Image via CrunchBase
Ever since Microsoft was forced to jump into the Cloud Computing bandwagon, they are touting their Software+Service (S+S) strategy religiously. Their dilemma is understandable as Software is their current cash cow and Service is the future. Their desperation to hold on to their cash cow when the ground under them is breaking apart is evidenced by their push of S+S in every single opportunity they get. Recently, I attended Cloudcamp Seattle last month and someone asked the panelists about why we need to download software to do computing on the Cloud. A panelist from Microsoft grabbed the question and went on to explain why Software + Service strategy is the right approach to Cloud Computing.
In fact, I don't care that much about Microsoft trying to push their strategy in the Cloud Computing space. Ultimately, the market will decide on the winner. But, what irritates me is the way they try to push wrong facts, at times, to justify their Software + Service approach.
On Friday, I came across an article in The New York Times about Microsoft's Cloud Computing strategy. Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer, spoke with the author of the article at the NYT offices and explained Microsoft's grand attempt to conquer the Cloud Computing landscape. The article points to a quote by Steve Ballmer in which he tries to convey an impression that there is no difference between using the desktop applications to access the services in the Cloud and accessing these services through a web browser.
As he has before, Mr. Ballmer insisted that these PC programs are not all going to be replaced with Web sites, like Google Docs or Gmail.
“Everyone says ‘You have to run in a browser.’ That’s nonsense,” he said. “When you run in the browser, you are not running HTML, you are just downloading code to the browser instead of downloading code to the PC.”
This is plain wrong. I am not sure if Steve Ballmer said exactly this or the author of the article misinterpreted Mr. Ballmer. But, it is a plain misrepresentation of the facts and there is no way these two are one and the same. Using Mr. Ballmer’s words, it is plain nonsense.
I will try to explain these two scenarios at a basic level to help non
technical folks see through the misrepresentation of Cloud Computing. When we
install applications on the desktop, each application uses a certain amount of
space and it varies according to the application installed by the user. It can
range from few Kilobytes to Gigabytes. In fact, a software like Microsoft Office
can take a couple of Gigabytes of disk space depending on the components
installed. Eventually, all these applications add up and use enormous amounts
of disk space. They also use the computing resources of the desktop computer
while running. When services like Google Docs are accessed using the browser, it
doesn't install software on the browser like the desktop applications. Rather,
some of the services download a small script (maybe a few kilobytes to a
Megabyte) to the browser (stored in temporary folders and, usually, removed
after the session is closed) in order to offer a desktop like experience to the
users. In fact, most of the heavy lifting is done on the server side, in the
Clouds. For example, when a complex calculation is done using an web based
spreadsheet, it is done in the backend servers at the vendor's Cloud. If an user
is using a dictionary inside an online Word Processor, the whole dictionary is
not downloaded to the user's browser. Rather, the work is done on the vendors’
servers. So, Mr. Ballmer's assertion is plain wrong and there is no way the
desktop software installation and use of scripts in SaaS applications can be
compared. It is like comparing apples with oranges grapes.
Also, it is not a correct assertion that browsers are used only to run HTML scripts. Come on!! Is he still living in the early 90s? Or, is it a result of using Internet Explorer for a long time? Browsers have moved beyond rendering HTML web pages to do much more complex stuff. In fact, it has matured into a platform. The very success of SaaS can be attributed to the evolution of the browser to a platform. Any attempt to paint browser as a tool to view HTML pages is not just simplistic but plain wrong.
To get a feel of the scripts downloaded during the use of SaaS applications,
I asked Zoho evangelist Raju Vegesna about how much code is downloaded
when I access their SaaS applications. He told me that the "code" downloaded is
a Javascript and it is 1.1 MB in the case of Zoho Writer and even less with
their other applications. He further noted that they keep it very light on the
user side and take the entire computing to the server side. He said that this
helps them to run the same app on the mobile devices too. ((Disclaimer: Zoho is CloudAve's exclusive sponsor, and Raju was the easiest to reach on the weekend. I'll be happy to quote other SaaS providers numbers, too.)
It is sad that facts are misrepresented to justify the S+S strategy of Microsoft. I would prefer if Microsoft gives out some really valid reasons to convince users to buy their shrink wrapped software than giving out such wrong information.
(Editor's note: read Espen's post today along similar thoughts)
"A panelist from Microsoft grabbed the question and went on to explain why Software + Service strategy is the right approach to Cloud Computing." That's a familiar scenario. They seem to think if they say it enough, it'll become true. I had to be quite rude a MS guy at a SaaS meeting recently as he was tryong to define SaaS how MS want it defined. I commented along similar lines early last month: Software + Services = Swan Song
"...is he still living in the early 90s?" Yes.
Disclaimer: Microsoft employee working on Azure I think it's important to understand the tack with S+S. If you listen to Google tell the story, they will tell you that the web is the platform and that it won. We disagree. There's more computing in the average smart phone than was used to put every many on the moon. Think about that for a second. Why would you throw away the compute power of the end point and use the least common denominator approach of the web browser? Further, if you think about the success of the iPhone, none of those apps are SaaS apps. They are all end point apps targeting a specific platform. They understand the power of software. If they didn't, they wouldn't have created the App Store. They would have been content to let apps simply be HTML apps that they rendered in Safari. The limiting factor for most apps to be delivered via the cloud is bandwidth. If you think into the future where real time delivery of apps is no longer limited by bandwidth, you can start creating some very special applications. HTML, JavaScript...those are great for creating apps, but when you start thinking about Flash or, gasp, Silverlight as your app target on the endpoint, things get a whole lot more interesting.
No, I think you're wrong. JavaScript + HTML is not a scalable platform to program in. It's missing a lot of functions that regular programming environments have enjoyed for years. The fact that the code is not permanently installed is really a side issue. Auto updating desktop apps achieve much the same thing. If you take a look at popular 'cloud' services there are usually a suite of software apps that can be used instead of the browser based version. Look at the iPhone as a good example. HTML + JavaScript is really just a result of some pretty bad software deployment technologies over the past 15 years. It was never design to do what it's doing now. What need is a next generation standard execution engine and presentation framework.
I'm not sure I really understand the argument about storing applications on the local hard drive. Disk space is so absurdly cheap these days that I have ~2TB of storage in my HOME. Do I really care if Microsoft Office takes up 2GB? And what am I supposed to do when Bubba and his backhoe take down my Internet connection for the 3rd time this year and I can't get to my word processor to do even basic work? Cloud computing has its place but I don't like depending upon distant services across narrow-pipes (no ISP is going to give me gigabit to the server the way I already have on my Intranet at anywhere near the same price point) for mission critical applications or sensitive data.
Brandon, my post was not directed against Software+Services strategy. It was against the misinformation campaign by Microsoft. In fact, all I care about Cloud is to put the data out there and grab it using different apps, devices etc.. For me, SaaS is one of the many weapons in the toolkit. But an effective and efficient one though because all we need is just a browser. Joeyw, I disagree. Javascript + HTML is not the entire story. It is just a small part of the whole web story.
bschorr, The issue here is not just disk space. It is about the advantages of using local resources vs resources on the cloud. The latter wins clearly. Why would I buy a $1000 machine to run powerful apps when I can do it with a $199 netbook by tapping into the Cloud for my computing needs?
[..] Krishnan’s post today [..]
Krishnan. The end device is irrelevant if you don't can't access the application (content). YOU need a connection, no connection no service.... try making a mobile call when you are out of coverage ... SaaS 'leeches' off ISP's. until they are incented to provide connectitivy commensurate with the criticality of the services that run over them you will have this issue. Always on internet costs, ever increasing data going over that infrastructure costs more. SaaS providers need to factor this into their products
There is one key point Software + Services misses - Mobility. If you need software to be installed on the computer to use it, your are tied to the device which misses the point. True mobility can be archived when the service is Device/OS/Browser independent. Regarding effective usage of local resources (if available), there are good innovations coming up in browsers like Chrome where they span separate process for every webapp enabling them to effectively use local resources whenever available.
Yessssss to the point on mobility. We’re clearly moving to device-independent computing, and the more of these situational devices (laptop, netbook, tablet, iPhone, Startrek Communicator...) we have, the less viable the sync-it-all, carry-your-files-with-you model becomes. Just try the madness of waiting for your files to sync between 3 or 4 computers before you can start to work … it only gets worse the more devices we have. We're better off having data and apps in the Cloud. Now, you can say it's S+S anyway, but I do see a difference between two approaches: A: local data and apps, Cloud only helps syncing all this stuff. B: default is the Cloud, you bring down locally just what you need on your situational device.
Paul, your argument takes the progress in the opposite direction. If internet connectivity is the issue, we should focus on making existing technologies to solve the problem , like Gears, better. We should strive to force our ISPs upgrade the network to meet the demand. Using software is not a solution. What is the point in storing your data on the local machine as well as a remote machine. Why have this unnecessary redundancy. The industry can do better than S+S to solve the net connectivity problem. It is just Microsoft's desperate attempt to protect their cash cow after they realized that the march towards Cloud Computing is irreversible. Plus, as Raju and Zoli said, it is mobility, mobility, mobility. Internet connection may not be all that prevalent in many parts of the world. But mobile communication networks are present even in the remote parts of Africa. With the SaaS approach, it is possible to deliver the service to these people using their mobile devices whereas S+S model is meaningless for these people because they could neither afford the expensive devices needed for S+S model nor the cost of the software itself.
Hey kinda sounds like straight from the Clinton playbook, doesn't it? Say it enough and people will begin to believe it's true when it is a flat out lie. W.
Firstly, i'm a big fan of cloud services. But my point is that Cloud / SaaS is part of a much wider ecosystem which includes the connectivity. It is all required to deliver the user experience.. something cloud providers all seem to just expect to be there. For a business to get SLA's from their provider, that provider MUST address the connectivity component. Forcing the ISP's is a fools errand. They own the end customer, Saas providers don't. And until they see some economic benefit from cloud services, cloud services are only seen as a cost. Its that simple. Its like owning a railway line, there are huge cost or maintaining it, but if they can't get some money from the trains rummbling down it, wheres the incentive? this is true for mobile too... all those mobile towers are connected to fixed networks for backhaul...just like your wifi network in the house Some other points, the 'thing' that people are using in the cloud is 'software'...ergo software is the solution. Google Gears is software... being anti software is the wrong
I like the public cloud and web delivery. It is great to work on any system and get at my email, im, and collab (via company IT groups private cloud anacdoteally) I like getting web based email, im, and collab over the web(via IT groups private cloud), I like working on the plane with outlook and offline sharepoint folders with version management check in/out, I like having effective and exciting apps on my handhelds, gaming system, cable box, etc. Just support the scenarios users want. Looks like google is also doing S+S with installs for supporting outlook and offline use: just install Gears, Outlook Connector, Google Talk, and some GAL thingy. Looks like there is a bit of software for the users that want to use that scenario.
Post Comment