Our opinion is that other vendors have accepted the value of this technology. Unfortunately, creating an expert system calls for a new product to be designed and built. In addition to the very large costs involved in engineering a new product, the industry and the end users are not demanding more from their software vendors. These are probably the reasons that the major vendors have no plans to rewrite their products even though they were designed nearly 20 years ago! As an alternative, many of them have incorporated some limited “thinking” into their products and are advertising this as strategies, tactics, workflow management etc. In spite of these attempts, it is a fact that none of these systems can be described as an expert system. Compare what has to be done with these systems to create some of the automated environments and processes that are easily created using RMEx. The difficulty in setting up and using the “thinking” features in these other systems is directly related to the fact that unlike with RMEx, these features were not incorporated into the original design of the product but were added much later on in the life of the product. The results obtained from these competitive systems are different, and for any collection software vendor to claim that a conventional data-based system can compete with an expert system is both irresponsible and inaccurate.
Since this technology is so promising, why have other vendors not endorsed it and redesigned their products?
Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!
About the Author: Jeff Dickey