been using Centralpoint for the past 4 years to manage over 3,200 local missions. At first I dont think our staff understood the full potential, but within the last 3 years we have grown accustomed to getting the new releases. We used to use an ASP service costing each of our churches 29.00 per month, which was close to 1.1m/year, and have cut those costs nearly 60%, representing a savings of over 3m for our entire denomination since we have gotten a handle on it. We used to use Vignette, and a variety of homegrown open source tools...and have found Centralpoint to be a perfect fit for our many micro sites. 15 Daniel Longbottom 10-22-2005 09:28 AM ET (US) We have been using Centralpoint for about 3 years, and it is used by our IT team for our intranet, extranet and public facing website. My department (marketing) is in charge of updating the sites...and we have never had to turn to the IT department for help or assistance once...great platform. 14 Dave Clark 09-09-2005 08:09 AM ET (US) I agree, Lindy...Oxcyon's Centralpoint CMS/ECM platform has saved our company thousands of dollars and much aggravation. Prior to buying Centralpoint, we looked at Vignette, Stellent, Websphere, FILEnet, Interwoven and even Tridion....and found Oxcyon to provide the best value for the investment. It is both scalable and robust.... 13 Lindy Fejes 11-01-2004 01:12 PM ET (US) I would like to refer you to a company called Oxcyon. Their prices are good and you get what you pay for! Edited 01-27-2005 09:26 AM 12 David Johnson 06-13-2003 08:04 PM ET (US) I refused to pay the penalty to upgrade Quark from 68K to PowerPC. I definitely will not be upgrading to Q-6. InDesign suits me very well. If not that I still have a copy of Pagemaker I can use. 11 Rob McNair-Huff 06-13-2003 01:43 AM ET (US) Thanks for those comments, Jon and Thad. I agree that NoteTaker offers a lot for $69, and BBEdit is a bargain, no doubt about that. 10 Jon H 06-12-2003 10:58 PM ET (US) NoteTaker's $69 was a good deal, especially considering that the NeXT version cost something like $400. Omnigroup's prices are good. 9 Thad Hoffman 06-12-2003 04:21 PM ET (US) Oh, and I see Apples products as a challenge to developers. To aid in creativity and inovation. They up the anty. They protect me from cheap crappy software. For me to pay for your software means it better be more fantastic than Apple's free software or offer some features, or ease my workflow that I need that Apple's offerings don't supply.   Pretty much goes for all apps though. BBEdit has to offer tools or power that I can't get from vi or emacs etc..., Dreamweaver too, Mozilla vs Safari.... goes on and on. There are lots of avenues open. For instance, I'd love for my AIM and email apps to be one. Why can't I see who is online in my address book of email? I could zip my email over as an AIM chat that way, rather than maintaining the different lists/apps. All in one convenient package. 8 Thad Hoffman 06-12-2003 04:14 PM ET (US) BBEdit, to me, is worth more that the cost fo Quark. Dreamweaver is a solid performer and about top end of what I'm willing to pay out of my pocket. Photoshop, Quark, MS Office all seemed priced for the corporate wallet. And speaking of corporate wallets, Apple bundles free basic apps that enhance the system/OS and everyone seems to say they are stifling competition on the Mac. What about MS and all the stuff that comes with a Wintel box? Web browser, media player, office, etc... Talk about stifling competition. I see more room and opportunity on the Mac dev side than the PC side, yeah there are more PC's (most corporate though) out there, but there are more holes in the Mac side than Windows side. Such as decent Database tools & drivers, vpn products, script debuggers (though venkman rocks), development tools that work with MS VSS, etc... The difference in software that I see are that there are less crappy "VB hack" apps for sale on the shelves for Macs than windows. All in all, the offerings are about level and priced equally. Two examples that contradict the "Mac cost less" statement are: 1. turbo tax, that software you get every year costs 20 dollars more for the Mac version at CompUSA. 2. MS Office, it costs more for the Mac version than the Win version. One example for "Mac cost less": 1. OS cost is less. Full licence of Jag is $129, vs 199 and 299 for the XP flavors. 7 Rob McNair-Huff 06-12-2003 02:10 PM ET (US) Robb, In general I would agree that some apps are underpriced. But many are overpriced, or they offer too little for their price. I understand that as a software developer you look at this situation from a different perspective than a typical software buyer. But at this point, with Apple's focus on consumers, apps that will succeed in the Mac market have to fill the needs for hard-earned consumer dollars. Many run out and buy Word or Office because they see no alternative, just as many folks use Mail.app or Safari because they don't explore alternatives. What I find interesting about Mark's comment is the idea that Mac users aren't charged enough for software, which infers that Windows users and other software users pay more. That is why I asked for examples. The reason no investment dollars are being spent on the Mac market is not that people are not paying enough for software. It is that Apple has hijacked many software product areas where third parties could be innovating and making money. Instead of innovating, developers turn to other markets where they don't have to compete against Apples lightweight but free software. Turning things back to the point of this discussion, what software do you see as a bargain in the Mac market in terms of what you get for buying the product? I mentioned in my short post that products like QuarkXPress and Office are overpriced, but I am also curious what products people see as bargains - programs that they would even consider paying more to use because they are so useful or simply so fun or cool to work with? 6 Jim 06-12-2003 02:01 PM ET (US) Bloatware costs too much. Too many features to justify some of the prices. Hence why I like what Apple offers: Free. Just buy the computer. So what if Apple won't spend time developing iTunes to run on my LC630 under 7.5.3, the point of getting a new computer is that it's faster! Beneficial features are worth paying for, but I can't think of anything in Word v.X that I miss when I continue to use Word 5.1 5 Robb Beal 06-12-2003 01:58 PM ET (US) I couldn't agree more with Mark! Rob, there are next-to-zero investment dollars flowing into Macintosh these days outside of Apple and get this, its management doesn't see the problem as a priority. Check out these comments from Tim Bray, a rather dispassionate observer. I didn't solicit those comments and our conversation was wide-ranging. 4 Rob McNair-Huff 06-12-2003 01:35 PM ET (US) Hey Mark, Can you offer some examples of applications that are underpriced in the Mac market? I agree that there seems to be far to little innovative software for the Mac, but on the other hand I think there is very little innovative software for Windows as well. Is software really more costly for Windows? 3 Mark Bernstein 06-12-2003 12:31 PM ET (US) This won't be a popular thing to say, but most Macintosh software right now is radically *under* priced. As a result, we see far too little innovative software, and far too many "little" programs that convert formats or do other small tasks. 2 Rob McNair-Huff 06-12-2003 12:26 PM ET (US) Chris, I think you hit the main issue with software pricing. It all depends on what you get from the software, or whether it helps you do something that is critical to your business or home life...	Upgrade to PRO Upload pictures, personalize your board, and more! About these ads
^     All messages            2-17 of 17  1-1 >>