Trial Applied Client Network Membership

[Jim Jensen]

I received an email this afternoon granting me a trial membership to Applied Client Network through 10/31. Perhaps due to registering for the Virtual Conference. Curious to see what it's like these days. Haven't been in there for 4-5 years, maybe more.

[Hans Manhave]

I received an email this afternoon granting me a trial membership to Applied Client Network through 10/31. Perhaps due to registering for the Virtual Conference. Curious to see what it's like these days. Haven't been in there for 4-5 years, maybe more.

Jealous...   Still wonder why that hasn't been rolled into support fees.

[Jim Jensen]

Hans, did you register for the convention? There's no cost this year - register and see if it comes for  you too. May see a session or two worth some time.

[DebAmstutz]

I registered for the virtual conference since it's free, but I haven't received any trial membership email yet.  I'm not that excited about joining, to be honest.  The price for a normal non-member attending the "real" conference isn't much higher than a member, so there is no incentive on that front.  The nearest user group meeting site for me is about the same distance that Indianapolis was when we had a chapter, but those meetings are usually centered on just Epic, and the cost is $50 for non-members so I've only been to a couple since going back to work last year.  The speakers have been the same chapter members each time, even though they could afford outside presenters.  There is just no "spark" there, so that makes the motivation to join less for me.  I don't like to spend agency money on something that is not useful. 

[Michael]

I dropped our membership a year or two ago and haven't really missed it. The meetings seemed to be mostly about epic (which we're not on) or speakers/vendors peddling their wares and while nice to meet and talk to others in the industry, it wasn't worth the time or money. I was also really bothered by the fact that our Canadian brokerage had to pay our local fees in US dollars so membership cost us like 30% more than everyone else and when I raised it with them they didn't weren't interested.

[DebAmstutz]

The TAM/Epic balance for meetings was beginning to become an issue when I was forced out of the chapter presidency (term limits) several years ago.  I could see it was going to be a "sticky wicket" since there were (at that time) a lot of staunch TAM users, but Epic was gaining ground in agencies.  There were not too many topics that worked for both, and at that time, not many presenters who could handle both systems.  We could have done a session for one system in the morning, included everyone for lunch and then had the other system's session in the afternoon.  That was one plan.  If we would have had all-day meetings on successive days (if a topic/topics required a day-long session for each system), then there would have been added expense for the presenter, and no guarantee that we'd have had enough Epic attendees to make it worth the extra expense. 

What I think should have happened was to have regions in states combine and have a TAM chapter and an Epic chapter within a larger area.  I would be willing to make a 2-hour drive to anywhere that would provide good information I can use.  That might have solved the issue if people would have been willing to volunteer for officer positions.  Our chapter dissolved when the president after me decided one term was enough for him and nobody else would volunteer. 

[Sherry Burrell]

As a presenter, who has presented at chapters around the country, I have seen a total swap of users.  In Florida, they usually have a day long session with Epic in one room and TAM in the other.  Originally, Epic was in the small room with maybe 10 users, and 40 or 50 TAM users in the large room.  Last time I presented in 2019, it was the other way.  I don't think 10 TAM users were there, and there was a full room of Epic users, probably  50 people.  Same thing happened in Georgia/Alabama chapter, two sessions offered, one on each system.  Part of it is also that people who aren't on Epic yet may sit in on those sessions to see what's different from TAM.

Some chapters are presenting TAM one quarter, and Epic the next.  There is one Epic only chapter in the NY area covering Tri-State (not sure which states).  i would be interested to know what the user #s are now as members of Applied Client Network.  Based on # of licenses, not # of agencies. 

[Terry Evans]

I registered/attended the virtual conference but did not receive an ASCNET trial offer.  The ASCNET group in Arizona has not been very active over the years so I probably wouldn't get much out of it.

[Jeff Golas]

This has been an interesting topic with Applied; while we were on Vision, Applied kept reporting that they were supporting it and developing for it, while really no progress was being made and it became difficult to keep running it while moving onto newer OSes and computers. We were "stuck" until we moved, but the only thing going was that the data was on SQL, meaning it could be accessed/transferred/processed outside of Vision if need be. This is also still how we access some legacy data; once in a while we need to run a script against the Vision Databases which is still faster than trying to find an old computer to run Vision.

That said, peeps, Tam is going away eventually. If I'm not mistaken, TAM runs on dbase? If so your data is sitting in an antique database format that should have been retired about 20 years ago. You can't do much with it other than to access it or report from it via TAM itself, at least not without some work. Many other database platforms have been around for literally decades and Tam should have been moved/ported to something newer back in the 90s to evolve the product. Just to put things into perspective, even smartphones use a flavor of sql to store data within the phone (sqlite). I think ultimately what happened is that Vision was intended to be the next-gen Applied product in the 2000s, but it never caught on because, well, it mostly sucked for a long time until they really put some developers behind it. Since it had a poor reputation, they moved to "reboot" with Epic; put some better development into it, and have it be a viable product instead of an alpha-version like Vision 1.0 was *twitch*.

I'm curious what the cost path is going from Tam to Epic; Epic is going to be more expensive no matter how you slice it, as its "too complex" to run on-prem for most smaller shops, and very expensive to buy as a hosted product. I'm not sure how the TAM licensing costs compare though, but it seems Epic is likely (slowly) moving to all web-based product (As most business software is), and there will likely be an Epic-Lite or something to win over Tam holdouts.

Applied has moved on, hence the flip in TAM classes/training. Even if they won't admit it - its basically "sunsetting" TAM, as Epic is the replacement and where all the effort is being made. You can't blame Applied for that, other than it should have happened sooner, or maybe just "better" with Vision, even if eventually evolved to Epic anyway.

[DebAmstutz]

I was told a rollover price from TAM to Epic of at least $25,000.00.  I am guessing this agency would go to less-expensive software that is more user-friendly than Epic if TAM goes bye-bye.  The cost for Epic is outrageous for a smaller agency.

[Billy Welsh]

I would argue that dBase probably should have disappeared more than 20 years ago, but point taken.

I am too far removed to recall the exact costs, but as with everything A$ it was steep.  There were one-time costs, which they were always looking for new ways to pile on to, the new licensing model (more expensive), and the increased monthly "support" costs on top of that.  I have said it before, and I'll repeat it - be very careful and try to think of everything and hold their feet to the fire UP FRONT and get it documented.  There was no "grace" given to us as a former TAM agency who moved from AMS to TAM (cha-ching #1) and then to Epic (cha-ching #2).  I made the mistake of relying on the verbal word of the sales rep that TAM access would not be cut off (not true), and should you call as a paying Epic customer needing some assistance getting some of YOUR data from TAM, don't expect the Epic support fees to cover it.  I would absolutely insist on TAM access and support for as long as your are a paying Epic customer, given that they do NOT convert all the data.

To this day that sick twisted business model just gets me all riled up.  Maybe it's better these days with the competition that's out there like Bob's application.

[Mark]

You can kind of compare the two products to cars.  You have the old car, TAM, which doesn't have a lot of bells and whistles but is keeping up pretty well for the most part and running the agency quite well (this is relative, not a major point).  However, under the hood, it is very out dated and maybe now or soon, you wont be able to get certain parts for it anymore.

There are costs to replace this car.

There are lots of different kinds of new cars today, all with their own advantages.  However, operating costs differ (electric vs. gas), repairs differ (batteries).  Newer technology may be more expensive to maintain, there may be more moving pieces, specifically trained personnel, or whatever.  Point is that there is an acquisition fee for his new car and there are other costs to maintain this new car that maybe you didn't have with the old car.

Epic being the new car, there is a list of differences that could fall under the above.  That doesn't make it so much better or the best out there, it is just the reality.  That reality is that if you want to get into a new car, there are costs - but there are lots of cars, so when the time comes you have to do the research.  And that time may come whether you want it to or not.

Side note, speaking of cars - my Dad has a Toyota Avalon Hybrid.  The battery - the "regular" battery, not the big driving battery, needed to be replaced... because it's a hybrid, it's not a "regular" battery, so it was $700 to replace!  The batteries that drive the car are something like $3,500 to replace, so again - this wasn't those batteries.  It was the "starter" battery or "accessories" or whatever you want to call it.  That's crazy.  The mileage is undeniable, but in the end it is hard to decide if the value is there with these costs.  You have to decide what "value" you're interested in, because all that money you save in gas clearly goes into other aspects of the car, and if you want to keep it or hand it down to a family member, it will actually cost you more to do than a gas vehicle.  Those driving batteries are suppose to be replaced after x years - I forget, 5 or 7?  Even if it's 10 years, if you give it to your kid, they'll soon need to fork out the price of a used car just to replace the batteries!

This actually flows well into my analogy.  TAM vs. Epic (or other AMS) - what value are you interested in?

[Billy Welsh]

Realizing I'm toeing the line on the TOS  , my personal opinion has always been that the whole electric car thing is way over politicized.  Forced into mainstream use and subsidized with tax $ well before it was ready for prime time.  Even now, other than for short trips, it does not seem ready for prime time.  And when you consider the fact that ~99% of electrical generation comes from fossil fuels, are you really accomplishing the stated/desired environmental goals?

Personally, I am not convinced that electrically powered transportation is the long term answer.  The materials for the batteries are quite toxic (trading one pollution problem for another), and it remains to be seen if the battery technology and charging capabilities can make it a practical alternative 100% of the time to traditional fossil fuel vehicles.  Add to that the generation paradox (absent some huge technological breakthrough, solar and wind cannot meet our needs) and the case gets worse.  Nuclear power generation could help, but again there's plenty of toxic pieces to THAT solution.  Hybrids are a nice bridge between the old and new technologies, but see Mark's post about battery costs.


IMHO the tax $ spent on forcing electric cars into the market would have been better spent on continuing to improve the technology to address pollution from fossil fuel use.  Think about how much cars have improved over the last 30 years.  My dad was an auto mechanic, and he pooh-poohed the ideas of computers in cars, and yet they have allowed huge improvements in fuel economy and engine life among other things.  Remember the tune-up, the main issue being changing out spark plugs?  Spark plugs use to wear out because of imprecise and inconsistent fuel/air mixture.  No more with computers.

Let the Tesla's of the world do their research and compete in the open market.  Go ahead and produce hybrids too.  But stop forcing it, and subsidizing it, unless we truly are approaching an inflection point where it is really necessary (we are not there yet, other than maybe in a few densely populated areas where air pollution is through the roof).  If folks want to buy an electric or hybrid, fine that is the definition of freedom.  But to Mark's point make sure they know up front what the replacement/maintenance costs are.

Remember as well that a typical volcanic eruption (which are quite a regular occurrence on our tiny blue dot) produces more CO2 that all the cars in the world.  We can force ourselves off fossil fuels for reasons good/right or bad/wrong, and in the end Mother Nature is truly in control anyway.

I personally believe we will ultimately solve the fusion problem, which would solve a whole lot of these issues.

Just my $0.02.

[Mark]

I personally believe we will ultimately solve the fusion problem, which would solve a whole lot of these issues.

That, my friend, has been in my nerd news feed quite a bit this past week. 

[Sherry Burrell]

A huge battery manufacturing plant is being built in my home county in Georgia to provide batteries for the automotive industry, SK Innovations.  It is supposed to provide over 2000 jobs when completed.  There have also been a lot of issues with the construction of the facility, contractors quitting, bringing in foreign workers (general construction work, not specialized engineers, etc.) to construct the building instead of using local employees, etc.    There was also a court case alleging SK stole the battery patents.