LawStream:

What it offers now, and how it grew from our earlier software...

---

Go to: feature comparison chart

Go to: "Why we had both programs: LawStream, and LawStream Classic"

Go to: our narrative of why we developed LawStream Classic, and why we moved from it to LawStream

Go to: questions and answers about LawStream Classic and LawStream (mainly for LawStream Classic users interested in moving to LawStream, but helpful for everyone)

Sample LawStream Main Work Area (with optional toolbar, word processor and utility drawer)	LawStream Classic Main Work Area

---

Feature	LawStream Classic	LawStream
works on PowerPC Macs	Yes	Yes
works on the new IntelMacs	Yes (under Rosetta emulation)	Yes (does not need Rosetta emulation, and does take advantage of the full speed and power of the new IntelMac processors)
works on Windows	Windows 98, 2000 (contact PowerSoft for other possible compatible operating systems)	Windows XP, Vista (contact PowerSoft for other possible compatible operating systems)
integrated word processor	No	Yes
integrated e-mail	No	Yes
spell-checker	No	Yes
ability to create reports in pdf format	No	Yes
recommended minimum processor speed	1 MHz	1.66 MHz
required screen size	800 wide 600 high	1024 wide 720 high
ability to import documents in rtf format	No	Yes
timekeeping, billing, accounting, contact management, file/matter management, productivity reports, inter-office memos, notes to file, and all other core features for managing time and money	Yes	Yes
continued development and enhancements	Yes	Yes

Why are some people still using LawStream Classic, even though PowerSoft Innovations Corporation is now only marketing LawStream?

If you're looking for an application that can handle your timekeeping, billing, scheduling, accounting, notes to file, contact management, file/matter control, trust accounting, receivables, payables, productivity reports, and other key functions for managing time and money, then either program will give you what you need.

If your office's current focus is on making the best use of the hardware and operating system software you have, and if you don't have immediate plans to upgrade your hardware and software, and if your current hardware and software don't quite meet the minimum recommended specifications for using LawStream, then you will likely want to choose LawStream Classic for its core functions and its ability to work well on most hardware and software.

If your office's current or short-term plans include the use of the latest hardware and operating system software (especially, the new IntelMac processors), and if you want to take advantage of the speed and power of the latest technology, you should consider LawStream. LawStream is also a good choice for those who rely on document management and the merging of custom data into documents, and who would be able to use the integrated word processor provided with LawStream.

Why we developed two similar programs...

Yes, we've changed our policies:
You may see from some of the following questions and answers, that we originally offered both LawStream and LawStream Classic, as programs for our users (existing users, and prospective users). Since introducing LawStream, though, we have had no new sales of LawStream Classic (even though we marketed both products). That sent a fairly clear message to us: even though there are still a few of our dedicated LawStream Classic users who do not (yet!) want to move to LawStream, most people see the benefits of getting a more advanced program at the same cost

Please keep those comments in mind, as you read the following questions and answers...

Two programs, one goal:
As you have likely noticed from the other information on this web site, there certainly are similarities between the two programs (LawStream Classic and LawStream). Both of them perform the same key functions for managing time and money. In that respect, LawStream Classic and LawStream continue to fit squarely within the mandate we have established for our software for more than ten years: helping professionals organize their time and their money, and helping them turn their time into money.

Keeping up with technological advances:
From Bob Dylan: The Times They Are A-Changin'
If your time to you is worth savin...
The slow one now will later be fast...
For the times they are a-changin.
Going back more than ten years (when one of our challenges was deciding what to do when our program software would no longer fit on an 800K floppy disk!), we have always faced technological changes as opportunities rather than obstacles. Our most recent opportunity/challenge has been the advent of IntelMac (universal binary) processors. When Raining Data (the company that provides us with the Omnis Studio software we use for development) announced its plans for the IntelMacs, we were both pleased and dismayed: we were pleased, because that announcement confirmed that Raining Data would release an IntelMac-native version of Omnis Studio; we were dismayed, because that announcement also noted that there would be no inexpensive upgrade for developers who wanted to take advantage of the new IntelMac processors. The announcement that we would not be able to use the development software we had, to produce an IntelMac-native version of our software; instead, we would have to purchase new software development tools if we were to be able to provide our users with an IntelMac-native version of our software.

Trying to please all the people all the time:
We have all kinds of users, but we sometimes classify them into two different categories: those who continue to push the technological envelope and demand more, and those who prefer to make the best use of their current technology and shy away from any unnecessary hardware and software advances. The development of our software over the years has often involved a balancing act between those two approaches to office productivity. As we faced the need to deal with changes in our own development software, we had to consider the needs of those types of users. Moving to the new development software (a newer version of Omnis Studio) would put us and our users in a position where our software would work best on the newest hardware and system software, and where it might not work optimally on older hardware and system software. We also realized that some of our users would not want to pay for the cost of getting new software from us, while they were content with the software they already had. Another important consideration was the cost (in time and money) of dealing with two development tools: we had not previously made any commitment to maintain and enhance two different versions of our software, and instead we had always chosen to replace old software with new software when we found it necessary to move to a new development tool.

Deciding on a compromise, or: Rickie Nelson was wrong:
From Garden Party:
"See you can't please everyone,
So you got to please yourself."
As noted above, we faced preferences and options favoring different types of users, which we also had to weigh against our own interests. We had to make some compromises, to deal with a variety of factors, including:
- our own preference for ease in developing and maintaining our software,
- the preference of some of our users, in moving to more advanced hardware and system software; and
- the preference of other users, who did not want to suffer the expense of new software or new hardware.
We dealt with those compromises, by putting our own interests behind those of our users, and by choosing a solution that would satisfy all our users: we chose to continue with the development and support of LawStream Classic, and to proceed with the development and support of a new product (LawStream). We could fairly quickly build a new application (LawStream) on the basis of the core functions of LawStream Classic, but develop it with the new version of Omnis Studio, so it would take advantage of the new hardware and system software available to us and our users. The development process for LawStream (known at that time as SmartWeal) turned out to be more time-consuming and more costly than we had expected, but we were able to get the development work done without any major problems.

Adding more value:
It might have been enough to develop a new application with the same features and appearance as LawStream Classic: after all, that solution would have addressed the need for an IntelMac-native application, and it would have involved less development effort and cost on our part. Instead, though, we wanted to give LawStream users additional value for their money, as the new development tools gave us additional opportunities to enhance our software. We also saw the development of two similar applications as a way to give our cutting-edge users a chance to take advantage of new hardware and software, while also giving our "techno-stable" users a chance to continue to profit from their current investments in hardware and software. With additional screen-space and faster processor speeds expected from LawStream users, we were able to add some significant enhancements to LawStream: a word processor and related tools for managing and creating documents.

Questions and Answers...

Is there anything I should know, to help me understand the other questions and answers, before I start to review them? YES: please read the brief technical explanation, found by clicking here.
Why couldn't you stay with LawStream (Classic) as the only program you have?
Why couldn't you drop LawStream Classic entirely, and let everyone move to LawStream?
If LawStream Classic and LawStream both use Omnis Studio, then why is there a need for upgrades and extra expense and differences between LawStream Classic and LawStream?
Could you let both programs use the same data base engine?
Can I use both programs with the same data file in my office?
If I choose to move from LawStream Classic to LawStream, what happens to my LawStream Classic data?
Will all Mac LawStream Classic users have to migrate to LawStream when they get new IntelMac hardware?
Will development and enhancement of LawStream Classic be frozen, or can LawStream Classic users still expect to see enhancements of their program?

A brief technical explanation, to help you understand some of these questions and answers: LawStream Classic and LawStream use a data base engine (similar to FileMaker Pro). That data base engine is called Omnis Studio. Just as you need a word processing application to develop your precedents, pleadings and other documents, we need a data base engine (a data base application or program), to develop our applications. Just as other people need a copy of your word processor application to change the documents you create on your word processor, our users need a program that can run the programs we create. We therefore use a developers' version of Omnis Studio to develop our applications, and our users need a runtime version of Omnis Studio to run those applications.
Why couldn't you stay with LawStream Classic as the only program you have?	LawStream Classic uses a data base engine called Omnis Studio (version 3.3), to organize and store data, and to generate the windows and reports used by LawStream. Omnis Studio is somewhat similar to programs like FileMaker Pro and Fourth Dimension, although its market is generally limited to professional data base developers, and it is not actively marketed to the public in general. Around the time Apple announced that it would be using the IntelMac processor in its new computers, the developers of Omnis Studio announced that Omnis Studio version 3.3 would not run "natively" under the new IntelMac chips. Instead, applications developed with Omnis Studio would have to be re-developed in a newer version of Omnis Studio (version 4.2), in order to run natively under the new IntelMac chips. We realized that we had to develop (or, re-develop) our software, to be able to take advantage of the new hardware; also, we wanted to stay at the cutting edge of data base technology in any event, so we saw the move to Omnis Studio 4.1 as a way to take advantage of the latest data base software technology for both platforms (Windows and Macintosh OS X). If we had stayed with LawStream and Omnis Studio 3.3, we and our users would have been forced to remain with an application that works well with current and recent hardware and operating system software, but that would not work optimally with the latest technological advances, and that might not work at all with future technological advances.
Why couldn't you drop LawStream (Classic) entirely, and let everyone move to LawStream?	We thought briefly about dropping LawStream (Classic) entirely, but we quickly decided that that would not be wise. We had a large number of firms using LawStream Classic, who were quite content with what LawStream does in their offices. Many of those firms have invested large amounts of money in hardware and software, and are not ready to spend more money on another law office management application, and are not ready to spend more money on new hardware for their offices. We owe much of our growth to those users who have been dedicated to us: they have supported us, and we want to continue to support them. Since the introduction of LawStream (formerly known as "SmartWeal"), a large number of our LawStream (Classic) users have moved to LawStream, but there are still some firms that continue to use LawStream (Classic) in their offices, and we want to ensure that they are able to use our software with their current hardware and operating systems. We also considered finding a way to offer an exact replica of LawStream, running under the new (Omnis Studio 4.2) data base engine, but we eliminated that option: there is a large cost in developing our application (even, in converting it from Omnis Studio 3.3 to Omnis Studio 4.2), including a large cost in distributing new (Omnis Studio 4.2) data base engines to all our users. Because there had to be a cost in moving from Omnis Studio 3.3 to Omnis Studio 4.2 (our development cost, and our users' cost for new Omnis Studio runtime rights), we realized we must offer extra value for that extra cost: that prompted our decision to create an application that would do everything that LawStream Classic would do, and more.
If LawStream Classic and LawStream both use Omnis Studio, then why is there a need for upgrades and extra expense and differences between LawStream Classic and LawStream?	Even though LawStream Classic and LawStream both use Omnis Studio, they use different versions of Omnis Studio. LawStream Classic uses version 3.3 of Omnis Studio, and LawStream uses version 4.2 of Omnis Studio. We have to pay for a developers' version of Omnis Studio 3.3, and a developers' version of Omnis Studio 4.2, so we can continue to develop and enhance our applications. We also have to pay for the right to distribute runtime versions of Omnis Studio, for each person who uses any of our applications. When people choose to move from LawStream Classic to LawStream, we have to pay for those runtime rights for Omnis Studio 4.2.
Could you let both programs use the same data base engine?	No. Even though there are many similarities between LawStream Classic and LawStream, and even though LawStream Classic and LawStream use data base engines developed by the same company, they are not compatible: LawStream Classic uses Omnis Studio 3.3, and not Omnis Studio 4.2; LawStream uses Omnis Studio 4.2, and not Omnis Studio 3.3. Any attempt to use LawStream Classic or LawStream with the wrong data base engine will not end up in success.
Can I use both programs with the same data file in my office?	No, you cannot. The data file format for LawStream Classic is very similar to the data file format for LawStream, but there are formats, indexes and other features in the LawStream data file that are not included in the LawStream Classic data file. Either LawStream program (Classic or Pro) will let you open a data file created by the other: for example, LawStream Classic users who choose to move to LawStream can easily convert their LawStream Classic data files to LawStream files, by opening the data file in LawStream and letting LawStream proceed through a quick conversion process. If you try to open a LawStream data file with LawStream Classic, you might find that you can open it; even if you do manage to open a LawStream data file with LawStream Classic, though, you will lose any data that was designed solely for LawStream use.
Will all Mac LawStream (Classic) users have to migrate to LawStream when they get new IntelMac hardware?	No. It is not necessary for a LawStream Classic user to migrate to LawStream as soon as that user starts using an IntelMac. We currently have LawStream Classic users who are using Intel-based Macs, and we currently have some LawStream users who are using PowerPC-based Macs. Here's a summary: - LawStream Classic works on IntelMacs - LawStream works on IntelMacs - LawStream works on PowerPC Macs - LawStream Classic works on PowerPC Macs Here's a bit more of an explanation: LawStream Classic currently works on IntelMacs, just as LawStream currently works on IntelMacs: we have users who are using LawStream on IntelMacs, and users who are using LawStream Classic on IntelMacs, and they have had no problems. LawStream and LawStream Classic both work on IntelMacs, but they do so under a process called Rosetta emulation. The significant issues will arise when (if?) the folks at Apple decide to abandon Rosetta emulation. At that point, anyone without Rosetta emulation will be unable to run any PowerPC-based applications on their IntelMacs; as far as I know, that is a risk faced by everyone using any Macintosh application. Because there is no IntelMac-native version of Omnis Studio 3 (the database engine that drives LawStream Classic), LawStream Classic users will not be able to upgrade to an IntelMac-native version of LawStream. What we have done (and what we are trying to continue to do), is to offer solutions that will work with our users who want to continue to use their current operating system software and current hardware, while also offering a solution for those who want to take advantage of the latest processors and operating systems. Those offerings, as far as I know, likely go beyond what many developers are doing: the trend in some other applications appears to be to either refrain from any upgrade (thereby leaving their users in the lurch), or abandon legacy applications in favor of applications that run only on the latest hardware and system software. We have chosen a middle path, which we hope will please all our users and anyone else considering a purchase of our software.
If I choose to move from LawStream Classic to LawStream, what happens to my LawStream (Classic) data?	All your LawStream Classic data can easily and quickly be converted to a format acceptable to LawStream. Because of extra data types and indexes in a LawStream data file, your LawStream program will probably have to spend some time reorganizing your old LawStream Classic data. Once that reorganization is complete, you will be ready to proceed to use your old LawStream Classic data on your new LawStream program.
Will development and enhancement of LawStream Classic be frozen, or can LawStream Classic users still expect to see enhancements of their program?	As can be seen from the ongoing lists of enhancements shown on this web site, we have continued to develop and enhance both LawStream Classic and LawStream since LawStream was released. Those enhancements, though, will be different, because we are working with different screen-space, different processors, and different add-ons (if I can refer to the integrated word processor, etc. as “add-ons”).  Think of an analogy relating to cars, where LawStream Classic is a town-car and LawStream is a new SUV manufactured by the same company: the fact that an SUV might get a more powerful engine or better offroading abilities, does not preclude the town-car from getting a more efficient engine or a better audio system. It also doesn't preclude the addition of identical features (e.g., advanced airbags or other safety features) to both models. We have not frozen the development and enhancement of LawStream Classic. We do plan to continue with development and enhancement of LawStream Classic and LawStream, although development of new features on "Pro" will go beyond the range of developments on "Classic".