Talk:Open Dental

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I have no idea how to edit this page to indicate that I give permission for text and images to be used from my software and my website. I do, of course, approve and give permission. I did not add this page, and I very rarely edit this page, fixing an ocassional typo. -Jordan Sparks


I have replaced all references to "open source" with "FLOSS" throughout. To my knowledge, Open Dental is the only correct usage of the term FLOSS. Thus, this particular article is an important record in the body of Free Software/Open Source Software/Free-Libre-Open Source Software history and documentation. And in case anyone is unclear, I'm only partially kidding--I'm actually quite serious :-) Chitu (talk) 01:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

disagree with User:Longhair "not free software"[edit]

I consider this "free software" as in "free speech", the use of GNU General Public License is a widely used free software license. 21:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's dual licensed with the full function version available only under a commercial license. This isn't necessarily a knock against the project since there's no way around it with the ADA licensing, but it's still a fact of life. (talk) 19:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


Although this article may need more work to be wikified, I do not believe it should be deleted. There are a lot of open source software products that are less notable, found on wikipedia. with some time this should improve 21:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Three years later and this article still needs heavy copy editing. It reads more like an advertorial cut-and-paste from the product's web site than a Wikipedia article. I fixed some of the most glaring problems, but it requires more time than I have available to give to it. (talk) 19:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Opendental IS NOT anymore supporting linux in any way.[edit]

The developers moved from opengl to directx, and as frequently stated by the developer in his forum, the linux support and ability to run under it was cut way far ago. As i speak, Opendental cannot run under any linux platform, not even recompiling the source code. This article should be corrected in many parts. As it is states false affirmations and uncorrect facts.

I've updated the article to match the current state of affairs. (talk) 19:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I think we should place a new section called "pricing" or something like that

IMHO, for newbies, the article is very misleading. The terms "free dental", "gnu public liscence" and "open source" may mislead someone into thinking that this is free software. Also the way the article is written looks like an advertisment. The inclusion of the pricing will make it more objective and indipendent

The trial version is free but it is limited to only 30 patients

The full version costs $149 a month for the first year then $99 a month

Vmaldia (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2011 (UTC) The software is indeed free, you must compile the source code to run it, it takes only time and programming knowledge. The charge is for distribution of complied binary, which anyone could complile and sell. In fact, there are at least five companies that compile and sell it at different prices, so that is one reason why there would never be a pricing section. Vmaldia, for instance, could download and compile the source code and post compiled version for free. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

POV tag added[edit]

The article reads much like an advertisement. Lots of PROs not many CONs. The tag should be removed when it reads more balanced. Also the point form list of features should be put in paragraph form.Dig Deeper (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2016 (UTC)