Folks,
At the risk of muddying the water even further, I've talked to Jon about this in the past, and unfortunately the lawyers have got to HIM about this. He's worried that someone using an old program or old database, and prescribing from outdated data could leave HIM open to liability. This is part of the reason he's moving to a subscription model.
I suspect that the "$500, one time, that's it" text will be going bye-bye in the future.
Maybe not, but that's my impression.
That being said, I also don't see Jon pulling the plug on someone who has had their subscription expire unless he thinks there is a legal threat, or unless for some reason there becomes a legal liability problem due to an unknown flaw in an old version. (a possible example would be finding out an old version altered or ate chart data, or some such) in which case the ability to add new records to those systems would be disabled.
If the practice had the subscription, they'd have the updates.
I've had some pretty long talks with Jon on this, and he's trying to balance a lot of different concerns here. I don't think its about the money - I think it's about having to support multiple versions in the field, and liability.
Just my $0.02
V.
