Sign up Now | Forums Home
Enterprise software vs desktop software sales
Post #1
03-15-2005, 10:49 AM
DanH
Newsletter/Forums Member
Hello,
I am hoping someone could point me where I can find information that compares
Enterprise software vs desktop software sales.
The software company I work at has been providing (engineering focused)desktop
(fat) software solutions for 13 years. We have a technology meeting coming up
and I would like to be able to discuss the different trends of different software
sales.
I think it is obvious that the large enterprise prefers to invest in thin applications,
but I have nothing to support my thoughts.
Are there any links you know of that could help? Any pay sites that could provide
some insight into this?
I would also love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks,
Dan
Post #2
03-17-2005, 06:22 AM
Skraner
Moderator
This isn't what you asked - but what did occur to me is that the strong trend
I see is a preference for specialized ASP's - like SalesForce.com. I see this
preference in the big companies, even more than smaller ones.
__________________
Steve Kraner
Principal
TopLine Solutions, Inc.
www.hightechguru.com
Post #3
03-17-2005, 06:29 AM
DanH
Newsletter/Forums Member
Skraner,
Thanks for the reply. I am still searching for some charts or data to support
my belief that sales of standalone, desktop software applications are flat.
I think I am getting closer to what I need when i search thin client vs fat client.
Anyone else thinking of the barriers of selling fat client software?
Thanks,
Dan
PS
Here is a conversation that I found useful and might explain what I am looking
for.
http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/d...joel.3.74919.24
Post #4
03-17-2005, 08:07 AM
Ken Beam
Moderator
It could be that I'm hanging with the wrong crowds or not reading enough of the
right (correct?) white papers, but the terms thick(fat)/thin are seldom heard
anymore in my circle of business associates when referring to an organizations'
IT needs.
I do recall, some years ago, participating in many sales presentations that generously
evoked these two terms to gain a strategic advantage when the competitors' product
could be viewed as inferior because it didn't offer one or the other; but, until
this posting, I haven’t heard either term used for some time. Our research
has established one undeniable fact however - every ISV has the most 'robust'
product in the industry...if you're impressed with generalized verbal vagaries
As Skraner pointed out, the buying decisions and new product development strategies
usually revolve around buying or developing an ASP model, an Enterprise model,
or both. It's beginning to appear that the ASP model is gaining a strong foothold
for businesses spanning the entire size and revenue spectrum.
When I hear an application described as a "desktop" product I immediately
think, "ah, a consumer product.", not a commercially viable or enterprise
product. I think limited workforce collaboration, integration and usability lifecycle.
There are also software management, licensing and inventory issues that would
trigger an immediate negative reaction if I were the IT person responsible for
those things and approving the purchase.
With the evolving art/science of SEM/SEO it becomes more important than ever
to reach into the minds of those who might be searching for the class of product
your organization delivers, and use terms that are relevant and current for two
key reasons; 1) Easier to locate - increase hits, 2) Not appear dated as a technology
due to functionality description(s).
Who are you targeting for this, or future, versions of your product? What are "they" asking
for?
__________________
Kenneth G. Beam
Team Captain
The VAR-City
"...solving the Partnership Puzzle"
Phone: 972.240.8793
Web: http://thevarcity.com
Email: kbeam@thevarcity.com
Post #5
03-17-2005, 09:04 AM
dubicki
Moderator
Take your cue from where development tools have been going for the past several
years.
.NET, J2EE, Web Services, Service-based applications
For business, software is moving to web based environment almost completely.
Managing applications with a destop footprint has not been where its at for the
past several years.
Sources for industry trends:
gartner.com
idc.com
forrester.com
metagroup.com
aberdeen.com
I'm with Ken Beam, this is like old news. The whole thin client vs. fat client
deabate ended about five years ago IMO. You are looking at history.
__________________
| allegiance.ca | Robert Dubicki
Post #6
03-17-2005, 03:12 PM
Judy Schramm
Moderator
I agree with Ken and Robert. I haven't heard anyone talk about thin vs. fat in
a couple of years.
The analyst firms Robert mentions should have the kind of statistics you're looking
for.
But the people in your company might be more impressed if you do a quick survey
of other companies in your industry. Just go look at the press releases on their
websites. If you can say that 8 of the top 10 companies in your industry now
offer web-based software, that's a pretty powerful indication of where the market
is going.
__________________
Judy Schramm
JMR Consulting
703-931-9273
Post #7
03-17-2005, 04:37 PM
LisaMoody
Moderator
I think it's a mistake to not offer a desktop option right next to your web based
option, if web based is even a good option for you. There are plenty of viable
synchronization techniques available that don't require hosting confidential
information in an ASP model.
Production (non-consumer) applications are being created every day that are not
ASP models. I just attended a seminar to hear about Raytheon's latest invention
of an Emergency Patient Tracking system in the event of a homeland security attack.
They use the same non-ASP based programming scenario that we use in our company.
There are PALM and Windows CE devices all utilizing synchronization techniques
that do not utilize an ASP model. Granted, there are options for web based apps
in the same realm but it is not always the right way to go, regardless of what
the "consultants" say should be happening. Create your app based on
what the customers say should be, not consultants.
Lisa
Post #8
03-17-2005, 04:45 PM
Dave45000
Newsletter/Forums Member
Before the web, there was three-tier client-server. Fat and thin client-server
was two tier. Then, the web came along and brought us n-tier. Now business rules
technology is bringing us four-tier client-server, web developers are separating
structure from content and presentation, and forms developers are separating
forms from content and presentation. So it's up to you to decide how many tiers
to have. Aside from having seperate servers for each tier, which increases administrative
expense, it really doesn't matter to the clients.
Business rules technology will change the IT game as much as web-based technology
has to date. And, it too will bring on another round of IT unemployment.
David Locke
Post #9
03-18-2005, 09:18 AM
cfrancisvoice
Moderator
You state that:
"I think it is obvious that the large enterprise prefers to invest in thin
applications, but I have nothing to support my thoughts."
I'm not seeing this trend with my software customer base at all. Both my "thin" and "fat" developers
are growing equally.
I would argue that whether a company chooses to go "thin" client or "fat" is
not a generic enterprise decision but rather a decision based on the application
requirements, the results needed the make up of the company and the market. Not
all applications work well in a web based application, nor are they mature enough
to support an enterprise roll out.
Using CRM as an example for my clients that do 100% telephone work never travel
and have all sales reps in one office, I recommend a client server application
rather than an ASP or web based application. If they have reps working from home
all over the country then a web based application makes sense.
__________________
Colleen
Engage Selling Solutions - Inspiring Results
www.Engageselling.com
Post #10
03-18-2005, 09:51 AM
dubicki
Moderator
I'll put a different slant on what cfancisvoice has said.
Why have ERP applications such as SAP and Peoplesoft have moved to the web?
Don't accountants sit behind their desk all day? So why would they need a web
application?
Because IT departments don't want to be managing desktop software. Plain
and simple. It is much less expensive to manage hosted applications. That is
why
the web has been a strong trend. And collaboration and sharing of data works
much easier and better via "web aware" applications. The web adds a
powerful dimension to do more ... and rethink how an application actually works.
Wether you sit behind a desk all day or on the road, is not the main factor IMO.
__________________
| allegiance.ca | Robert Dubicki
Post #11
03-18-2005, 10:36 AM
Dave45000
Newsletter/Forums Member
IT is commoditizing itself. If IT offers no competitive advantage, then it should
be outsourced. Web services is one way to do that. Now, you might answer that
question about IT and competitive advantage with a yes or a no. That implies
that some IT can't be outsourced and some can.
The place you drive costs down is where you are getting no competitive advantage.
The place you are willing to pay higher costs is where you are getting competitive
advantage.
From a technology adoption perspective, late mainsteam is where commoditizaiton
occurs, because you are running out of available new customers. This is the place
where the web services, utility computing, model should live. Cheaper and cheaper
is important there. Vendor profits decline. M&As happen regularly. IT layoffs
are a big part of the picture.
You can also look at industry organization and how that affects the picture.
In the bowling alley where you have a portfolio of vertical applications, you
fight it out for market dominance. Afterwards, you end up getting organized into
an industry heirarchy. That heirarchy dictates how much money you can make. The
market leader takes 77% and each subsequent vendor takes 77% of the remaining
after the larger vendors have taken their cut. This assumes execllent operations
by each vendor. This means that by the fifth position, you really are not making
that much money even in a $nB market.
Moving towards late mainstream consolidations occur. The market leader ends up
with the customers. Shifting to webservices only means less money and lower margins.
There ends up being one provider for a particular webservice. Anti-trust might
kick in, but not right now.
By going with the ASP/webservices model, you are saying that you really don't
need that much money and would love to work very hard for very little payoff.
You are skipping all the intervening markets and going directly to the late mainstream.
There is no reason for a vendor to adopt and push this technology, because the
technology is detrimental to their business. It's detrimental to their customer's
businesses as well, but nobody sees that just yet.
Utility companies are monopolies, because they couldn't have survived till now
if they had to compete. When you change your economics from marketshare matters
economics to marketshare doesn't matter economics or utility economics, particularly
utility economics without physical constraints like having to run more wires,
you end up with much less in market cap.
Think grocery stores vs. Wal-Mart. Most stores are moving to the luxury end of
the market. They are doing this, or they are going out of business. With ASP,
there is no luxury position. You are opting to go out of business, laying off
your people, and finding a desolate future. Say no to ASP.
There will always be a place for the mom and pop place at the end of the street.
But, it will only keep two people alive, mom and pop. They can't even afford
to have a kid come in a sweap up. That is an outsourced, webserviced IT industry.
Let's not even consider Grid computing, data privacy, and identity theft issues
around webservices. Some technologies should not be adopted. Here let me clone
your wife.
David Locke
Sign up Now | Forums Home
|
