Topics created by mmicha

@mmicha said in Where to start...:

Build out a site to site to a their datacenter and slowly build / upgrade things.

A lift and shift can be a good idea. But it isn't very likely. Taking applications that aren't well maintained on premises and just shifting them off premises is just "moving" a problem, it isn't addressing it in any way.

That doesn't mean that you might not benefit from keeping these applications in this way. It's not to say that colocation is bad. But you can't start with the assumption that the "less common" solution will automatically be the right one with no evaluation at all.

@Dashrender said in Access 2003 in a 2021 World???:

@scottalanmiller said in Access 2003 in a 2021 World???:

@Pete-S said in Access 2003 in a 2021 World???:

@Dashrender said in Access 2003 in a 2021 World???:

@DustinB3403 said in Access 2003 in a 2021 World???:

And yes I know that best is relative to ones needs.

Access was the "best" at one point I'm sure.

I'm willing to bet that's not true - not a lot.. maybe $100... lol pretty sure Access was never the best for anything.. other solutions while possibly more difficult could still likely be shown to be much better solutions.

It wasn't Access itself that was the thing. It was the JET database engine that Access used under the hood that made it popular.

Back in the 90's if you wanted a simple database in your application and you used something like Visual Basic 3.0 then the JET engine was the first option to consider because Microsoft bundled it with VB and it was free. That's how it gained a foothold.

The JET engine was very very far from the best or even good. It was common to corrupt the database and run tools to "repair" it. But it was available without any effort - today we know that is perhaps the most important "feature"...

If you wanted the best you'd connect your application to an Oracle db.

MS Access itself was never a serious tool that developers used for business applications. It's very limited so VB was the default choice in the MS ecosystem for these kinds of applications.

Once Access could use SQL Server, it became worlds better. But the whole "GUI application interface" made it so expensive and limiting that it could never really be a great tool, even when it was a good enough tool.

I've got customers who have built way too much on it and even though they are tiny and use it about as well as anyone could, it's really clear that if they put a little effort into a PHP developer that they could replace everything in a week with something vastly better.

A week? you mean 40 hours at $250/hr (dev house)?

40 hours, a PHP dev sure isn't $250/hr. That's an ERP cost per hour. Contract a developer for a week and you can definitely find someone who will work at much more like $85/hr if you shop around and find someone available.

@JaredBusch said in Remote Access & HIPPA:

@Dashrender said in Remote Access & HIPPA:

@rjt said in Remote Access & HIPPA:

I would second what @JaredBusch said about the HIPAA site and automatic control of the desktop. I would hope if you need control after hours, you could simply reboot the machine and then no consent is necessary.

You either have consent on or off, you don't flip flop without having what seems like a clear workaround to what is supposed to be a security benefit.

I have not, yet, looked back at the MC consent setup once it was implemented. Assuming it was done correctly, consent is permission based, so you could have an account that does not require consent. But you would need auditing on any use of the account.

I was pretty much assuming the use of two accounts - or (more crazily) log in with admin - change the permission, etc... but again, that would be crazy.

But the ability to do that more or less defeats the purpose... because you can choose to be a bad guy and just change that setting as you want and see what you want.... yeah logs are supposed to show what you're doing - but still.

But you have clients who have you in that spot, do you have a during hours and after hours account you use to support them?

@mmicha said in Cyber Liability Insurance:

Just curious what others thoughts and take it on this new form of insurance. Are most starting to carry?

No, several reasons...

Insurance for something like this means that smart, secure, backed up companies pay for companies that don't protect themselves. So if you are competent, you get screwed. On average, the insurer makes money. That means that on average you don't just pay for the damages that happen, but for their profits on top of them. Those that carry insurance are much higher profile targets than those that do not as there is so much more to potentially gain. The likelihood of getting paid even when something happens is insanely low.

For the average company, cyber insurance does more harm than good.

@mmicha

Yup, it's a good solution for sure. Nothing is perfect, but as long as you have CommQuotes by your side, you will have someone there to help you if you need it. We have clients with a few phones to hundreds of seats, as well as call centers that push millions of minutes per month over their network.

You are in good hands and I think you are going to save so much money that you will be hoisted up on to a chariot and whisked away to the kingdom that awaits you as King of Phones at your company

@scottalanmiller said in Phone Service Decision:

Keep in mind I oversee a competitor to RingCentral and am still recommending them 😉 This size is their sweet spot. RC is essentially unbeatable from 1-10 users because that's when they offer their $20/mo rate.

So for five users, that's $100/mo. Flat, easy, done.

Now you want 11 users, call me, I'll beat RC every time. But at 5, you can find a few options at the same price. But you really aren't going to find someone cheaper.

Same recommendation here as I also compete with @scottalanmiller in this space.

There is no way to beat $100/month flat.