What do you think of the term Software as a Service, usually shortened to SaaS? As an evangelist for the concept I’m constantly having to explain what it means, and the term itself is rather clumsy. In my weekly SaaS roundup I mentioned that the Enterprise Irregulars have been debating the term. Vinnie highlighted that CIOs understand “as a Service” and the term is well accepted, and some of our number thought it was all a waste of time to be arguing over words. Chris Selland quite rightly pointed out:
“We keep talking about 1/4 inch drills - and keep arguing over different ways to describe the specifications of the drill. The market is buying 1/4 inch holes - and cares little about the tools that are used to produce them. ”
That is so true. The average end user wants a solution and cares little about my argument as a SaaS bigot against those SaaS pretenders who have an old client/server application that they’ve web enabled with Citrix technology so they can deliver it in “SaaS” like clothes - SoSaaS (Same old Software, as a Service) as Phil calls it.
But words are important. A combination of Jason Corsello, and then over at Coghead, Paul McNamara, triggered the discussions between us. I particularly liked Paul’s jibe that bright sparks in the 1920s didn’t decide to call Radio “Phonograph as a Service”. Over the weekend David Tebbutt chipped in, and quoted me from the EI dialogue when I said SaaS was an ugly term. Phil had raised the topic before, but came in with a poll to get his readers reactions.
The term that, to me, sounds natural for job is “webware”. Paul raised it in his article, explains it was coined by Rafe Needleman, and points to the C|Net site of the same name, which had completely passed me by (and which has some diverse but good material). David and Phil come firmly in behind the term, and the voting on Phil’s post so far seems to bear this out. To me or a layman, webware echoes software (which I already understand) and explains that I’ve got stuff designed for use over the web that’s doing the job. As Phil points out, it neatly cordons off solutions that weren’t designed for the web, but doesn’t restrict the concept to specifics like software.
I’d be particularly interested to see what SaaS experts like Jeff Kaplan think of the debate. He’s got so much invested in the term, it will be good to get his take as the “high priest” of SaaS. Hopefully this will get raised at the upcoming SaaScon.
If technology terms are confusing, then they’re getting in the way. My gut feel is that the webware term will begin to get used more and more often in the coming weeks and months and take on a life of its own. I also believe that when I use it, it will be much less likely that I get a blank expression from the business person I’m talking to, and then have to launch in to my explanation, and get bogged down by “1 to many” and all that stuff he’s not particularly interested in. Long live webware.
