SaaS Blogs

If all SaaS was meant to be browser-based, it would have been called ‘Web Apps As A Service’ (WaaaS). So let’s not forget that when we’re talking about SaaS, we’re talking about the evolution of software, not just web apps. Given that, it’s a bit incorrect to say that SaaS is the natural evolution of Web 2.0. Instead, consider Web 2.0 to be an augmenter in the evolution of software. Perhaps SaaS would more accurately be called Software 3.0, rather than Web 3.0.

Thanks. I have to get that off my chest because believe it or not in browsing blog posts and comments across the web as of late, I still see many people saying things like “check out my site at www.something-that-ends-in-r-because-I-shortened-er.com. It’s a SaaS mashup that is the future of Web 3.0!” To which I reply…. “Huh?”

Web 2.0 in all its rich, protocol-driven, glory undeniably brought the user experience portion of Internet-based services, or web applications, closer to our familiar traditional software experience. But let’s not forget that as a whole this paradigm shift which we’re in is in fact called Software as a Service for a reason. Just because we happen to have undergone a user experience mutation in recent years, and now we append ‘as a Service’ to it, doesn’t mean we have to abandon our notion of what software actually is. According to Dictionary.com, software is “anything that is not hardware but is used with hardware.” Whoa. That’s a lot of things, that software.

An analogy: When you go to a restaurant and order a steak, you are receiving that steak as a service rather than cooking it yourself at home. Either way, it’s still a steak. While it may be flavored differently, it doesn’t take on different properties as a steak because it was prepared in someone else’s kitchen. The same thing prevails here – SaaS dictates that you use software cooked in someone else’s kitchen (the service), but don’t accept anything less than real software. In other words, don’t accept Web 2.0 when you’re really looking for SaaS – because if you do, you’re only getting a piece of the action. Consider Web 2.0 to be a mutation in the evolution of Software, but don’t forget that there’s a whole lot more to software that is still required for it to be software.

In late 2005, Phil Wainewright of ZDNet SaaS Blogs started an interesting series of articles with an introductory piece called “What to expect from Web 3.0“. In it, he asserts that Web 2.0 is merely a staging ground for what will ultimately become ‘a much more mature and durable Web 3.0 era’. Noting companies like Google, Amazon, and eBay as the major players of the Web 2.0 phase, he rightly (*sob* Writely) drops names such as Webex, Netsuite, Jamcracker, and of course Salesforce.com as potential leaders in this new Web 3.0. In setting up the piece, Mr. Wainewright stresses distinctions between his notions of Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 by drawing a topology of Web 3.0. A piece of this topology is a layer known as ‘Service Clients’. To paraphrase the article, these are enterprise application clients as we know and love them, but with the augmentation that they are themselves provided as services. Fundamentally, we are talking about virtualization and service a la SoftGrid™ . However, let’s not go too far in this direction either.

So, does SaaS mean Web Apps? Mashups? Virtualization? Application Streaming? Thick Clients?

The answer is YES.

Incidentally, this is why the SaaS platform space is so interesting right now. There are platform players arriving on the scene everyday bringing enablement to the table. But who’s going to bring the SaaS platform that is so general purpose and all-encompassing that it allows vendors to produce the real software of the Software 3.0 era?

In summary, take a look at this fundamental diagram that shows Web 2.0 simply as a modifier to the progression of software: