The past few months have seen a wide array of Microsoft services being down for fairly long periods of time. Whether MSDN for developers or hotmail and live messenger for the masses, this is casting some doubts on the whole “Software as a Service” or SaaS concept.
Doesn’t cast doubts for me. I have written before that I don’t like Software as a Service and I’ll say it again. If you don’t control it, you don’t get it when you need it.
Microsoft is trying to get people to use even MS Office in a online mode. The advantages are these:
- All you need is a computer with a working web browser installed – anywhere in the world
- Your data is available to you – anywhere in the world
- You can share your data with coworkers easily – anywhere in the world
But let’s take a look at the disadvantages:
- Your data is available to Microsoft, its employees and any hackers – anywhere in the world
- Not just any web browser of your choosing, Internet Explorer only
- Your internet connection must be working, and at a fast clip
- The browser and the computer you are using must be updated to the latest and the greatest in security patches, updates, plugins, activeX controls, you name it
- Backup is whose responsibility?
- Availability of the service is whose responsibility?
One of my clients had their high dollar internet connection, a T-1, go down about 4:30pm earlier this week. If the company would have been willing to pay someone to stay and wait for AT&T for up to 4 hours to come and fix it, AT&T would have. Instead they opted to wait until morning. It was fixed about 8:30am.
The email server was so backed up that email was not flowing normally until 3pm (mostly spam of course). Everyone was frustrated, many were angry.
We take these services for granted when they work, even though responsible IT people will constantly remind all of those involved that many services, such as email, are anything but guaranteed.
For certain people in certain circumstances, Software as a Service may be appropriate. With data they don’t care if Microsoft, Google, Every ad agency in the U.S., some clever hackers, and the U.S. Government all have access to.
But if your business and livelihood rely on it, keep it under your control. And treat it properly.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
While I think criticism of Microsoft and any other vendor attempting to sell their application as an online service is healthy, if only to push them – violently in some cases – to make it better, which it is. But a generic ‘bury your head in the sand’ approach isn’t realistic and doesn’t recognize that most of the objections you raised in your post can and have been overcome by the vast majority of companies with SaaS offerings. Nor does it acknowledge that the economic benefits of this model are compelling enough to make businesses of all shapes and sized consider SaaS-based offerings to replace their legacy solutions, and they’re willing to take the risk in exchange for the reward.
The market will reward those who pay attention to the issues you bring up, and will trash those that do not, but turning a blind eye to the topic isn’t the right approach either – be vocal, criticize, push, and take your business elsewhere if the performance sucks.
I absolutely agree with you, except that I haven’t turned a blind eye. And I absolutely agree to taking your business elsewhere when service sucks – but there are not always a lot of alternatives.
I am continually monitoring these types of technologies, hence my ability to comment on them.
Think about my perspective for a moment. A client will read about some great new service and (usually, but not always) ask my opinion. If I fail to point out every reasonable shortcoming I have done them a disservice.
If they sign up for a service such as this and then their internet goes down, they are screaming and yelling at me, even though I have no control over AT&T.
Just this morning I received a call from an acquaintance who has limited internet offerings in her area. Her ISP has been down since Monday, and was told today that service MAY be restored by next Tuesday. Obviously an online app of any kind would be useless to her for over a week – and she has a business to run.
My job is to point out those things my clients don’t always think of; and yes, overcome those problems if feasible.
Vendors first started trying to talk my clients into SaaS (then known as the ASP [application service provider] approach) for almost a decade. Most of those original ASP firms are long gone. Boy am I glad none of my clients fell for their EXPENSIVE offerings at that time.
Will that time come? Perhaps – only with redundant, non-correlated internet access – IMHO – a long time off.
Thanks very much for taking the time to comment.
I hear you. I work for a software company with a large partner program, and we’ve worked with them to convert their apps to SaaS offerings, so I have some good perspective about what was going on in the market as well, and don’t disagree.
I believe that time and competitive pressure will ultimately fix theses problems – maybe not broadband availability though. The small SaaS provider doesn’t have the kind of clout they need to raise an eyebrow with AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc., to get a broadband connection to their data center fixed according to a business quality SLA, which I believe is a reason that better channel models for smaller SaaS providers to work together will ultimately be a successful model, and go a long way towards solving some of the very relevant problems you talked about.
Nice chatting with you.
I’m doing research about downside of SaaS.
I am looking for victims of SaaS users.
Do you know any companies had such negative experience
I would appreciate for your help.
Thank you.
I do not have any specific horror stories at hand. There were a few a number of years ago but I have forgotten the details.
Most had to do with promising a lot (for a lot of $$$) and delivering little.