- Don't look back
- Is support for OSS optional in your business?
- Nokia N810 Tablet + WiMax
- Vendors need to right-size their products
- Dolphins Invade Sun Campus!
- State of Open Source
- MySQL Workbench: open source data modeling
- Comments on The 451 Group's Database Report & Red Hat's 4Q revenue
- Kaplan: Guiding open source in IT
- Can the transportation market teach us anything about the software market?
September 18, 2007 | Comments: (0)
SaaS vs. Open Source: Open Source will win
One of the things that struck me as I roamed the floor of the Dreamforce event (besides the fact that I find events like this to be incredibly depressing) is that there is a clear difference between companies that form a "community" and those that are part of an "ecosystem."
Since we launched MuleOnDemand this week I have been spending a great deal of time thinking through the advantages/disadvantages of SaaS and OSS. Despite the fact that I do believe in SaaS, I am finding that the current crop of SaaS companies are middling at best, with only a few standouts whereas there are many great open source companies--at witnessed by the acquisitions in the space (see Matt's post on The Gold Rush.)
Those SaaS companies that standout are the ones that have mutually beneficial non-competitive relationships with Salesforce.com whereas the non-standouts are just hangers-on. They also tend to not blend into a bigger strategy. For example Eloqua makes sense as does Omniture as it rounds out your needs. Similarly, most SaaS apps don't play well with others, largely ignoring the IT worlds move to SOA.
In open source we talk about "the community" and how it creates a larger development society. This is doesn't seem to be the case with SaaS. With Salesforce (or SaaS in general) the efforts that pop up around the product have little to do with a bigger picture and more to do with lateral routes to making money from said product (ie. Offering a function that Salesforce doesn't have). There is certainly nothing wrong with that but it sets a very different tone for how the companies interact with each other as well as with their potential customers.
With the ecosystem approach there are two possibilities: you make enough money to support the business or you get acquired by the mothership. The issue for the companies at Dreamforce is that Salesforce doesn't acquire many companies, and if you look at the way these SaaS applications are built they might use the same underlying technologies but don't share a common architecture (schemas, multi-tenancy for example) that can be merged into a bigger app like Salesforce.
Contrast this with the community approach where a company can sustain the business, or be acquired by a much broader range of companies. Witness how Citrix acquired XenSource and Yahoo acquired Zimbra, proving that open source and the community approach have far more options for success.
One other key aspect of community is that open source has both "developers" and "users" where SaaS tends to only have "users" which we should probably term "consumers" since there haven't been many well known contributions from SaaS companies back to OSS projects.
Ask any-and I mean any of the new school SaaS companies what they built their sites on and 99% will tell you it's all open source--primarily LAMP (BTW if you built on Windows just stop now. The costs will sink you as you scale.) Ask them if they pay for support and the response is less than 20% by my informal research.
I do think that SaaS is a great delivery model and I am glad these guys are consuming open source to build their businesses. The SaaS guys that provide actual value like Omniture, OpSource and a few others have a retainable space in the ecosystem. But, it's hard to see how majority of the companies on display at Dreamforce will build sustainable revenue outside of the Salesforce.com
This post was not meant as flame-bait. I personally have been trying to figure this all out. Any thoughts are welcome.
Posted by Dave Rosenberg on September 18, 2007 02:38 PM
RATE THIS ARTICLE:
-

- COMMENTS
Hi Dave,
So I tried to muse intelligently here in comments, but I ran out of characters. Basically - I believe that viable SaaS companies/services are only appropriate for very mature core business processes, like the basic sales, service and limited marketing features SFDC offers its customers. For innovation, you need a DIY effort - and these days are far more likely to look to Open Source to do it. Open Source appeals to developers and innovators who are going to twist, bend and reinvent the applications of the software they are using. SaaS users are business folks, or consumers, who basically want to avoid IT invention and the accompanying development delays to get basic functionality. When they are not looking for a competitive edge, or not much of one, SaaS works. When they are - they need IT, and all the glorious Open Source Software that comes with it.
For more on that, and how I think SaaS was a big factor in the commercialization boom of Open Source... you can read the rest on my blog... where there are no character limits! :)
http://www.hyperic.com/blog/hyperic/2007/09/19/saas-fueled-the-oss-fire/
Posted by: Stacey Schneider at September 19, 2007 10:00 AMInteresting viewpoint but I think it's misguided to think that there is a winner (or loser) between Open Source and SaaS. Both win. The economics of moving to SaaS offset most company's overhead of maintaining an application. And certainly most SaaS companies provide both SaaS, on premise solutions and open source or community editions (e.g., Rally, www.rallydev.com, the company I work for) offers SaaS (over 400 customers), on-premise (a handful of companies choose this option) and community (freely available). This is a viable approach for the 2.0 business...
Posted by: Rich Feather at September 19, 2007 02:55 PMCurrently SaaS is a $10 billion industry, so it would appear that more that just Omniture (a public company with a market cap of over $1 billion) and OpSource(not really a SaaS play, but a SaaS enabler) are able to make a go of it.
Posted by: John Atkinson at September 19, 2007 08:05 PMDave, I think the answer is clear from Salesforce.com themselves. 8.5 years ago, many (esp IT) thought management would ever cede their data and reliability to an outside SaaS provider. Today, SFDC is the leading CRM provider. The basic premise behind that success was IT didn't have to play much of a role and therefore didn't get in the way. With open source, IT does get in the way and therein lies the problem. IT has enough to do AND can't be expert in all things users require in today's 2.0 business. So although, our product, ActiveConversion is another scalable open source app, it's the fact that it can be delivered without IT resources is much more important than it being open source.
Posted by: Fred Yee at September 25, 2007 07:44 AM
- Get Started
- Port 25 Blogs
- OSS News
- Join a Project
{Open Source} Heroes Happen Here
Start today and order your own Hero Hack Pack – which includes Getting Started with Open Source, Windows Server 2008 and Visual Studio 2008 Trial. Each pack is a chance to win a free pass to OSCON 2008.
TOP STORIES
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

- Virtualization: A Step by Step Approach to Success
- Dialing up Agility with Business Transformation
- 5 Things You Need to Know About Storage Virtualization

- Is your smaller organization ready for High Availability?
- Is system maintenance doing more harm than good?
- Virtual Test Lab Automation: Manage development infrastructure








