Posts Tagged ‘paas’

Reverse Engineering Force.com’s Approach to the Cloud Computing Market

busyI’ve been a bit busy recently and so instead of finishing off the complex REPAMA SAS into the “Cloud Computing / Cloud Software / Cloud Management / Application Services Management” study, I decided to produce a rough draft of the much simpler REPAMA into Force.com’s go-to-market strategy instead.

Whilst the segment analysis study only covers Force.com at the moment, I will add additional vendors/providers into the study over the coming weeks. If you have any suggestions who I should compare to/with Force.com, let me know.

I’m quite pleased with the result. Not because of any specific talent on my part but rather as I’ve already said here, Force.com’s marketing is a case study in how to take a new, disruptive technology to market. They understand their audience, they know what problems they solve and they know why they’re better/different. They communicate in clear language and they repeat their positioning strategy again and again and again consistently in all of their out-bound marketing communications. They’ve had successes and they’ve been able to document this and use it as proof of the claims they make. It’s been a joy to reverse-engineer it. That’s not to say that I think it’s perfect – they do tend to mix their audience and messages (audience strata mismatch) but it is very good indeed.

As I’m working through the cloud computing market and helping some vendors with their go-to-market strategies I’ve decided to share this and some  future studies on here because as I said in my ironic blog mission statement all those months ago, I want to highlight best practice in marketing communications and product marketing through this blog. So I thought it would be useful to share what value propositions and messages a market leader is using to address their prospects.

Anyway, below is the positioning statement that I’ve reverse engineered for Force.com’s proposition to end-user organisations. (I don’t plan to tackle the ISV or SI propositions yet)

Platform Services - General Purpose - REPAMA Segment Analysis Study (0.90)_Page_09

It’s a little woolly and raw at the moment but even in that state it’s clear that Force.com knows its market, its competition and its USPs. The REPAMA SAS containing just Force.com at the moment can be found online at  Slideshare.net and is embedded below.

If you’d like a copy of the slides let me know. For details of how to interpret the results of the REPAMA study please review the Lustratus REPAMA Guide.

Danny Goodall

Save/Share:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • email
  • Print
  • PDF

Force.com – Hat’s Off Time

hats offSteve and I met with the good people at Force.com this morning to get an update on their approach to the Cloud Computing market and to hear their vision for the future.

I’d already carried out some REPAMA analysis of Force’s marketing proposition and, just like I found when I looked at Oracle’s ESB proposition,I was very impressed. With some vendors’ marketing propositions I have to spend a long time inferring what their strategic marketing strategy is, for others the strategy is so well communicated to their prospects through their out-bound marketing communications that my job is made easy.

And so it was with Force.com…

Unlike complex on-premise .Net and Java development tools, Force.com is half the cost and five times as fast

I’m paraphrasing and simplifying of course but that is about the nub of the proposition. It’s repeated over and over again and as we found out this morning there appears to be some substance behind the claims. That said, neither benefit metric (cost nor time) can be impartially validated. But that doesn’t really matter. I know, I know, of course it ‘technically’ matters but this is about market perception where Force.com was first to grab a space in prospects’ minds and that will be tough if not impossible for other vendors/providers to wrestle back.

Force.com is signing up end user customers and ISVs in ever-increasing numbers and with their SFDC subscribers subsidising the provision of the infrastructure to their Force.com platform users they don’t have the set-up costs and growing pains of some of their potential rivals. It’s an impressive operation and one that I’m sure we’ll touch on in a bit more detail in the coming months. But taking off my marketing analyst hat and putting on my technology analyst hat for a moment, I have one concern about these off-premise platform as a service propositions. And the people we met from Force.com were, as yet (although I’m meeting with one of their techies who I know from a previous life for a coffee this evening) unable to answer satisfactorily, and that concerned workflow and process orchestration.

How does a process that is developed with/within Force.com play a role in an externally managed process/service orchestration or workflow? The answer for process orchestration appears to be that any fragment of a Force.com application can be exposed as a web service which means that you have enough granular control (and associated complexity by the way) to do anything you want. But what about an off-premise managed workflow that relies on providing UI from a number of different on-premise and off-premise systems to achieve the result? Can Force.com UI and logic integrate into that sort of external situation? We’ll see.

Anyway, as I said I was impressed as much by what I heard as what I had seen about the way the company executes. On top of it all they have taken cloud computing from the theory and made it real for many users. So, as I said, hats off to them.

Danny Goodall

Save/Share:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • email
  • Print
  • PDF

A Market Landscape/Taxonomy/Segmentation Model for Cloud Computing

Cloud Computing - Market Landscape - REV 1 (0.92)_Page_07I’ve completed the first draft of the cloud computing segmentation model upon which we will build our REPAMA studies.

As I’ve mentioned before along my journey to arrive at this model, I’ve found the cloud computing market to have quickly become crowded and confused. This is largely due to the ease at which “traditional” vendors have re-repositioned themselves to catch the cloud computing wave.

The other issue of course is that over time cloud computing will cease to be a new paradigm and will quickly become the way consumers and businesses avail themselves of computing services. So what I’m seeing here is a market in transition where just about every category in traditional software sales will have an offer in the cloud computing space until on-demand models becomes “the norm”.

So I guess it’s really not that surprising to see so many vendors present in the space. But at the same time it is very confusing for legitimate prospects to cut their way through the mass of terminology to then examine vendors and service providers who appear to have broadly identical capabilities and value propositions.  How do they decide the best way to take their first steps into cloud computing? It’ll be interesting to see what our REPAMA studies say about how each of the vendors/service providers’ takes their products to market.

Anyway, I’ve uploaded a set of slides to slideshare.net which I think is probably the best way to make the material available but if anyone wants a copy of the slides please let me know. The slides are embedded below.

As I’ve said before, this segmentation model will undoubtedly develop and change over time as I look in more detail at the marketing efforts of the various vendors involved. The definitions for each of the functional areas are a little woolly right now. But at least I now have a structure that allows me to decide which segments and vendors/service providers I will include in our studies moving forward.

I’d like to once again acknowledge the significant role that Brad BuckPeter Laird and Christofer Hoff played in helping to form the ideas on market segmentation and the role NIST has played in crystallising definitions on cloud computing and software/platform/infrastructure as a service.

Danny Goodall

Products and vendors included in the segmentation model are shown below. If you represent a vendor below and I haven’t represented your organisation correctly, or if you represent a vendor that isn’t included but should be, please contact me and let me know a little bit about your company and your proposition and where you feel you fit in the segmentation model.

10Gen MongoDB, 3Tera App Logic, Aconex, Advologix, Altor Networks, Amazon EBS, Amazon EC2, Amazon S3, Amazon SimpleDB, Amazon SQS, Amitive, Apache CouchDB, Apache HBase, Appian Anywhere, Appistry, AppJet, AppNexus, AppZero, Aptana, Aria Systems, Aster DB, Beam4d, Beowulf, Blink Logic, Boomi, Box.net, Bungee Labs Connect, Caspio, Cassandra, Cast Iron, Clickability, Cloud42, Cloud9 Analytics, CloudFoundry, CloudStatus, ClusterSeven, CohesiveFT, CohesiveFT VPN Cubed, ColdLight Neuron, Collabnet, Concur, CrownPoint, CTERA, CTERA Portal, DataSynapse, Desktoptwo, DirectLaw, DocLanding, DropBox, Dynamsoft, Dynect, Elastichosts, Elastra, EMC Atmos, Engine Yard, Enomaly Enomalism, enStratus, Etelos, Eucalyptus, eVapt, FathomDB, Fios, Flexiscale, Force.com, Gemstore Gemfire, Gigaspaces, Globus Toolkit, gnip, Google App Engine, Google Apps, Google BigTable, GridLayer, Hadoop, Hosting.com CloudNine, HubSpan, Hyperic, Hypertable, IBM Lotus Live, iCIMS, InfoBright, Informatica iTRICITY, Joyent Accelerators, JungleDisk, K2 Analytics, Kaavo, Knowledge TreeLive, LayeredTech, LiveOps, LoadStorm, LogiXML, LongJump, LucidEra, memcached, Mercury, mezeo software, Microsoft BizTalk Services, Microsoft SDS, Mosso Cloud Files, Mosso Cloud Servers, Mosso Cloud Sites, Mozy, MS Azure Services Platform, MSDynamics, MuleSource Mule OnDemand, NetDocuments, NetSuite, NewRelic, Ning, Nirvanix, Oco, Open.ControlTier, OpenCloud, opencrowd, OpenNebula, OpenQRM, OpenRSM, OpSource, OpSource Connect, Oracle Coherence, Oracle On Demand, Panaroma, Parallels, ParaScale, Parature, PingIdentity, PivotLink, Platform, Qrimp, Quantivo, Questys, rackspacecloud, Redi2, Reductive Labs Puppet, Responsys, Rightnow, RightScale, Rollbase, rPath, Salesforce.com, Scalr, Sertifi, Serve Path GoGrid, SkyTap, SnapLogic, SnapLogic SaaS Solution Packs, SOASTA, SpringCM, Sterna, StreetSmarts, Success Metrics, Sun Grid Engine, Symplified, Syncplicity, Taleo, TerraCotta, Terremark, TIBCO Silver, Tokyo Cabinet, Trigence, Vertica, VMWare vSphere, Vordel, Workday, Workxpress, Xactly, Xero, Xeround, Xythos, Ylastic, Zembly, Zmanda, Zmanda Cloud Backup, Zoho, Zuora, Mezeo Software, Workxpress, Trigence, AppZero, Platform, OneNetwork, SpringSource, Vaultscape

Save/Share:
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • email
  • Print
  • PDF
Categories
Follow LustratusREPAMA