Text messaging has to be the bane of the SEC…
I thought that was Twatter?
Speaking of SaaS, reMarkable have been valued high.
Their business model is this:
Billed monthly in two tiers (normal at $7.99/month and “lite” at $4.99/month), Connect is how the startup plans to make a substantial part of its money going forward (indeed, when I asked it declined to give any projections for device sales for 2022). Among its features, Connect provides continuous software updates; cloud storage; connectivity with Dropbox, Google Drive and One Drive if you want it; an extended warranty for the tablet; handwriting conversion; screen sharing and a feature to send by email
I get that they need to be profitable and selling mainly hardware, especially in such a mature market, makes that tenuous. But something really rubs me up the wrong way with most of the things they are charging a subscription for. I mean, syncing to third-parties? Really?! And some really should be built-in freebies/included in the initial sale price.
I think what makes me more accepting of Office 365 is that a) it’s a great deal with the cloud storage, and b) they do sell the programmes outright if you decide to cancel your subscription.
1 Like
Wall street absolutely loves SAAS and there are many companies trying to do the same with HAAS. (Hardware As A Service). I’ve even seen a couple of pitchdecks that prominently tout they are a HAAS offering.
And what I find amusing specific to that is that they often talk about how successful the old cell phone sales model was as justification 
But being serious, I think both SAAS and HAAS can be good models for certain segments of the market such as SAAS in larger corporate but the other issue I have is that too many companies try to make it a one size fits all solution.
1 Like
Outside of greed, I understand why they do it. Advancements are largely slowing as most of the low hanging fruit has been picked, but they still need to make a profit.
One approach is the disposable one, a la the fashion world, but practically and morally there’s only so far you can go there. I do think there’s enough room for main sales and accessories (at a premium for first-party ones) to sustain quite a few companies there, but not the current number.
Then of course, you can make it a service. And of course that’s the path many of chosen. I think it’s very easy to be scummy doing it though and rip-off your customers. I’ve seen it most with fitness gadgets. Garmin, Polar, Suunto, etc. are fine for the moment, but some of the newer companies (Fitbit, Oura, Whoop (Get started for as low as $30/month!)) charge silly amounts for data that’s of questionable use (and even accuracy).
None other than our “friends” at Apple:
Can’t wait for atmospheric oxygen as a “subscription.”
1 Like
I mean, from a revenue-churning standpoint, it means money the corporation can always depend on. It has its advantages as you had keenly noted, and it is most loved by board of directors and investors for the steady cash flow it secures. For skeptical potential customers on the receiving end though, it could be viewed as a guaranteed indentured servitude. (Looking at you, Adobe.) Depending on the overhead and service it provides, it can present a strong advantage, such as a company without the budget or know-how for a proper IT department. Windows 365 in such a case could very well make PCs irrelevant. Hypothetically, consider a company with a three-year PC replacement program for its employees. A $45 per user license of Windows 365 (dual-core, 8GB RAM, 128GB storage; $1620 per three-year term) could end up being cheaper than hardware, electricity, and support costs for a physical device, perhaps more than $2000 per employee over that period. Couple that with the advantage of being able to access their Windows device anywhere, including from a smartphone or tablet. For a company with BYOD, this would be a very logical move. For companies who need to provide hardware, Apple is said to be on the verge of offering HaaS that could be the impetus for them to take the plunge as well.
@Hifihedgehog I should introduce you to one of our consultants who is a huge SAAS advocate. He can give you reams of data on TCO and how both models impact that. Again I personally am not in the one size fits all group.
Additionally another angle he uses which is actually getting a lot of traction of late is the idea of core competencies. In other words does it make sense for a company that makes craft beer to also have a large IT operation ?
In the past companies of any size that wanted to deploy technology almost had no choice, but that’s no longer really true in todays market.
Again not arguing per se, as much as offering alternate views.
1 Like
SAAS - Software An Absolute Sinkhole
HAAS - Hardware As Another Sinkhole
It’s not like ANY of the Big Tech companies (Apple, Adobe, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, or any of the hardware vendors) NEEDS subscription services to stay afloat - it’s merely an even more profitable way to float their boat. I can see for small software shops a subscription model is difference between life and death. For the big guys, just guaranteed RIVERS of revenue, a true wet dream.
Sorry to be so crude, but how many people have benefited since Adobe went from CS to CC, OTHER than Adobe?
3 Likes
I totally agree. I was just speaking diplomatically and hypothetically. My fear is this: when most everyone becomes sharecroppers instead of property owners of their technology, that gives these companies the leverage to give everyone as janky, bottom-of-the-barrel offerings as possible. It is much like the buzzword “cloud” has become a rebranding of off-prem solutions that the dumb CFOs (in my experience, most are technically illiterate) running companies fall for and take hook, line, and sinker.
1 Like
The new Outlook is officially in preview for all Office Insiders.
And it’s still awful. I’m convinced that the developers of this don’t actually use email.
2 Likes
They won’t have a snowball’s chance in Death Valley of companies’ IT personnel letting this baddie get deployed. Besides the interface, there are way too many legacy Outlook plugins among other things that this new modern replacement cannot support that companies need for their work. Microsoft’s done goofed this one. Whichever team handled this should get reassigned to Clippy development as cruel and unusual punishment.
3 Likes
Yeah one of our engineers is on the dev track for Office builds, and her first reaction was “yuck!”
1 Like