SaaS vs on-premise, myths and reality. Stop cholivarit

Tl; DR 1 : Myth can be true in some conditions and false in others

Tl; DR 2 : I saw a holivar - look and see people who do not want to hear each other

Reading another article written by prejudiced people on this topic, I decided to give my point of view. Maybe someone will be useful. And it’s more convenient for me to give a link to an article instead of telling a lot.

This topic is close to me - we create contact centers, offering them on both models, as it will be better for the client.

SaaS in this article refers to the software distribution model when the server is in a shared cloud, and users connect remotely, most often through the Internet, through a web interface.

By on-premise, this article refers to the software distribution model when it is installed on a client server and users connect locally, most often using the windows-application interface.

Part one. Myths

Myth 1.1 . SaaS more expensive on-premise

Myth 1.2 . On-premise is more expensive than SaaS

SaaS vendors often say that starting to use their software is much lower. Only X dollars per month per user. Much cheaper than XXX in on-premise.
On-premise vendors multiply the SaaS price by many months and say their software is cheaper. Even the graphics draw. Wrong.

Wrong schedule does not take into account that the price of licenses is not all. There is also the price of customization work. And the cost of training. And the cost of mistakes untrained employees. There is an admin price that discusses the server. There is a price for server upgrade and repairing a burned-out power supply unit or HDD. In short, there are no straight lines either there or there.

In reality , cheaper or more expensive depends, for example, on the length of the period when large changes are not expected. For example, when our client knows exactly how many people he needs and what they will do - it is more profitable for him to on-premise. If for him the contact center is a kind of experiment, it is better for him to choose SaaS. Moreover, to change one to the other, if anything is possible without data loss.

So what's cheaper? For some cases - one thing, for others - another

Myth 2.1 . SaaS is safer on-premise

Myth 2.2 . On-premise is safer than SaaS

Our clients are divided into two large, approximately equal groups. Some say “that my data should be somewhere on the Internet? God forbid! What if evil hackers hack, steal or delete? No, let them be on my server, here, in my office. ” Others: “so that my data were here in the office? God forbid! What if a fire, theft or a mask show? No, let them be somewhere on the Internet. ”

In reality, security is a multifactorial concept, the location of the server is just one of many factors, saying that one is safer than the other is not serious.

So what is safer? For some cases - one thing, for others - another

Myth 3. SaaS poorly customizable.

In theory, for on-premise you can add in the code what you need for a specific client. In practice, this will lead to an increase in the number of versions. The cost of the accompaniment will soar to the skies, and no one tries to do anything like that. Instead, some kind of config is loaded and an application of any kind will set itself up.

In reality, customization depends on the maturity of the software and on the developer’s foresight. And not on the method of distribution.

So what is better customization? In some cases - one, in others - another

There are other less popular myths. But equally erroneous. But for now, for illustration, and these will be enough

Part two. Holivar

There is such a thing as “Muller's number” - the number of entities with which we can operate. 7 + -2. Everyone has his own, in stress can decrease up to 1.

If there are many entities, we begin to simplify and generalize. Here is the catch - we simplify and generalize each in our own way, and the words we use are the same.

Generally, at least one of the two errors is visible in any holivar. And more often both at once:

1. Different meanings of the same words.

For example, for someone twice cheaper = better. Because you need to use it only 1 time. And another looks, due to which the price is such, and sees that shnyaga is made by the dendro-fecal method, which is unacceptable for him. Better for him = more expensive, but normal. Then they argue, forgetting to clarify what is meant by "better."

2. Not everyone is ready to see ANOTHER person in another person and recognize that he has his own goals and priorities

Someone important specifications, and someone - ease of use. Really more important, in his situation it is uncomfortable = “I will earn less money a month” or “I will be irritable and growl at home”. It is important for him to overpay a few percent of his income for many hours of his good mood, his wife and children. And someone himself lives, to him an extra few hundred dollars is important, but there is no one to piss off at home. If these two don't want to hear each other, then meet a holivar like “Mac vs Windows” or something like that.

By the way, “they don't want to hear each other” is very often the MOST main cause of holivar. Unfortunately. As soon as they want, it will turn out that you can shrug your shoulders, say “yes, in your case so” and change the subject.

Have you noticed this? Or, on the contrary, noticed something else?