Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: Kyle A. Miller <kyle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 11:52:09 -0500
It happens that Ray Porter formulated :
Here are a few more details.
Understatement of the year. :-)
You story is interesting considering I sell software tailored to a market, and my main competitor, ACT, is not. I am working with an organization now that thought they could go with ACT, tailor it to their needs, and forgo my application. This was 3-4 years ago, and things have not worked out. ACT allows for some customization, but not enough to satisfy the organization's needs.
The moral of the story is a pair of tailor made pants will always fit better than a pair of Sears Toughskins.
I guess you know you cannot rely on winning your case on technical terms. The head of your argument must be evidence based on time and cost savings. Both are synonymous and equate to $$$. Make sure to include any recurring licensing and maintenance costs. You will need to show how your shop can beat the competition, keep dependencies to minimum, and allow for tailor made solutions.
.
- References:
- in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: Ray Porter
- Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- From: TJC Support
- in-house development versus packaged solutions
- Prev by Date: Re: RAD Studio Roadmap Updated
- Next by Date: Re: Private variables question
- Previous by thread: Re: in-house development versus packaged solutions
- Next by thread: Problem downloading from Codegear
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|