Software as a Service Overload (small rant)

[mcmm]

Does it not seem like every single business function is moving into SaaS whereby we pay many multiple monthly subscription for most business functions that we have.

Don’t get me wrong I don’t mind paying for a good product/service as long as it is worth it but gone are the days of simply buying a product and paying for support. Having said that I am old enough to remember “downloading” recording free ZX Spectrum games broadcast from the Radio.

The whole thing reminds me of the pay walls and freemium apps and games in the mobile apps market.

It just seems that with SaaS there are so many different and arbitrary pay walls or limits on functionality without paying for a premium vapourware licence support.

The benefits of SaaS are really good particularly the whole cloud storage of content and automatic backup etc. BUT try integrating functions across your business and you are completely stuck in whatever SaaS you have chosen like it or not.

Any thoughts?

 

[Clinton]

Wow! No replies!?

I hate SaaS for SaaS sake and refuse to pay a sub for anything where a competitor is offering a similar product for a fixed fee.

But I'm amazed at how many businesses sign up so easily to subscription services.They pay a sub for their office software, for their storage, for their accounting package, for everything! Corporate UK has been highly successful in converting us into an installment society. "Get now, pay later"

A friend of mine has written a great piece about this slide into the morass of SaaS: Subscription Psycho.

His follow up articles to that are also worth reading.

 

[mcmm]

Thanks I will take a look.

 

[Alan]

I hate SaaS for SaaS sake and refuse to pay a sub for anything where a competitor is offering a similar product for a fixed fee.

Fact of life, subscription make business sense for software providers.

BUT try integrating functions across your business and you are completely stuck in whatever SaaS you have chosen like it or not.

Integrating standalone software has never been easy either. At least in 2017 most decent SaaS products have an API. It is one of the first things to check when looking at a SaaS solution. SaaS solutions without APIs suck.

 

[mcmm]

Yes Alan you a right about traditional software integration but I am talking about the complete micro management of simple functions within a SaaS when you hit a paywall. For Example there is an arbitrary document attachment limit to emails with HubSpot.

I would rather simply pay for x and expect x support. Not this model of, weeellllll you can use a, most of b, and a tiny fraction of c and if you want d, e, and f functionailty its an extra squillon a month. This pay wall model also makes it quite difficult to evaluate something as you only hit some of the pay walls as you evolve your own functions and ability with the software.

Yes and any SaaS without an API is a lovely walled garden.

 

[DavidWH]

I hate SaaS. Our Mac's are still running CS5 & Quark 9. These were superceeded years ago. But the new software has no new features we really need. So not been having SaaS saved us a few quid.

On our windows machines, we have office as SaaS and Adobe. Firstly we can work from home, and we can also open files supplied from the latest Adobe suite, and downsave to CS5 for the Macs.

if you need the latest updates, the SaaS makes sense. Buying outright could save money long term, but when the upgrade finally comes, it could cost more.

I'm always concerned that the software will suddenly demand you need new hardware, and there's more cost, where a stand alone software will work, and can be reinstalled from disc.

 

[ffox]

BUT try integrating functions across your business and you are completely stuck in whatever SaaS you have chosen like it or not.

You are looking at it from the wrong angle. Try lateral thinking. The important thing is data, not the software which captures, generates or stores it. Data is the lubricant in the engine of your business. In the 'free' arena there are cloud storage offerings from Amazon, Microsoft and Google. Just sign up and use them. Avoid wrapping you data in a silo environment provided free or on payment by any software provider. Simply design yourself an efficient online filing system
Your data is then free for you to integrate wherever you chose to deploy it..

If you want to opt for a more secure, professional solution, use Office 365 or G Suite. There are so many ways you can integrate data between these platforms that I can't begin to describe them here.

Office 365 also offers SharePoint online at no extra charge. Effectively an enormous SQL DB that needs little or no technical skills to use effectively.

To get the best you will need a clear business and information strategy though.

 

[Alan]

The important thing is data, not the software which captures, generates or stores it.

Data is at the bottom of the pyramid ( see DIKW pyramid ). Unfortunately you need processes to change data into information, and software is a way of automating processes. I'm afraid your view is too simplistic for me.

Not this model of, weeellllll you can use a, most of b, and a tiny fraction of c

I agree, that just will annoy the consumer. Vote with your wallet.

I'm always concerned that the software will suddenly demand you need new hardware, and there's more cost

You say you hate SaaS, but you go on to says many things that support SaaS such as the above.

 

[ffox]

Data is at the bottom of the pyramid ( see DIKW pyramid ). Unfortunately you need processes to change data into information, and software is a way of automating processes. I'm afraid your view is too simplistic for me.

Exactly Alan. The pyramid cannot exist without the base. In the old days algorithms, built into software packages, filtered and categorised data to deliver useable information. Now G Suite and Office 365 deliver the facility of powerful indexed search across the whole enterprise data estate. With O365, much of this can be achieved without the need for writing code.

 

[pentel]

Avoid sass as much as possible. There is no customer advantage as far as I can see.

Sign up for Sass for everything because your business can support the monthly payments. Business takes a downturn, but we have to keep paying the ransomware fees to keep going, stop paying loose accounting function, kills business, cant even access info for liquidator...

We have had this with payroll, (not even sass) changed supplier and because we were no longer on support with the old company couldn't even print off duplicate wage slips or P60's....

 

[Clinton]

@pentel, you've discovered but one tiny problem with SaaS. It's actually much worse than that.

The potential to hold your data ransom is bad enough on its own - and every SaaS company that has your data, including big ones like Microsoft, have you by the short and curlies - but there are many other reasons.

The important point for me is one of principle: If a service can be delivered on a one-off payment, but the company refuses to offer a one-off payment option, they should be avoided simply on the grounds that they are unethical and exploitative.

Pricing options tell you a lot about the ethos and integrity behind a company. If they are looking to screw as much out of the customer as possible - avoid them. Others may call such activity "revenue maximisation" or whatever. I call it taking the p*ss.

And if pricing has a £0 option i.e. free trial ... exert even more caution if taking that free option is going to put you, in some way, in obligation to that company or give them any power over you or your data.

 

[Clinton]

You say you hate SaaS, but you go on to says many things that support SaaS such as the above.

So if one SaaS software provider demands you upgrade your computer, the answer is to SaaS the fcuk out of your hardware as well and take your processing into a subscription based cloud?

I never anything more crazy!

 

[Videoguy]

If a service can be delivered on a one-off payment, but the company refuses to offer a one-off payment option, they should be avoided simply on the grounds that they are unethical and exploitative.

Agreed, but look at it from a software developer's point of view...

Once you've sold a piece of software you've sold it - plus there's nothing to stop people running off copies and giving it away free. The only way you can make more money from the product is by offering upgrades, but if your customers don't want the latest bells and whistles you're stuffed! By making people pay a subscription, and by keeping the software on "the cloud", you keep the cash flowing in because customers HAVE to keep paying - both to use the service and access their own data. I believe it's called a "toll booth" business model.

I'm playing devil's advocate here .

I'm still using Photoshop CS2 and the MYOB accounting software I bought 15 years ago. Both do everything I want, so why change? For that reason software companies HATE people like me and force us to use a subscription service. I'd love to have the latest version of Adobe After Effects, for example, but I wouldn't use it often enough to justify the subscription - plus my broadband speed is so slow it probably wouldn't work properly, anyway.

BTW, if you're fed up with SaaS, this site offers good free or low cost alternatives: http://alternativeto.net/

 

[Clinton]

Agreed, but look at it from a software developer's point of view...

Why should I, as a consumer, care about the software developers' bottom line?

Sure, developers need revenue to keep improving the product. But for decades development was financed with a flat, one off fee. We've had lots of software developments on that old model; it worked.

Why do software developers now need a lot more money to do the same thing? In fact, given the rise of vast armies of cheap developers in the far east, it should be cheaper now.

Nah, they are crooks, the lot of them.

 

[Dimo]

I use Adobe Photoshop Elements in a professional capacity and have no intention of paying a monthly subscription to do so. I'm still using Elements 9 (which meets my needs), as the last time I considered upgrading I was told by Adobe they wanted a minimum of £9.99 per month.

Forever.

 

[DavidWH]

You say you hate SaaS, but you go on to says many things that support SaaS such as the above.

Not sure what many things I said to support SaaS. Yes we use SaaS, but my preference would be to buy outright. Like our machinery, we determine a service life, and within x years, it will be replaced. Same with out IT system, and software, it will be upgraded as a whole, and we'll repeat the step.

Why would I pay £30+ PCM for 5 years (price not fixed either), when for 1 nominal fee we could run the software for 5+ years like we do?

I use CS5 & CC suites, and my preference is CS5, the interface is clearer, and there's no features within CC that would warrant us to upgrade. If it ain't broken, why fix it?

Sage keep mithering to upgrade out accounts package, it meets our needs, and their new software provides nothing 'extra' that would be of benefit.

The other downside of SaaS, is it's become accessible to the masses, anyone can pay £xxPCM, and have 'professional software' at their fingertips, and immediately declare themselves a professional... "you're charging how much???!! I can get photoshop for £xx! I'll do it myself"

 

[fisicx]

I met a client yesterday to discuss a project. We met at a location whose wifi was slower than a slug. But because everything I needed was on the lappy I could do the demo and make the changes they needed without relying on anything cloudy.

I see no value in paying monthly for tools full of functionality I never use. I've still got Fireworks 4 - does everything I need and only cost a tenner.

 

[The Byre]

Ain't nothing out there that ain't also available for free or mega-cheap

http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/articles/nothing-worth-having-is-free-except-software.618/

 

[Xtm_Mike]

I'm not a huge fan of SaaS but I don't mind embracing it for services that I actually get value from. I don't mind supporting the developers and aiding in the development of the product.

As a developer myself, I actually care about other developers (Shock!)... I understand the hard work and struggles and on going need to make money after the initial sale. I don't necessarily care about their bottom line, that's their problem... but I'm happy to pay for software if it is as a service that actually adds value to my business and of course, the company is demonstrating that they are using my subscription money to continue developing the product.

Companies avoiding the SaaS model are still being forced to come up with new business models as selling for a set single price is no longer sustainable. The one I'm seeing a lot and not a great fan of paid upgrades... Companies are releasing 'Major' upgrades each year and charging the same price, or with a small discount. If you upgrade each year you are essentially paying for the product every year... I suppose the added bonus is you're not forced and you have a perpetual licence for earlier versions.

I consider myself an 'upgrader' I like the latest and greatest... therefore the SaaS model works for me. I can pay monthly for a product rather than large sums yearly which works well for my income.

 

[ffox]

Wow. How blinkered can you get.

Start with the FACT. That SaaS can deliver most of the apps any business needs FoC. Google delivers word-processing, spreadsheet and database applications at no charge. So does Microsoft.

The potential to hold your data ransom is bad enough on its own - and every SaaS company that has your data, including big ones like Microsoft, have you by the short and curlies - but there are many other reasons.

Wrong - you can store a copy of your data locally, you can move to another free provider.

So if one SaaS software provider demands you upgrade your computer, the answer is to SaaS the fcuk out of your hardware as well and take your processing into a subscription based cloud?

Wrong - on One Drive and Google Drive you can access your data from any platform, Windows, IoS, Andriod, Linux. It's browser based - not PC dependant.

Why should I, as a consumer, care about the software developers' bottom line?

You shouldn't. You own your data. How you can use your data should not be dictated by some application developers whim. This applies no matter if the application is open source, client based or SaaS. - Don't put your data in a silo environment.

Not sure what many things I said to support SaaS. Yes we use SaaS, but my preference would be to buy outright. Like our machinery, we determine a service life, and within x years, it will be replaced. Same with out IT system, and software, it will be upgraded as a whole, and we'll repeat the step.

That is more expensive than it needs to be. Let the provider do the upgrades, your inconvenience is merely that of allowing it to happen.

Ain't nothing out there that ain't also available for free or mega-cheap

http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/articles/nothing-worth-having-is-free-except-software.618/

Sorry. But that is wrong, wrong, wrong. IT is simply a tool of your business. Use a sharp chisel, not a blunt one.

I'm not a huge fan of SaaS but I don't mind embracing it for services that I actually get value from. I don't mind supporting the developers and aiding in the development of the product.

Then define a strategy for your business that gets the best from SaaS. Think again about your storage and your processes. There are many new ways to achieve what you need without locking your data into silos.

The OP questioned the lack of integration in SaaS offerings. Quite right. Lack of integration is the heart of the issue. Your data is yours, it should not be locked into an application, freeware, purchased or subscription.

Think about what data your business generates, creates, captures and needs and build from there. Your business is unique, so why tie yourself to a data model designed by a developer employed by a software company?

 

[Clinton]

Wrong - you can store a copy of your data locally, you can move to another free provider.

How naive can you get? These companies know that most people will go with the default option of storing in the cloud. Then one day, wham!, you can't access till you pays your ransom.

Wrong - on One Drive and Google Drive you can access your data from any platform, Windows, IoS, Andriod, Linux. It's browser based - not PC dependant.

Most people don't need to access everything from half a dozen different devices. Features for features sake....and to justify the rip-off subscription based pricing model.

Besides, browser-based is bad news. (Browsers are bad news generally and we need to start moving away from them. They are vulnerable ...and getting worse.) Further, requiring an internet connection to access stuff is just creating extra layers of potential failure.

 

[ffox]

How naive can you get? These companies know that most people will go with the default option of storing in the cloud. Then one day, wham!, you can't access till you pays your ransom

Sorry Clinton, but the default option on most cloud services is to replicate. That means the data is both in the cloud and on the device. People who use free cloud services can't fail to 'pay a ransom' for what is free..

Most people don't need to access everything from half a dozen different devices. Features for features sake....and to justify the rip-off subscription based pricing model

Availability across multiple devices is a bonus and only affects cloud service price where local client installation of apps are required.

Besides, browser-based is bad news. (Browsers are bad news generally and we need to start moving away from them. They are vulnerable ...and getting worse.) Further, requiring an internet connection to access stuff is just creating extra layers of potential failure.

Had you not noticed that in recently developed software, even client installed applications, use the browser as the interface?

Internet connection often is an issue. Where this arises the business must balance risk and benefit. That doesn't detract from the huge benefits provided by cloud and SaaS for most businesses.

 

[fisicx]

Some businesses, not most businesses.

The benefits of SAAS and cloud storage for many small businesses are outweighed by the cost of using these services.

 

[Clinton]

And the cost is far higher than people realise when they are using free services.

Even in those rare SaaS situations where there's a copy of data maintained on your own PC, there's usually a price you're paying for free. Like with Gmail where they use your conversation to decide what ads to target you with.

Or Amazon who collect detailed stats on all their merchants' sales and conversion figures and then use that to muscle in and take the merchants' businesses over!

And all that's before we come to portability. I have several clients on SaaS accounting packages. No, they don't have a local copy of their data. Yes, some of the can download a copy of different report in .xlsx format or something, but not the entire data being held. For those who can download entire data ... it'll be in a format that can't be ported to another accountancy provider!

Companies that are greedy enough to inflict SaaS on their customers are companies you can't trust to not hold you to ransom or otherwise seek to screw more money out of you.

 

[pentel]

Sass works best for a developer. If you first generate the "go to" application ( think sage, adobe, autodesk), then having achieved market dominance change your pricing model to extract the maximum revenue you can. Alternatively (solidworks) make the file format of models created with the "new" version incompatable with last years model, with no option to save to an earlier version.

For early stage developers the hit of instant income from the sale of a perpetual license gives funds for development. The reality is that most of the work is getting to a reliable stable piece of software so this makes sense. Adding the (unnecessary) bells and whistles and changing the file format is in effect holding committed customers to ransom.

For our particular application solidworks 2007 was the best version ever, has actually gone downhill since, but while customers keep on paying for updates so do we... :-(

 

[Xtm_Mike]

And the cost is far higher than people realise when they are using free services.

Even in those rare SaaS situations where there's a copy of data maintained on your own PC, there's usually a price you're paying for free. Like with Gmail where they use your conversation to decide what ads to target you with.

Or Amazon who collect detailed stats on all their merchants' sales and conversion figures and then use that to muscle in and take the merchants' businesses over!

And all that's before we come to portability. I have several clients on SaaS accounting packages. No, they don't have a local copy of their data. Yes, some of the can download a copy of different report in .xlsx format or something, but not the entire data being held. For those who can download entire data ... it'll be in a format that can't be ported to another accountancy provider!

Companies that are greedy enough to inflict SaaS on their customers are companies you can't trust to not hold you to ransom or otherwise seek to screw more money out of you.

What companies? You got evidence to back up these claims or are you sitting there in a tin foil hat?

I'm also not sure what is so shockingly unrealistic about a company using their own data, on their own platform, provided by their own customers to improve their offering, put themselves in a better market position and beat the competition... I thought that was called business?

 

[Clinton]

What companies? You got evidence...

Links to articles with evidence already provided in an earlier post. Enjoy.

 

[Gecko001]

I do not like subscriptions, but they are here to stay. They have developed because of illegal sharing of pirated software.

I also hark back to the days when you could walk into PC World, pay your £500 and get a nice big box of software with a 300 page manual and various CD's. Unfortunately, in those days there were people, including competitors, who were paying £10 at street markets and auction sites for the same product.

 

[Asjs3n4]

I Agree, there are allot of Free open source packages out there including complex flexible ones like https://discuss.erpnext.com/t/best-practices-for-customized-erpnext-implementation-as-saas/23708

 

[The Byre]

When I suggested that there is good industry-standard software out there completely free, you wrote -

Sorry. But that is wrong, wrong, wrong. IT is simply a tool of your business. Use a sharp chisel, not a blunt one.

Unfortunately, you don't explain that reaction.

I mentioned in that article some six industry-standard packages that are used by millions and are offered for free for good, commercial reasons.

I would not claim that GnuCash, CS2 and Hit-Film are the very best in their class, but (IMO) WordPress, Reaper and DaVinci-Resolve definitely are at least as good as packages that cost tens-of-thousands to set up and require the customer to pay significant sums to keep up-to-date.

Both of those last two software packages can do things that none of the SaaS packages can and a full-blown commercial license costs $240 and $300 respectively. People use them, not because they are cheap, but because they are better!

In the case of DaVinci-Resolve, the parent company Blackmagic-Design, sells it so cheaply, so as to get the user into the BMD family. Reaper is sold via a $60 honesty-box for private use, because it is up against giant companies (Avid, Adobe, Sony, Yamaha, Apple) that use most of their revenue for marketing.

As a consequence, every penny spent on those two products gets spent in improving and developing the product - to the point today where both are found being used in large companies for whom the price of the product is pretty unimportant. The BBC has been using both for quite some time and Lucas Film and Skywalker Ranch (the World's largest post production facility) has been using both, as well as various SaaS packages.

 

[ffox]

Unfortunately, you don't explain that reaction.

I mentioned in that article some six industry-standard packages that are used by millions and are offered for free for good, commercial reasons.

I suggest you read https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1131022

The quality or otherwise of Video Industry specific software is something I can't comment on. Microsoft also make available version of software for free. The browser versions of Word and Excel, for instance, plus Visual Studio Express and SQL Server Express. They are restrictive licences though and users need to understand the uses to which the packages can be put.

The benefits of SAAS and cloud storage for many small businesses are outweighed by the cost of using these services.

Please elaborate on these costs.

Like with Gmail where they use your conversation to decide what ads to target you with.

Or Amazon who collect detailed stats on all their merchants' sales and conversion figures and then use that to muscle in and take the merchants' businesses over!

If a user doesn't like Google or Amazon practices they can always use Microsoft.

 

[Clinton]

If a user doesn't like Google or Amazon practices they can always use Microsoft.

I'll take it you're trying to wind me up. I'm going to pass commenting on that

 

[Gecko001]

I agree with The Byre about there being a lot of free software out there if you look for it. When the Credit crunch happened a few years ago, I decided to cut my software spend from about £1000-2000 a year to zero. It is amazing what you can find which is free and legal.

The key in my view is to not let clients know that you use this software. That can be difficult if you are interacting with other firms on a project. For example there will be times when you have to say that you cannot open a certain drawing or document because you only have the 2005 version etc. This sort of thing often gets back to the client in a competitive world.

Some clients might be impressed that you can do so much with so little, but most will not be impressed in my experience.

 

[Clinton]

Some might be impressed that you can do so much with so little, but most will not be impressed in my experience.

I'm not impressed when clients tell me they're using Microsoft Office. I'm seriously not impressed.

I advise them to use a decent programme or take the chance of documents/spreadsheets they send me getting messed up in my Open Office / Libre Office.

 

[fisicx]

Please elaborate on these costs.

These ones: https://products.office.com/en-gb/compare-all-microsoft-office-products?tab=2 (for example)

Or these: https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/

Or these: http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop.html

 

[The Byre]

I suggest you read https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1131022.

I remember that fuss and the fuss when they went SaaS. They had to insist on not really recognising that it became free (but pssst, lads - here it is anyway!) for very obvious legal reasons.

The quality or otherwise of Video Industry specific software is something I can't comment on.

It is however typical for any industry. There is a growing awareness by manufacturers that free or at least realistically priced software is a great way to get people into the 'family' of users.

I decided to cut my software spend from about £1000-2000 a year to zero. It is amazing what you can find which is free and legal.

The key in my view is to not let clients know that you use this software. That can be difficult if you are interacting with other firms on a project.

That is the big problem for many. If your main supply-chain for digital products is for example Adobe CS, then you really are stuck. The customer gets a project folder for Illustrator, so you have to be able to open an Illustrator file.

Things get a bit hairy when it comes to advanced plug-ins though and we have all kinds of problems with perfectly good project folders in some SW packages that feature exotic or problematic plugs. For that reason, we have to insist on files in a standard format, so no project folders! For film, that is AVI and RAW, for audio, WAV, for stills TIF and for layouts, PDF and so on.

That was the reason we were forced to drop Sage - no import or export in SQL at the time. If SW lives in a ecosystem all of its own, it is best avoided.

 

[Xtm_Mike]

Links to articles with evidence already provided in an earlier post. Enjoy.

The articles you posted don't validate any of your claims. They talk about something we already know: That perpetual licencing is no longer a viable model so they are shifting to subscriptions and SaaS. Obviously, these shifts were going to anger the old fogies forcing themselves to live with a version from the 90s because they don't like parting with their pennies.

You're making too many statements that these companies are evil money grabbers out to screw you over and hold you to ransom, but you have no evidence that this is happening or has happened in the past.

 

[DavidWH]

That is the big problem for many. If your main supply-chain for digital products is for example Adobe CS, then you really are stuck. The customer gets a project folder for Illustrator, so you have to be able to open an Illustrator file.

Hence why we have 1 machine running CC.

Yes SaaS is paying for development of the software. Trouble is few users make use of all the current features, so all these new developments and updates aren't of benefit to them.

I've yet to see any new feature in Adobe thats made me want to upgrade all our machines. When we last updated Quark, because of an OS update, it was the same... except it can now make shite websites.

 

[ffox]

I'm not impressed when clients tell me they're using Microsoft Office. I'm seriously not impressed.

Sorry, but why would anyone have a desire to impress you?

I remember that fuss and the fuss when they went SaaS. They had to insist on not really recognising that it became free (but pssst, lads - here it is anyway!) for very obvious legal reasons.

Pretending to be blind or shortsighted with regards to contractual requirements represents a needless risk to any business.

These ones: https://products.office.com/en-gb/compare-all-microsoft-office-products?tab=2 (for example)

Or these: https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/

Or these: http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop.html

Bless. These examples are just price lists. Yet basic cloud and SaaS is free. Let's suppose that a small start up one man business wants to track customer contacts, invoices sent and received, purchases and stock movement. Provided that the transactions are relatively light, these functions are easily managed with spreadsheet and word processing applications and a well designed electronic filing system. Microsoft One-drive and Google apps provide these absolutely free. Location of documents is by indexed search and that is server side, so need no great PC power.
Say, as the business grows, the business owner wants to automate some of the processes to get value from what the business is doing and where it's going. Simple, MS Flow and Power apps provide the facility to grab the data that has been stored in the cloud, down to a single row in a spreadsheet and copy it elsewhere. This could be another spreadsheet, or a word processor document, or to generate a task.
Again, at a small business level of transaction traffic, this is absolutely free. And it comes without the need to write any code. All you need is a clear idea of what you want to do.

Sure you could emulate some of this using client based apps like Open Office or Libre Office, but first you need a PC, then your need to install the software, then you need to keep it updated and you still have lots of data in silos that you can't integrate. There are crude search facilities, but they are unindexed and slow. In addition they only work at filename level.

I'll accept that Google Drive and One Drive are not the most secure storage facilities available, but the security is pretty good given that the offerings are FoC. If more security is required, upgrade and pay the small fees you illustrate in your earlier post. Office 365 and G Suite are more secure than any Local Area Network.

Incidentally, when the small business takes the upgrade plunge, say to Office 365, they also get 1 Tb of cloud storage per user, enterprise class (very secure) email, active directory security and, provide they take the right licence (E1 is only £60 per year) full MS SharePoint. The search facility on this alone is worth the money. Search across the entire business estate of data for documents of any readable type containing a customer name, or an item of stock purchased or sold or any combination of these. Again, no coding required.

At the start up level, access to One Drive or Google apps can be via a cheap and cheerful Android tablet. You can't get lower cost IT in any other way.

 

[fisicx]

That's how you would do things. Dave who does our building work struggles to write an email. He pays a bookeeper to do everything for him.

I'm sure many businesses take advantage of SAAS and other cloudy services but that's not the same as saying it's the right solution for everybody.

Just like your arguments for using Sharepoint - no matter how good it isn't for everybody.

This thread will always be polarised with valid arguments on both sides. If you want to use SAAS that's fine. If you don't that's OK as well. But don't tell me one is any better than the other as it isn't. It's just a different way of doing things.