Thoughts on what businesses actually need from the Cloud, not what vendors wish they needed.

Chris Bliss

Subscribe to Chris Bliss: eMailAlertsEmail Alerts
Get Chris Bliss via: homepageHomepage mobileMobile rssRSS facebookFacebook twitterTwitter linkedinLinkedIn

Related Topics: Cloud Computing, Cloudonomics Journal, Twitter on Ulitzer, SaaS Journal, Government Cloud Computing, Microsoft Developer, CIO/CTO Update, Telecom Innovation, Java in the Cloud

Blog Feed Post

Community Feedback is Good. Kinda.

As cloud computing and SaaS go mainstream, software vendors are increasingly connected with consumers

Yes, this is a repost, but it’s just so good we couldn’t help ourselves…

The Support, It Is a-Changin’
In the good ‘ole days when software still need installing and executives regularly printed their emails, software “support” was a strange thing. Sure, Microsoft had helplines you could call, and Quicken came with a manual, but it wasn’t “support” per se: more like a robotic attempt to appease the odd granny or two. Software personified the impersonal.

These days that’s all changing. As cloud computing and SaaS go mainstream, software vendors are increasingly connected with consumers more directly and more personally than ever before. Developers tweet back and forth with users: execs explain project trajectories in company blogs: support forums patrol themselves with dedicated fans. It’s an entirely different ecosystem.

More is better, right?
In a lot of ways, the increase in channels of access has lead to better support. Visit any popular app’s forum, knowledge base or helpdesk and you’ll see heaps of answers to popular questions, users voting on future bug fixes and enhancements, and inter-user dialogue about a product’s worth. As far as support goes, it’s transparent, freely available, and generally quite good.

But the situation isn’t all roses and rainbows. In the good ‘ole days when support sucked, developers had the luxury of designing products in relative isolation. They designed a product, released it, mucked around with it for a few years *presumably* improving it, and released it again. These days developers not only have to defend every design or implementation choice they make, but they have to analyze, respond to, and either accept or defend against every unique user request, which come by the trillions. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing: vendor accountability is at an all-time high, which is good, and developers get new ideas and a great feel for how their products are used. The danger, however, is that vendors fall slave to user demands.

The Slave Vendor
Vendors, enslaved by users? What do we mean? We mean that users don’t always know what’s right, and their (loud) opinions shouldn’t unilaterally dictate software production. A few ornate users on Twitter, a bad review somewhere, a highly visited forum post: none of those are good reasons in and of themselves to change anything. Developers need to deliberately and carefully pick their way through community feedback, which in the headstrong ways of the internet can be hard to do. Good development requires strategic focus, not fire-fighting.

Likewise, IT consultants should aggregate and qualify client complaints, throwing out the superfluous stuff and passing on the good ideas to vendors. The goal is a more helpful product, not a few satiated customers.

We’re happy that support has improved so much. We just don’t want anon423 having undue influence over the direction of our inventory software.

For more rants, reviews, and general tech geekery, read our blog our email us. Love to chat.

Read the original blog entry...

More Stories By Chris Bliss

Chris Bliss works at VM Associates, an end-user consultancy for businesses looking to move to the cloud from pre-existing legacy systems.

Comments (0)

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.