Five Benefits of Software as a Service
Here is a great article entitled “Five Benefits of Software as a Service” in which FreshBooks is cited. Here’s the intro:
Jason Maynard, an analyst at Credit Suisse, compares software to electricity. Most firms don’t own generators, he points out. They buy electricity from the grid.
That’s the direction he sees things going with software. Soon all applications used by organizations, except made-to-order applications that provide competitive advantage, will be delivered as web-hosted services via a browser.
Copyright © 2000-2009
10:22 pm
Software as a service has certain benefits but this article is riddled with false information.
The article claims that SAS is cheaper than Open Source apps. This is a lie and they are explaining expenses in a dishonest way. The fact is that open source apps are not only cheaper but more effective. Several governments around the world have already switched to open source apps. Spokespeople from companies such as Microsoft routinely spread lies and make the same sort of claims this article makes and it’s a shame that these lies are being endorsed on this blog.
SAS might be ideal for small businesses who don’t have an IT department and need a quick solution. SAS is not ideal for the home user or large corporations.
Microsoft has wanted to shift their Microsoft Office package from a software package to SAS for years. Ask yourself this; would you rather pay $400 for Microsoft Office or pay $50/month or whatever they would charge. You can be sure that Microsoft would price their SAS offering higher (in a 12 month period) than the amount they charge for the software package.
Big corporations with an IT department would be better off using open source apps on their own servers. I also doubt they would depend on a small company for their needs. They may consider using SAS from a huge company such as Google or Microsoft though.
People in the know see SAS for what it is – a potential for a big cash grab. It makes sense for 37 signals or Freshbooks to promote it but when you endorse an article that has so much misinformation it’s laughable. The open source community laughs at articles such as these. The author immediately loses credibility when he makes such nonsensical claims.
Instead of deceiving your readers why don’t you promote your business in an honest way? Even most savvy PC users aren’t aware of the inaccuracies in this article and your stamp of approval helps those who are purposely distorting the facts.
I’m sure Freshbooks provides a valuable service to many people but you’re not doing yourself any favours by promoting misinformation.
8:41 am
With all due respect Kevin, SaaS and open source are not mutally exclusive things. For example, FreshBooks is built on top of open open source products like Linux-PHP-MySQL and Apache. We are big proponents of open source. The angle for the article was there are benefits to using hosted software solultions like FreshBooks for a variety of reasons including the complexities of hosting it yourself and some of the hidden costs such as resource redirection, that often go unnoticed. Perhaps it’s worth reading the article again or considering looking at the two solutions a little differently.
As a final thought, I might argue that by exposing APIs – as FreshBooks, 37signals and other SaaS providers do – many SaaS platforms are becoming increasingly like open source technologies in that people build their own services organically on top of the SaaS platform and ecosystems emerge around and on top of the various platforms. Perhaps more food for thought…
9:28 am
I am well aware that they are not mutually exclusive, however, the “great article” you are promoting does not explain this and misleads readers by comparing Saas to Open Source by using distorted facts.
They also make generalizations such as this one;
“However, if you have to modify the application itself, you will have to go through a costly design-implementationtest process.”
I don’t know if you’re a programmer yourself but I’m sure you know that this is nothing more than fear mongering. What kind of modification are they talking about? Simple modifications can be done quickly and do not require a costly design implementation test process. Of course, if you’re changing core components of the code then it will be both time consuming and expensive, but working on an API can be just as time consuming and expensive.
I’ve read the article carefully and I’ve seen this type of FUD many, may times. It’s just inaccurate. I have no problem with Saas in general or reading ACCURATE articles which hype Saas. The problem I have is that the author is not being truthful. If Steve Balmer reads this article he’d probable offer the guy a job.
I like Microsoft. Their products are first rate (except for their web programming languages) but they attack open source and spread misinformation in a way that resembles the way this article was written.
I’ve also read a few of your blogs, including the one linked to this article about how people shouldn’t create their own in house apps. I couldn’t disagree more although I realize that it’s in your best interest to take this position.
In the long-run, in house applications cost far less. Ask yourself this question. Would you rather pay a web developer $50K-100K/year or would you rather outsource the work and pay $20K per project? In house is always cheaper.
11:33 am
@Kevin – People may receive your comments better if you don’t come out of gate swinging with “They are lying and being dishonest” etc etc. What you’re saying might be true, but my general point is- people will read your comment if it looks thoughtful and poised… but not if it looks like inflammatory right from the start. I mention this because I think you make decent points and it’s a shame to waste them by wrapping them up in an explosive tone. Not that you have to put a pretty bow on it (it’s okay to be honest). But there’s a middle ground there.
1:15 pm
Jeremy, it wasn’t my intention to attack Freshbooks and after this post I’ll say no more but yes, I was attacking the author of that article.
You state that the tone of my post is inflammatory but the way in which this article depicts open source is much more inflammatory. In my opinion, these falsehoods need to be exposed. I would think that a good chunk of people who read this blog are the ones who are thinking about starting an online business. They should know the facts, not the facts according to those who are misinformed or those who have a vested interest in promoting Saas and help spread misinformation about open source.
The industry is full of mouthpieces who post misinformation in a tactful and elegant way. If the only thing people are noticing is tone then they’ll never learn how to differentiate between FUD and facts.
Sorry, but such an article shouldn’t be given a stamp of approval on what seems to be a good blog even if Freshbooks is in the Saas business.
I don’t have much more to say. I guess people will have to figure things out for themselves and decide whether or not articles such as these should be taken seriously.