My main complaint about Office 365 is it’s extremely confusing, as there seems
to be a run locally but subscribe to online updates model, as well as a totally
cloud based model where everything’s in the cloud including your data. And if
a customer calls having trouble with Office 365, they of course don’t have a
clue how they are set up. Add the fact that someone buys a new computer like a
Surface and the first thing it has you do is set up a Microsoft email address
as a login for the computer, and starts backing up your data by default on
Skydrive. Or is it Onedrive now? Thing is, average customer without an IT
department actually doesn’t understand where on the continuum from “box
software” to Saas and “in the cloud” he is. Where is my software? Where is my
data? Am I launching software, or a browser window? Can I use it without an
Internet connection? What happens if I stop my subscription? I dunno. Who do
I call? It says to call my network administrator. That must mean my ISP. OK,
dialing my ISP now.
From: Bill Prince via Af
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 10:41 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SM Isolation question
I've got to say I'm firmly on the fence with regard to this issue.
The last time we paid for MS Office was back in 2000 (seriously). I think we
paid $400 or $500 for it, and it was the type of thing that we could load on a
couple of PCs for the duration. Yes, it got long in tooth, but it worked, and
it did what we wanted. That came to about $16 per PC per year. Pretty good
deal, and I don't think we missed out on much. Sure, a couple of years ago, MS
made a major change to file formats that the old version couldn't open, but
they also provided viewers and converters so we made do.
However, most of the office files you see these days are the new format, so we
decided to get the new version as a service. We're paying $150 per year for 5
seats (which we only need 4 of). So that will be $37 per PC per year (or $30
per PC per year if we install it on another PC). Call that inflation, but it
also gets updates on a more-or-less continuous basis.
The biggest downside is that the new office contains a bunch of cruff that we
don't need, and "probably" won't use.
Call it progress, or whatever. I've seen a bunch of model-evolutions over the
years, and this just seems to be the latest.
bpOn 10/16/2014 8:21 AM, Adam Moffett via Af wrote:
Autodesk....They still charge thousands of a copy of autoCAD, but you can get
it on a month to month basis for $60/month, or pay for a whole year and it's
like $35/month.
I would never have been able to justify paying them $3k for something I would
use 4 times a year, but I can pay them $60 each for the four times I want to
use it. Before that I would limit my use to twice a year....one 30 day demo of
the current release of autoCAD and one 30 day demo of the current autoCAD LT.
I don’t dispute that, or that SaaS is the wave of the future (present?),
just I find Intuit to be a money-grubbing borderline unethical company to deal
with, that nonetheless dominates their market niche. Probably because the
accountants all use it. As far as getting the bug fixes immediately because
you subscribe as a service, that would mean more if it didn’t take Intuit years
to fix bugs. There is actually very little improvement from year to year in
Quickbooks, it is mostly cosmetic or related to new services they want to sell
you. Which tend to be pretty poor, for example their payroll service is really
pathetic, you’re almost better off filling out the tax forms by hand.
But as an other example of SaaS, Adobe has gone heavily that direction with
their creative suites. If you are a graphic designer or web designer, I’m sure
it’s a very good deal. For someone like me with an owned copy of Photoshop, it
probably doesn’t make sense to start paying monthly, since I could care less
about having the latest improvements, I don’t use it intensively enough to make
it worthwhile. Maybe for Dreamweaver since HTML techniques are changing all
the time. At least Adobe doesn’t require that you are connected to the
Internet in order to use the software. I don’t really have any problem with
their approach, even though it doesn’t work out so well for me.
From: Travis Johnson via Af
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:38 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SM Isolation question
I haven't seen the same results... every single company I am involved with,
and even the 20+ that I have met with over the last three months have all used
Quickbooks.
Travis
On 10/16/2014 8:12 AM, Ken Hohhof via Af wrote:
I would not use anything related to Quickbooks as an example of the best
way to do something.
Your only choices from Intuit are how you get screwed, not whether.
From: Travis Johnson via Af
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:02 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SM Isolation question
How do you figure? Everything will eventually be SaaS... and it's a much
better model for both sides. The software stays updated and current and bug
fixes are instant. The initial cost to start with the software is usually
1/10th what it would be to buy, and it allows people to use the software from
anywhere.
Many years ago, I was of the same opinion. Then I started to realize my
time (or anyone else's time) was better spent focusing on the product we sold
rather than installing/fixing/supporting someone else's software.
I know I personally spent at least 50+ hours over the previous 15 years
installing/fixing/supporting Quickbooks on our LAN. Getting it installed on a
server, setting up the shares, mapping drive letters, installing it on each PC,
etc. The software cost us $500 to buy, and then the yearly updates were usually
$200-$300. Or you can subscribe to the online version for $39/month and be done
with it. It's automatically backed up, you don't have to host it on your own
server, or worry about upgrade issues or users with problems, etc.
Time is money. Spend your time doing what you know how to do, and hire
someone else to do the other tasks. :)
Travis
On 10/15/2014 9:31 PM, Tyler Treat via Af wrote:
True story.
___________________________
Mangled by my iPhone.
___________________________
Tyler Treat
Corn Belt Technologies, Inc.
tyler.tr...@cornbelttech.com
___________________________
On Oct 15, 2014, at 10:30 PM, Jason McKemie via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote:
Yeah, SaaS is great for the company that owns it, not so great for
everyone else.
On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Travis Johnson via Af <af@afmug.com>
wrote:
Nope... mainly SaaS companies and real estate. Best of both worlds.
:)
Travis
On 10/15/2014 3:40 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote:
Someone told me you were getting into manufacturing��
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr
On 10/15/14, 5:31 PM, "Travis Johnson via Af" <af@afmug.com>
wrote:
It just depends on the day... :)
Involved in 11 companies now, and looking at a 12th. Always
stuff going
on. LOL
Travis
On 10/15/2014 3:16 PM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote:
Travis, are you getting bored at your current job? Lol!!
Great to see you active in the list!
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr
On 10/15/14, 4:14 PM, "Travis Johnson via Af" <af@afmug.com>
wrote:
The other issue is p2p traffic between two people on the
same AP....
and
if you are doing bandwidth shaping in your router, even at
the tower,
you will never see these packets. Or in the case the
original poster
asked about, that customer could keep a high-def window
open of all
their video cameras at the other location, using 3-4Mbps of
constant
traffic, and you would never see it.
Travis
On 10/15/2014 1:48 PM, George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)
via Af wrote:
When you forward SM-to-SM traffic upstream, there's
nothing the router
can do about it. Put the two locations on different IP
subnets so that
traffic between the two has to be routed. Or turn off SM
isolation.
I leave SM isolation off because I'm not that paranoid.
The biggest
risk is broadcast/multicast crap flying around. So use
the SM uplink
broadcast/multicast rate limiting. This is one of the
best features of
Canopy, IMO.
On 10/15/2014 2:23 PM, Christopher Tyler via Af wrote:
We have a customer that has two SM's on the same AP at
separate
physical locations (home and office). The have a DVR at
each location
that they want to view. Everything is configured
properly on their
end to view the DVR's on port 80 through their routers.
Problem is
that we have SM isolation turned on with option 2 to
forward packets
upstream and they want to see the home when at the
office and the
office when at home.
So I set up a mangle rule in my Mikortik to mark the
packets with a
routing mark based on the SRC and DST addresses, and
then used a
static route for anything what that mark and send it
back to the AP
port. It doesn't work, what am I doing wrong, any
suggestions short
of disabling SM isolation?
