Google Apps Premier Edition

Feb 22, 2007 by

This is just a mini-post to aggregate the plethora of commentary surrounding the announcement of Google Apps Premier Edition.  Phrases like “in direct competition with Microsoft Office” abound, but overall it’s apparent that there are still a tremendous amount of questions surrounding the maturity level of the application suite.

Here’s a bit of what’s being said:

The question of competitive landscape comes up quite a bit in these discussions.  Is Google Apps Premier Edition as a whole product actually in direct competition with MS Office? Don Dodge offers some very good examples of why it is not. It seems that Google Apps’ aggregate features fall in between the intentional sparcity of the 37signals collaboration suite, and the common robustness and sheer power of MS Office.  As Google starts to elbow its way into the market MS is in a position to adapt and continue to innovate, it’s companies like Zoho and 37signals that should really be concerned (not to mention the price comparisons – $50 per user/per year for Google Apps Premier vs. $149 per user/ per month for 37signals’ BaseCamp).

What are your thoughts?  Where does Google’s play sit in the landscape of enterprise communication and collaboration?

read more

Mini-Update on the Channels Post

Feb 16, 2007 by

If you haven’t read it, I wrote a post the other day regarding traditional sales channels and SaaS end users, highlighting the potential need to reach these end users with creative partnerships. I used the NetSuite/CompUSA partnership as an example. I bumped into a post over on Phil Wainewrights blog this morning about NetSuite’s recent parternship with eBay. Personally, I like the proposition and really is a unique way to approach the reach problem through partnerships. This particular instance is a technical and business partnership. Phil discusses eBay’s business user base as a potential customer route for NetSuite, and I definitely agree. Furthermore, I think it exposes people to B2B on-demand software, which is always a plus.

read more

Do Traditional Channels Matter in a SaaS World?

Feb 15, 2007 by

From the vendor’s perspective, SaaS is more than just a distribution model; it’s a new way of doing business. Many of you have heard it before; no more large license-fee deals, issues with compensating your sales team, planning around incrementally growing yet recurring revenue, etc. The single most important question, however, is “How do I sell?” SaaS poses an interesting scenario: as a provider, you now have extended your distribution power and reduced your per-unit cost basis low enough that your application is a no-brainer deal for the small-to-medium sized business (SMB), but how do you reach these SMBs? Obviously, the mid to enterprise market has warmed up to SaaS so that’s a great market to tackle, but there are established IT inroads into members of this market. There are many, many SMBs out there each without a CIO or CTO or any other obvious “goto” inroad. Getting the idea of on-tap software functionality out to this market is a very big challenge. In my opinion, SaaS providers that attempt to leverage traditional distribution and sales channels with SMBs in mind probably won’t find it to be too successful. I’m betting that SaaS providers targeting this space will have to use a lot of creativity to achieve a broad and deep reach across the SMB space.

A good starting point would be to answer the question “Where do SMBs do business?” or “Who do SMBs work with that I can utilize as channels?” An example (albeit experimental in feel and nature) was NetSuite’s deal with CompUSA last year; CompUSA has many SMBs as clients, and could potentially act as a point of sale for NetSuite subscriptions as well as provide NetSuite training to customers. Although this might not be the “killer channel”, it’s a decent example of creativity. We’ll see more of this unfold as vendors try and tackle the space. Any thoughts? If you’re a SaaS provider, have you had any success with some sort of non-traditional channel or partnership pairing?

read more

Industry Jargon

Feb 7, 2007 by

It’s only appropriate to follow a post about complicated tech messages with one about SaaS-related jargon. After reading this top ten post by James Maguire, I couldn’t help myself. Maguire identified some of the more pressing keywords (including platform) that frequently causes SaaS-newbies to scratch their heads in agony, so I applaud his effort to demystify the messages and words surrounding SaaS.

One buzzword I would add to Maguire’s list is ecosystem. Today, its difficult to avoid the word ecosystem when dealing with SaaS, and more so with platforms. Does anyone have any favorite SaaS buzzwords they think should be added? If there are enough, maybe SaaSBlogs could start a glossary.

read more

Why Do We Overcomplicate Technology Messages?

Feb 6, 2007 by

Generally, most of my posts introduce a topic, question, or label (we’ll call it x), and then I provide a y to describe and foundationally support x. Well, for this post I’m going the opposite direction. For this particular x, I find that the sheer mention of it causes people to cringe and howl. Instead, I’ll give you y first, and then x (kind of like Jeopardy, but not really, but kind of). Here goes y

Imagine a technology that lets you reuse other technologies you’ve already bought and built regardless of how these other technologies were made. This same technology will also make sure that any technology choices you make in the future can be easily integrated into your existing system.

What x am I talking about in the above y? Service Oriented Architecture, or vernacularly known as SOA. Ok, go ahead and cringe now. Why am I bringing up the continually beaten dead horse? Because to this date, I want to vomit while reading the various descriptions of SOA on the web (particularly those provided by SOA vendors). Is it really that hard to relay a simple message? I’m basically jumping in on Thomas Otter’s side, as highlighted in his recent post on SOA. It seems like there is a trend in overcomplicating messages within the technology. When you have an established technology or product, there is no reason to obscure or overcomplicate your message when marketing the said product. Apparently, SOA is a magnet for obscure definitions. Some examples:

“Service-oriented architecture (SOA) is an evolution of distributed computing based on the request/reply design paradigm for synchronous and asynchronous applications. An application’s business logic or individual functions are modularized and presented as services for consumer/client applications. What’s key to these services is their loosely coupled nature; i.e., the service interface is independent of the implementation.” 

-http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-06-2005/jw-0613-soa.html

“SOA is an architectural style whose goal is to achieve loose coupling among interacting software agents. A service is a unit of work done by a service provider to achieve desired end results for a service consumer. Both provider and consumer are roles played by software agents on behalf of their owners.”
-http://www.xml.com/pub/a/ws/2003/09/30/soa.html (To be fair, this one attempts to set-up a simple analogy before hand)

“Service orientation is an approach to organizing distributed IT resources into an integrated solution that breaks down information silos and maximizes business agility. Service orientation modularizes IT resources, creating loosely coupled business processes that integrate information across business systems. Critical to a well-designed service-oriented architecture is producing business process solutions that are relatively free from the constraints of the underlying IT infrastructure, because this enables the greater agility that businesses are seeking.” 
-http://www.microsoft.com/biztalk/solutions/soa/overview.mspx

One thing companies may want to consider is to follow Otter’s advice: “The way to talk about SOA is not to talk about it” or don’t define SOA with the word SOA, and don’t get all architectural on us. After all, what is more understandable: Peanut butter is a healthy, tasty food that goes well with grape jelly or Peanut butter, a processed form of Arachis hypogaea that maintains a creamed consistency, is a flavorfull food that is often used in a pairing with processed grape food and provides its consumers with antioxidants, monunsaturated fats, and Resveratrol, all of which are generally associated with fortifying the human body against cardiovascular and coronary-artery diseases. Personally, I like chewing on peanut butter and jelly, and not on mouthfuls of words.

read more