![]() ![]() But the customer also has a cost for his licenses plus the cost you charge for development. Those companies that didn't find a way to get recurring revenue have either gone away, or seriously reduced their growth/development resources. There is also a side of the conversation where it's important for the longevity of the company providing the tool to have recurring revenue. ![]() And the longer we use FileMaker the lower the cost of ownership is. Our development time is so much shorter in FileMaker. And the 2 FileMaker developers we have cost orders of magnitude more than our license cost. ![]() They could never tolerate another environment. They value quick turnaround and stable use so much more than anything else. Again, not a binary conversation based completely on the "deployment" cost. The extra development time may 100% be worth it. Often it depends on what you are building, your business model, and what you value. After 4-5 years working in Xojo, my one friend said that his development time is 3-4x longer than it was with FileMaker. And half of the others still do a lot of FileMaker work. Of those, a little more than half have come back to FileMaker. Several FileMaker developers that I know personally, have moved to Xojo or an Open Source development environment. Just pointing out that "free" sometimes has a cost. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |