Comments on: Softworld cloud computing: an opportunity wasted

By: ManojRanaweera

ManojRanaweera — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:04:34 +0000

I do not think my own contribution at this year's (2010) debate was that useful. But the issues were still the same - all focusing on security aspects. See my comments on the 2010 event http://manojranaweera.com/2010/10/20/softworld-where-are-the-buyers

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:04:00 +0000

I do not think my own contribution at this year’s (2010) debate was that useful. But the issues were still the same – all focusing on security aspects. See my comments on the 2010 event http://manojranaweera.com/2010/10/20/softworld-where-are-the-buyers

By: Damian Saunders

Damian Saunders — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:46:26 +0000

As someone who is just starting down the road to integration of Salesforce and Financial force I hear you loud and clear.
If only technical people, and I've been one of them, could understand there's a subtle difference between “you can do this” and “this is how you do this” it would be quite refreshing. I already know what I can do before I even begin investigating a product further, by then I want to know how, and I want to know from a business application, not from a bits and bites perspective.

By: Damian Saunders

Damian Saunders — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:46:26 +0000

As someone who is just starting down the road to integration of Salesforce and Financial force I hear you loud and clear.If only technical people, and I've been one of them, could understand there's a subtle difference between "you can do this" and "this is how you do this" it would be quite refreshing. I already know what I can do before I even begin investigating a product further, by then I want to know how, and I want to know from a business application, not from a bits and bites perspective.

By: Damian Saunders

Damian Saunders — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:46:00 +0000

As someone who is just starting down the road to integration of Salesforce and Financial force I hear you loud and clear.
If only technical people, and I’ve been one of them, could understand there’s a subtle difference between “you can do this” and “this is how you do this” it would be quite refreshing. I already know what I can do before I even begin investigating a product further, by then I want to know how, and I want to know from a business application, not from a bits and bites perspective.

By: Why EuroCloud might be a necessity | AccMan

Why EuroCloud might be a necessity | AccMan — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 05:07:15 +0000

[...] the things that really matter. As I’ve said before, the saas/on-demand/cloud (SOC) players have not done a great job in articulating benefits. Despite Phil’s noble words, much of the remainder of the press release falls into the bits [...]

By: Dennis Howlett

Dennis Howlett — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:55:40 +0000

@Ollie – thanks for your thoughtful comment. I'll get to film you just as soon as we can get something coordinated.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 05:36:10 +0000

I liked the post. Having not attended, I can't say how bang-on it was, but I can relate to the language barrier of tech talk. Maybe we should lock these guys in a room and start detailed discussions into the Tax Act. See how they like it.

I'll be posting a piece on the Indicee blog on Tuesday that addresses this exact point, the language barrier. This post is more fuel to the fire. I encourage you to check it out.

By: Ollie Cornes

Ollie Cornes — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 23:53:49 +0000

As a FinancialForce customer who was planning to be interviewed by Dennis at the event (I couldn't make it, sincere apologies for that) I find this discussion v interesting. We're using FinancialForce and happy, though my background is as a technology and property entrepreneur, with a computer science background so the tech talk is actually appealing to me, but I fully appreciate I'm in the tiny minority – most don't want buzzwords, but clear benefits. I wanted cloud accounting in Salesforce before I knew of what was then Coda2go, so was pleased to find it. for me the primary appeal of cloud accounting centres around the out-of-the-box integration of CRM and accounting:
- One platform – lower tech costs and lower/no integration costs. e.g. same tech skills needed customise FinancialForce as customise Salesforce. No installation/servers/patches, just configuration, and you're off.
- One system, less training, more information visibility, better decisions, better customer service. Stop the number crunchers hoarding data others can use. "Does the customer owe us money?" – everyone should have an answer to that question who communicates with them!
- Immediate multi-site support. Multi-site Sage is horrific, I've used terminal server to do it, it works, but a pig in make-up. Our geordie dinosaur friends missed the boat entirely. I hate Sage's software with a passion, it's an insult to 21st century businesses. Homeworking alone makes Sage a useless product for a small business.

FWIW I've never bought into the "cloud is insecure" argument (despite cock-ups by Sidekick and others before them) – security in many organisations is pretty poor anyway – wi-fi, USB sticks, simple passwords, bad physical security, etc.

I should put these comments in the context of my being a startup guy – in the SME sphere the ability to have ONE system for marketing, adwords, sales, customer management, management reporting, operational process management, and accounting, ALL IN ONE PLACE, is so blindingly obviously beneficial I remain surprised so many small business still rely on Outlook/Access & Sage/Quickbooks. More apps like Kashflow coming, but lack CRM integration benefits and extendibility of force.com (even with its many faults). I am not qualified to comment on how FF & Salesforce compares to large-scale corporate systems.

FF is an early stage product and there are certainly improvements I'd like to see, but pleased to see the closer relationship with Salesforce as it underpins the delivery of a solution serving a clear gap in the prior Salesforce offering.

In FF's defence I should say they have certainly worked very hard with me as a customer to get me involved in the process, to talk about my experiences, and it's a shame that a commitment prevented me attending.

Interesting discussions. Always hard to sell into a market where the PRODUCT isn't widely understood, it'll get easier as the benefits are more clearly defined, and adoption increases, which it, IMHO, inevitably will.

By: David Terrar

David Terrar — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:23:52 +0000

I completely agree with you. It started so well when Richard Anning profiled the audience and set the scene, but the individual intros were too long and definitely incomprehesible to the non-technical. The session got better when we got in to the Q&A section and Dave definitely did best, but it was massive opportunity missed. At one stage the NetSuite guy mentioned a Gartner survey that suggested on premise IT infrastructure cost a company 3% of turnover whereas Cloud based solutions would cost 0.5% of turnover. I was surprized nobody wanted a reference to the source material or further explanation of a 6x difference – I assume that's for quite large companies. i'm glad you've quoted Richard Messik's post – he's been doing SaaS for many years, and it's great to see him layout the business case in such simple terms. A esson for any SaaS vendor.

Explaining the business case is what the Intellect SaaS document to be publised on 28 October will be trying to do. I'm looking forward to some robust discussion about it later this month.