FilePro running on Unix vs Windows

[Dan Snyder]

On Thu, Dec 16, 2004, Brian K. White wrote:

>> As Walter said, a CIO will take some other considerations
>> to take into account when selecting a technology platform
>> for business, such as availability of personnel skilled
>> in the technology, training materials and software availability.  We are
currently in the process of replacing our
>> SCO
>> UNIX/filePro system with a Windows Server2003 based ERP package.  I have
>> UNIX experience, so why go with a Windows server when the application we
>> chose does run on LINUX?  25 out of 35 off-the-shelf ERP packages that we
>> looked at ran only on Windows.  Additionally, of the packages that do run
>> on
>> UNIX many of the 3rd party add-ons that we would be interested in only run
>> on Windows servers and we don't see the need/benefit of running multiple
>> server platforms.  All of the ERP apps that did run on UNIX also ran on
>> Windows and the majority of the customers using those apps were running
>> them
>> on Windows servers.  And finally, there are far more training and
>> consulting
>> resources available to us in the Windows environment.
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, every day John E. has an anecdote to relate almost
> every week about various accountants and other buisiness
> associates who come into his office for one reason or another
> and happen to see his software in operation, and unanimously
> they ask "What is this? Where did you get it? Who sells it?
> It works way better than anything we've ever seen before..."
> And of course it's all stuff he wrote himself, in filepro, on
> unix.
> 
> By your logic John should never have bothered to become
> BETTER than the 25 to 35 other common systems that all
> run on windows and that a lot of people are familiar with.
> His company is eating his competition for lunch and growing
> like crazy because the other all have the same ordinary
> inferior stuff as everyone else.
> 
> We are doing the same thing and it's because of the same
> reasons. Frankly, the more people out there who believe
> in the logic you just tried to put over, the more I like
> it because it just makes it that much easier to stand
> out and outperform all that sea of common, commodity, stuff.
> 
> Brian K. White  --  brian at aljex.com  --  http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
> +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
> filePro BBx  Linux SCO  Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD  #callahans Satriani

Sorry Brian, maybe you missed this line of mine...
    The reality is that they both (UNIX and Windows Server2003)
    have their own strengths and weaknesses, either one could
    do a fine job for you.  You'll just need to evaluate your
    own capabilities and requirements before making a final
    decision.

I wasn't trying to slam filePro or UNIX/LINUX.  As a matter of fact, I'd
prefer an open source solution to our needs (LINUX, Postgres, etc.), but I
couldn't find one that did it all.

Cindy did not state anything about the strengths or weaknesses of her
filePro databases for her business needs or the resources available to her.
That's why I just said "could work".  Everyone's situation is different, if
you and John E. have highly developed software for your business' and can
quickly put together new solutions in filePro for any other business needs
that might come up, than that IS obviously the best solution for you.  And
if that's Cindy's situation I'm sure she will stick with filePro on UNIX.

Our situation was completely different.  Our filePro databases were crappy
as they were written by a hobbyist with 0 IT experience.  Their limitations
have been holding our business back.  I have taken some time to improve
them, but the time and money required to get the kind of features and
support that we want/need makes it a simple decision to dump filePro and go
with an off-the-shelf Windows package.  My company is not in the software
business and doesn't want to be.  We don't want to develop or pay to develop
basic functionality like that listed below which we can buy.
    customer relationship management
        (to automate sales, marketing and service)
    human resources management
        (electronic collection of hours and integration with ADP,
        automation of applications, government stats/compliance,
        employee benefits statements, etc.)
    production management
        (ISO quality control monitoring, scheduling that takes
        materials, equipment, tooling and labor into account)
    accounting (that can assist with Sarbanes Oxley compliance)
    materials data collection (bar code, RFID and touch screen)
    labor data collection (bar code and touch screen)
    direct internet access to our database for suppliers,
        customers and remote sales people
    direct integration with shipping suppliers systems
        (to include rates and tracking numbers)
    EDI
    simple point and click business intelligence for the executives
        (no need to teach them how to create a query)
    easy user interface

Purchasing an off-the-shelf package doesn't mean that a company can't
develop (or have developed) additional business specific software if needed
or desired.  The off-the-shelf packages use SQL servers so you can use any
language you want to make add-ons that access/update the data.

I agree with you that many accounting packages suck, and we eliminated
several ERP packages for having poor accounting features.  We didn't bother
looking at something as limited as QuickBooks that someone else mentioned.

-Dan Snyder