The Downsides of Software as Service

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!"'"

Comments

Re:When is the last time Dvorak...

[timster]

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.

Re:When is the last time Dvorak...

[Ironsides]

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.