[Sigia-l] Tool standardization (was about visio or not tovisio)

[Listera]

"Andres Sulleiro" wrote:
>> So *all* you are saying is that they should standardize on the *cheapest*
>> available product?

> I don't think David was saying that at all, you are putting words in his
> mouth, which you do oh so well :)

OK, let's parse this *question* (in case you missed the question mark at the
end) and take it to its conclusion, hopefully you'll follow.

> He was saying that by standardizing a tool they can get volume discounts
> for licenses, not that they choose the cheapest tool.

It's the same argument.

David was talking about standardizing on a tool because of discount
licensing, "end of story."

David's assertion is neither a good explanation nor a good justification for
standardization on a tool.

It's simply not a good explanation because volume discounting can *not* be
the sole reason. AFAIK, *every* software vendor offers discount breaks.

It's not a good justification because it makes money the central issue. When
you need to handle a billion records you'll chose a DB like Oracle, *no
matter* what kind of a license discount you get on, say, FileMaker. If you
do a lot of work in Microsoft apps, you'll standardize on Windows, even if
you get Linux at the ultimate discount rate of 'free'. Only the most
clueless and shortsighted IT dept would advocate excluding all other choices
regardless of their merit, because one of them provides the best discount.

> Most software tools, no matter how expensive, have a licensing program where
> you get discounts.

Exactly. Since I don't know of any company that would not give volume
discounts, *all* you are saying above is that the one that provides the
biggest discount should be standardized on, since volume discounts are *not*
a differentiating factor in and of themselves. That's why David's assertion
is false, end of story.
 
> I can see how a company would prefer you use a tool they already have that can
> sort of do the job for you.

"sort of do the job" Yep, that's exactly the point. Not do the job well or
the best, but sort of. And you standardize on this tool, because, well, you
get volume discount. Even though you'd *also* get volume discounts with *any
other* comparable tool.

Like I said, this is shortsighted in the extreme.

The point is *not* to standardize on *tools* but on output *formats.* Don't
standardize on FinalCutPro or Avid, standardize on NTSC/DV. Don't
standardize on GoLive or FrontPage, standardize on HTML/CSS. Etc.

With IAs, presumably, you are dealing with *professionals* who can think for
themselves. I'd find it rather astonishing that your average IT drone or a
system admin can actually help someone who calls himself "user interface
engineer" with, say, the finer points of diagramming in a tool like Visio.
So standardizing on a tool, because of volume discounts and support issues,
*in this professional* context, is penny wise and pound foolish.

Ziya
Nullius in Verba