Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Windows Operating Systems Software The Internet

The Downsides of Software as Service 326

JustinBrock writes "Dvorak's article yesterday, entitled Don't Trust the Servers, argues that the danger of software as a service was highlighted when 'the WGA [Windows Genuine Advantage] server outage hit on Friday evening and was finally repaired on Saturday. It was down for 19 long hours.' The whole fiasco raises an interesting perspective on the software as a service 'fetish'. Dvorak highlights it hypothetically: What if the timeline were reversed, and we were moving from online apps to the desktop. Hear his prophecy of the marketing: 'You can image the advertising push. "Now control your own data!" "Faster processing power now." "Cheaper!" "Everything at your fingertips." "No need to worry about network outages." "Faster, cheaper, more reliable." On and on. I can almost hear the marketing types brag about how much better "shrink wrap" software is than the flaky online apps. The best line for the emergence of the desktop computer in a reverse timeline would be "It's about time!"'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Downsides of Software as Service

Comments Filter:
  • by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @11:39AM (#20384709) Homepage Journal
    A few months ago, I found an old article in an old copy of PC/Computing where he lambasted Microsoft for releasing a $90 bugfix called Windows 98.
  • by timster ( 32400 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @11:46AM (#20384859)
    I can! It's a new funding model, necessary for the continued existence of giant software factories like Microsoft. The upside is that you no longer have to figure out ways to persuade your customers to buy the new version of your software, which has become more and more difficult (how many features can you add to a word processing app, anyway?)

    The upside to the customer is not so easy to find, unless you consider the possibility that with all this hypothetical easy money flowing in, Microsoft would be able to make a better product.
  • by TheLazySci-FiAuthor ( 1089561 ) <thelazyscifiauthor@gmail.com> on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @11:51AM (#20384975) Homepage Journal
    There are benefits to be gotten from both a served-software model and a standard local model, so why not use something like google gears and get the best of both worlds.

    Even if you are off the internet at large, we are getting into an age where a personal area network will become ubiquitous. Served-software would still be available from, say, your phone as the server (always keep the gears software on your phone ready for load) or maybe your bluetooth watch could maintain local copies of frequently used software.

    While at some remote location you might be lucky to find that a colleague has a local copy of a certain, rarely used software on their wristwatch.

    Then again, it is something to think about that within 20 years will it be as unusual to find oneself without internet access as it is to find oneself without electricity...perhaps it will be even more unusual than that (what with satellite communication).

    Just thoughts.

    It is interesting to note how much more bandwidth my internet connection has as compared to my first computer's bus speed.
  • by BrotherBeal ( 1100283 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @11:52AM (#20384987)
    I'm not so sure I see this as outrageous or even ill-founded. Unoriginal, perhaps, as all one needs to do is look at the history of computing to see that cycles such as these are well documented. Software-as-a-Service (SAAS) has a certain set of features and characteristics that differs from the features and characteristics of the installed-software paradigm, and I see no reason to suspect that we won't see this cycle continue for at least another few iterations depending on what's 'in' and 'out'. I think it makes more sense, at least from a developer's standpoint, to look at the various ways to distribute software less as silver bullets and more as tools - like TCP versus UDP. Noone in their right mind would say that UDP beats TCP (or vice versus)in all situations or is the 'wave of the future' - you would choose the right tool for the right job. SAAS makes sense for certain limited applications, like business infrastructure or media-content-delivery, but it would be a terrible choice for something like an OS, or document editing software, or media playback, or games, or...
  • by ArcherB ( 796902 ) * on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @11:54AM (#20385037) Journal
    I, for one, can't think of a single upside of "Software as Service"

    Software as a service can be run locally by a company, rather than on the web. There are several (provided the server is maintained on site).
    Single point of failure should a catastrophe happen.
    User's can't go in and break the system.
    There is one system to maintain, one anti-virus package, one system to back up and so on.
    Files are much easier to share and keep updated. It is a nightmare to have a single spreadsheet that is updated by several people when they are updated on the own personal systems.

    When the server is remote, there are still advantages, just not as many:
    My step-dad uses quickbooks for his small business. He has architects and accountants that need access to the books. Originally, he had purchased a copy for each of them to run on their personal computers. Unfortunately, when one made a change, he had to call everyone else to tell them, or email a backup copy of the DB and everyone would have to manually update their own DB's. It was a nightmare and this was only with four or five employees. With Quickbooks Online, each user logs into the website, enters their data and everything is updated almost in real time. He's a roofer and does not have the knowledge, nor the time to keep up with the application. He only cares about the reports, not how they are created. This works very well for him.

    However, with all these advantages, I agree that it sux for the most part.
    It's slow... much slower than running apps locally.
    In the event of a failure, you're at the mercy of the tech folks that you do not employ and have not control over.
    You are not in control of your own destiny.
  • by Ironsides ( 739422 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @12:05PM (#20385211) Homepage Journal
    I can think of one, possibly two upsides to software as a service.
    1) Software provider has an 'incentive' to ensure the product is bug free or that the bugs get fixed quickly. With shrink-wrap software, they have your money and are providing fixes for free.

    2) This is an accounting style advantage. Say, you have the option to pay $300 for a software suite up front, or $5/month for as long as you use it. Most of us would go with the $300. Except, what if the $5 gives you free upgrades forever? Now, what if it was $1.50/month? Here we start getting into a grayer area about it being cheaper to pay per month than up front, due to about how much money you could make off of the base cost in interest on investments.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @01:03PM (#20386321)
    I have seen RAID arrays fail. It happens. There is a tendency to bundle vast amounts of data in one place because we think that RAID will protect us. And we need a certain volume of data before RAID makes any sense. Of course, large arrays are more economical (and easier to manage) than a bunch of small ones, so we order the biggie size. Then we have unexpected failure of the backplane and it's back to a full restore.

    In disaster recovery planning, a server room can be considered a single point of failure. RAID or no RAID, a broken sprinkler head can spew enough water to take down the whole thing. Although anything (even a roomful of servers) can have all kinds of failover redundancy, the technology is far from infallible. Until the great WGA meltdown came along, I'm sure MS would be willing to tell us how their configuration was nearly indestructible.

    The problem is only going to get worse because the speed of very short connections is so much faster than the speed of WAN. Back in ancient times, SCSI was 5 Mbytes/sec., Ethernet was 10 megabits, T-1 was (and still is) 1.5 megabits. Today, SCSI is 640 Mbytes/sec. (128x faster), Ethernet is 1000 megabits (100x faster), and a T-3 is 45 megabits (only 30x faster). WAN is failing to keep up with the increasing amount of data and speed of local transfer.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @01:30PM (#20386747)
    Paying a monthly rate for software means paying a mysterious amount, not USDn/month. It may be USD1.50/month today and USD10/month three years from now. Unless the software's utility increases monotonically there will be points where shrinkwrap upgrades would be skipped (perhaps for arbitrarily-long periods of time) and the value shifts strongly in the direction of shrinkwrap. That is partially the motivation for "software as a service": vendors wish to make a continuous stream of income without meeting any increased demand. After a market is saturated, if 90% of the users of a piece of software have something that is Good Enough(tm) the potential growth from new releases cuts off and previous revenues cannot be sustained. Providing software as a service enables these users to be charged in perpetuity despite receiving minuscule benefits, while also increasing the flexibility of choosing additional revenue streams (for example, adding advertising to the services after service dominance is obtained).
  • by lottameez ( 816335 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @01:54PM (#20387185)
    What software are you talking about that replaces $1000+ apps with online apps?

    Compare a CRM system from Salesforce.com versus on-premise Seibel for example. Big big difference in price.

    if you are talking about inhouse, intra-net apps, for security reasons, the only way you should be able to access it from outside the network is through VPN

    Again, think about a CRM app. Do you want your top sales guy or exec to have to mess with getting through the VPN from his home computer? Or futzing around with some hotel's internet connection? Or from Starbucks? etc etc etc.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @01:59PM (#20387249)
    While not quite of the form that MS want to force upon us (just take an enforced subscription of $150 a year for office - saves even having to bother doing any coding) I do have the experience of using software, for licensing reasons, that is held on a server and we run the copy remotely across multiple users.

    The experience - far from perfect, sporadic problems, slow (compared to local execution) and a dangerous reliance singular structure. If the central copy goes down (which it has done 3 or 4 times for 6+ hours in the past year) then it is shut up shop at work. Myself and a few colleagues who rely on it basically can do nothing - and indeed on a couple of occasions we have knocked off and gone home at 2pm because there is basically zilch for us to do.

    Whether a local service structure or an internet wide distribution structure - a reliance on that setup is risky - and while there are arguments about advantages (above and beyond the nefarious reasons MS want it) of all my software I have installed (what, 20-50 installed programs) none of them require daily/monthly patching or anything that remote supply can do better. In terms of patching and security the OS is the one that requires it most. How many of us desperately need to "patch" winrar once a month? (or frankly even office).
  • by greed ( 112493 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @02:21PM (#20387631)

    The thing about e-mail out-sourcing, is, that's kind of "service as a service". It works, e-mail already is a service, so it doesn't really matter where it is served. Assuming you've got acceptable bandwidth and latency levels, and a good caching IMAP client can make being on the wrong side of a pretty horrible link fairly tolerable.

    Heck, the IMAP client on my Palm T5 using a weak WiFi signal at a motel and talking SSL to my home server via ADSL is very tolerable. (And the A in ADSL means "getting stuff from home sucks".)

    I outsource my MX for exactly the same reason your company does: pobox.com does the anti-spam thing on all e-mail for the domain, and then sends the filtered stuff to the internal machine that will only talk to a pobox.com server.

  • by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @03:16PM (#20388411) Journal
    It's not that bad. I run an SSH server at home and all my software is available anywhere. It's especially nice with irssi and screen. Software as a service is wonderful, if you run the server.
  • by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) * on Tuesday August 28, 2007 @04:04PM (#20389161) Homepage Journal

    3) No desktop installation required - no screwing around with what build works on your particular OS.

    On the contrary, installation will be required every time. If the source is down, you have no software and you cannot work.

    4) IT maintenance - while not a big issue for most of us that post here, for all those mere mortals keeping the software up to date, or upgrading to a new version can be a major headache. With software as a service, its done for you.

    Good IT departments test VERY carefully before allowing an upgraded or even bugfixed app loose in a large installed base. This is because every company will have core things that they do which are unique to them, and the software "upgrade" may break those tasks. This is a VERY common problem. What you have no is no control over those damage inflicting "upgrades." This is not a good thing. There's a very good reason software isn't just handed to people in shrink wrap with a laconic "hey, install this."

    Accessibility - what if you're outside the firewall and can't get thru the VPN? Again, a bigger deal for mere mortals that /.-ers. (of course the disadvantage is no working offline)

    You are seriously saying that an app on some web server somewhere, over networks and hardware you and your company have no way to repair or control, is superior to software and data on your laptop in terms of accessibility? There is no way. Individual machines with local software are far more accessible and reliable; if one goes down, one employee loses functionality. If the web service or the pipe to it goes down, they all do.

    less start up risk. If I can start with a couple of seats a month for $50/seat versus having to kick out hundreds or thousands of dollars per desktop copy, it's a better deal (well, legally anyways).

    Depends on the software. The question is, what business software is not available in a desktop version inexpensively or even free, but you can get as a service inexpensively on a web site? You can get office suites, bitmap graphics software, structured graphics software, accounting software and so forth for not very much money (or none) per seat. Moving from this state to paying a web site to provide it isn't necessarily a better deal, or safer. It *could* be, but it requires very expensive software to be replaced by the web service, and examples of this are actually pretty rare.

    Generally the Software as a service providers have better backup/recovery processes than the average SMB (think law firm, not software house).

    This isn't an advantage of a web service as compared to shrinkwrap software. Good backup is an entirely separate issue. Furthermore, the web service backing up one software item and it's data doesn't solve the issue that the rest of the computer needs to be backed up as well, and in that sense, this is no favor to the computer user. The correct answer is complete and regular backups of the user's machine.

    Previous poster's points you refer to:

    Software provider has an 'incentive' to ensure the product is bug free or that the bugs get fixed quickly. With shrink-wrap software, they have your money and are providing fixes for free.

    Shrinkwrap providers also have incentives. They'd lke to sell more; they'd like for the user to be enthusiastic both about the product, and about support. If they can't sell more, they go out of business. I know what I'm talking about here, I've been running a software company selling an application that was initially brought to market in 1992. It is complex, extremely feature loaded, fast and stable. These things are the result of an ongoing process driven by precisely these issues - it matters if you leave bugs in or don

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Working...