More nonsense about SaaS

by admin on March 31, 2006

in Cloud Computing/SaaS

Phil Wainewright over at ZDNet is left ‘speechless’ at an ‘all-you-can-eat’ SaaS offering from Extrasys. I, fortunately, am not so afflicted. In Martin Veitch’s original posting over at IT Week,

“It doesn’t matter how legacy your application is, it can still be brought into the hosted environment,” said Jaydeep Korde, Extrasys business unit director.

This may be true at a technical level but is utter nonsense at the business level. Martin reports this company has signed SAP, Siebel, Sage and Microsoft Office. Signing and delivery are two different things. There’s a long history of failure using Citrix (Extrasys pitch). This is not SaaS as I understand it. Instead it’s an ill-conceived cost play which will be exposed the minute customers attempt to figure a TCO model.

By the way claiming ‘revolution’ as Extrasys does is a very dangerous play.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Comments have been disabled for this post.
Sort: Newest | Oldest

This highlights one of the biggest problems for the true Software as a Service vendors who have set up their business model from scratch and properly architected their product for the web to make use of the 1 to Many model. We have SaaS, ASP and On Demand being used by different vendors and not consistently, which leads to the current confusing situation for the end customer. In that environment it's easy for integrators like Extrasys to present their "Living Dead" solutions in new clothes. Some of these vendors may not be exposed immediately, but the companies like Twinfield who have been deploying SaaS solutions for over 5 years and learned from their earlier mistakes will be the ones that will thrive. What we really need is a proper definition of SaaS, or maybe a better acronym that "screen-scrapers" can't hijack.

"service-oriented" IS rather worn-out, and sounds clumsy, which is the antithesis of the concept.

Ric - don't know if you realise it but the expression 'services based' is certainly one I'd prefer to the interminable 'service oriented' argument.

At first glance throught their website, it does just look like a 'screen-scrape' technology like Citrix or Tarantella. I'm not saying that it's not useful, but it's NOT service-based software

Previous post:

Next post: