Scobleizer - Latest Comments in Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Brad Phillips — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 13:24:03 -0000

Business software and sexy don't go hand in hand. Hell, I haven't exactly seen many sexy female software engineers out there, so it's kind of tough to make it translate.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

ChangeForge | Ken Stewart — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:51:49 -0000

Robert, great article. You must be the master of pot-stirring. I would submit there is a middle ground between sexy and stable...

Enterprise software does need a PR make-over. CXO's often don't ask their customers how they would be impacted, and I think this is a major mistake. There must be a way to give customers what they need and what they want.

I have expanded on my comments in my blog:

http://www.changeforge.com/...

Keep up the great work! I always enjoy reading and listening.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

David Scott Lewis — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 05:18:01 -0000

Robert, I don't want sexy enterprise software, I want functional enterprise software. A great UI would be helpful, but there's a lot more to enterprise software than a pretty face.

Also, why is BillG talking about enterprise software. At Microsoft, enterprise software is selling 500 seats of Office. Now Oracle and SAP are premier enterprise software companies. Microsoft could learn a thing or two from Oracle and SAP.

When I moved from Microsoft to Oracle, it was like moving to another planet. Oracle is what enterprise software is all about. Microsoft, well, Microsoft should stick to selling copies of Office.

And note that where Microsoft gets the most traction with their apps such as Microsoft CRM and the Dynamics line in general is with SMEs, not the G2000.

Take a look at who runs Oracle or SAP apps. Compare this list to who runs Microsoft apps. How many G2000 companies are primarily running Microsoft Dynamics?

I rest my case.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Ajay Mishra — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 16:04:17 -0000

BTW: has anyone seen a successful ERP implementation? Ok guys be honest..

ajay

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Ajay Mishra — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 16:02:37 -0000

Enterprise Software and sexy - in the same sentence? Are you OK Scolbe? Its like Sushi And Ketchup..

Names - as they say - tell a lot - if not all. Lets see:

Planning Time Horizon, MM Module, GL Code Combinations, Chart of Accounts, General Ledger.. and the list goes on..

Now, lets compare that to the non-enterprise words:

Music, FREE, Video, Flickr, Bebo,Watch, Download Free.. Creative Commons, Cheap, Friends of Friends.. and .. well..

I am not saying ERP is useless - bloated -yes.. but anything but sexy

Cheers
ajay

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Joe Gum — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:21:08 -0000

After working with ERP systems for twenty years, there's one thing that I've come to realize. ERP customers (decision-makers) believe that they are unique, and their uniqueness demands that their ERP be highly configurable.

Most of the sexy software serves its purpose very well, but I think most of the sexy software requires that everyone adapt to "how it works".

While I'm not saying that ERP can't or shouldn't be sexy - I think ERP may remain matronly until the demand for sexiness meets or exceeds the demand for configurability.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Fazal Majid — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 04:00:08 -0000

The fact the person who makes the purchasing decision means vendors can get away with the cruddiest user interface you can imagine, but that's not the root cause.

Enterprise software will never be sexy just as accounting will never be sexy, and for exactly the same reasons.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

ckeene — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 21:24:31 -0000

Just because enterprise software is geeky and bloated doesn't mean that it isn't trying it's durndest to be sexy. Let's review the last few enterprise software waves: 1) client/server computing - an attempt to do in the enterprise what people had been doing for years on home pcs, 2) thin/client computing - a mass enterprise hysteria for all things internet, driven by a mass consumer hysteria for all things internet, 3) Web 2.0/Rich Internet app stuff - a slavish insistence that enterprise software be as usable as, for example typepad or blogger.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Alan — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 03:01:21 -0000

Enterprise software must be sexy, but that is to address the issue of acceptance by the users. For a CIO to implement an Enterprise application based on looks however means that he has no clue. Functionality, stability and support should drive the sale of a product and sexiness should be way down the list of requirements.

I have been using SAP in my corporation for many years. We have 120000+ users on it and I must say stability has never been an issue (in my humble opinion that is). However, I’ve always been negative towards the product because it’s complicated and ugly. Seriously, it’s damn ugly. So the usability and user interface really prevented me and many other users to accept the product for what it can do, and rather looked at it as a useful yet ugly old Betty.

It’s a bit of a catch 22 though, because sexy interfaces are usually resource intensive, just look at Vista and Office 2007. Beautiful interfaces (yeah I know what you are thinking MAC fans), but who wants to buy those powerful machines for their corporation, SMB or even one-man-show businesses to run a single simple application, sometimes requiring no more than a few MB of RAM?

I’m in two minds about this one…..

Sneaky Puffadder

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

anon — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:30:43 -0000

Consumer software becomes enterprise software. Because what we call consumer software is typically younger, easier to use, and has a smaller featureset it is more interesting to discuss and there's more opportunity to make an impact on it.

Enterprise software seems to exist for itself. Features are mostly about keeping existing customers locked in and the realization of cool new features undergoes a much, much longer development time.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Matt Robinson — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:38:28 -0000

Enterprise Software gets "sexy" when end users, not only CIOs and IT, are given the ability to take matters into their own hands and decide what product to use themselves. The on-demand model has made this easy. This coupled with a high degree of self-service customization (and reliability) breeds customer satisfaction and hence broader adoption. Salesforce, NetSuite and Taleo have proven this in the SMB markets.

New do-it-yourself PaaS (platform as a service) offerings are taking this a step further by providing business users with the tools to design and deploy entirely new business apps themselves without necessarily writing code. These kinds of platforms are poised for adoption at the grassroots level. In the newish world of on-demand enterprise software end users are demanding to be empowered with self-service customization:

http://blog.rollbase.com/20...

What is "sexy" is in the eye of the beholder -- if your enterprise software cannot dynamically adapt to fit the beholder's whim, someone else's will. It is becoming easier and easier to pack up and switch vendors if you are not happy with the product. Still not happy? Roll your own.

Matt Robinson
www.rollbase.com
blog.rollbase.com

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Dave — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:32:35 -0000

Scot Typed: "Er, I guess you’ve never owned a Mac."

I do... but my enterprise doesn't.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Scott Gentzen — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 20:59:02 -0000

It depends on the software and the company that it comes from.

The Lotus Notes/Domino community is pretty actively blogged, and discussed out there. Google IBM Lotus blog sometime.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

melody — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:39:05 -0000

I believe that it's time for a small software company to start creating small-business enterprise apps--and make them look and act well at a reasonable price--it can be done. The big boys are not cut out for this--they are too entrenched in their old way of viewing things and too hung up on the technology to realize that what really matters is how it feels to the end-user. (they are affecting millions of lives here--day-in and day-out) Reliability and performance are part of that, but so far every enterprise system out there looks and feels really unprofessional, awkward and is a pain to use. Hard to believe when the systems sell for millions.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Justin Kestelyn — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:43:48 -0000

Scoble, to me, it's about available eyeballs - nothing more.

http://blogs.oracle.com/otn...

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Jay Neely — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:44:47 -0000

I've written about 7 technologies that could make enterprise software both be sexier, and as Michael Krigsman says, enable core business processes.

-Optical Character Recognition
-Document Collaboration
-Enhanced E-mail
-Wikis
-Syndication Feeds
-Virtualization
-Analytics

My full explanations for each are in my article, 7 (Practical) Technologies That Could Make Enterprise Software More Exciting.

What do you think, Robert?

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Pete Steege — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:01:21 -0000

Consumer software can be sexy because we interact with it. Good consumer software excites, engages and delights us because we're in a relationship with it.

Enterprise software will never be sexy because we don't directly, personally interact with it.

But behind every sexy consumer software solution is ten times as much substance (and value) in quiet, enabling, "just do it" enterprise software.

Don't sweat it! It's supposed to be this way.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Mike Woodhouse — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 05:27:57 -0000

I'm not sure it's possible to make enterprise software "sexy". If by "sexy" we mean engaging, easy-to-use, stuff like that.

There's been a whole bunch of discussion on this, but little addressing of your actual question(s), which isn't necessarily a bad thing, I suppose.

Why isn't "enterprise" software sexy? I'd submit that the principal answer may lies in the source: enterprises. It takes a large company to build a large system, which in pretty much every case I'm aware of will drive every ounce of passion, individuality and flair right out.

Companies like Fog Creek produce sexy software (I enjoyed attending the London leg of Joel's World Tour last month) but I doubt that they could produce anything near as attractive were they 10,000 strong with eight layers of management and distributed over several locations and timezones. We just don't have the organisational tools to do that yet, if we ever will.

The current (and future?) generations of enterprise-ware will scale: that's their differentiating factor. We can hope that they'll work (mostly) reliably and that support and training will exist and that they won't be so opaque that the purchasers incur significant risk through uninformed misuse.

It could change, although I think it's unlikely. A possible route might be through niche software providers along, to stick with the above example, the Fog Creek model, to make it easy to integrate their products with other similarly "sexy" instances, so that the enterprise can work on a great big sexy mash-up. The obvious barriers are (at least) twofold: first the sexy builders don't have any particular business incentive to create an API and second, the interfaces are likely to need standardising, which can be a slow train to nowhere.

But the thought that I might one day not have to put up with Lotus Notes (without quitting my current job, that is) makes me hope.

And the rest of my family collapsing with flu made me miss Friday, which sounds to have been a blast. Durnit.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Robert Scoble — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 05:12:08 -0000

Herschel: please note that I don't have advertising here (yet) and so, for me, I don't really care about page views. But, let's be clear about this: a post about Apple computer recently brought 10x more hits than the one yesterday, even though the one yesterday was talked about on lots of blogs and got to the top of TechMeme. The traffic doesn't support your thesis that talking about Enterprise Software will generate good page views.

In truth I bet it DOES generate great influence, though, because the few people who buy Enterprise Software weild so much buying power.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Kontra — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:36:39 -0000

I explored the notion of why people who are exposed daily to high interface and interaction values inherent in TV, movies, advertising, magazines and gadgets in the consumer sphere are somehow supposed to be rendered incapable of expecting and appreciating the same within the walls of the enterprise from 9 to 5, with a dozen enterprise examples that aren't sexy:

What isn't sexy enterprise software?

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Karim — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:42:26 -0000

So, why is it so?

For the same reason there are dozens, perhaps hundreds of magazines on interior decorating and design, and relatively few magazines covering say, bricks and mortar. Dramatic lighting is sexy; cinder blocks, not so much: YOU CAN'T SEE the cinder blocks once the building is built.

Any of you have any ideas on how to make business software sexy?

Hmmm. Do cinder blocks need to be sexy? Not really; they mostly need to be reliable and cheap. In fact, "sexy" might be the wrong thing to go for; you might want your business software to seem EXTREMELY RELIABLE, PREDICTABLE, DULL and COST-EFFECTIVE. Enterprise software is the accountant; consumer software is the receptionist.

There's also a desire to copy what other people are doing, to use tried-and-true industry standards, which is why ads for Microsoft SQL Server are always saying "look at all these other people using our software." Note they are not trying to appeal to gearheads (they downplay emphasis on TPC-C & other benchmarks), and they're not screaming about their new features. The overall message is one of solidness and robustness -- "if our software is good enough for (name recognition massive application), it's good enough for you."

There are "fashion trends" in business software but they tend to be slower and more low-key. Sticking with SQL Server as an example, there was a time it was considered a toy database, and "real" databases were in Oracle. Well that changed! The same thing is slowly happening with MySQL.

Now if your goal is to sell more software (as opposed to just making it "sexy"), you should investigate why that kind of migration happens... My guess is that it has not so much to do with being "sexy"....

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Herschel — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:41:44 -0000

Funny, I read this blog post a couple of hours ago and re-read it after seeing all the noise from other bloggers.

Robert, in my humble opinion unlike what you said "Instead, let’s look at the business of journalism or even of blogging. We’re paid to deliver page views."

I beg to differ. You are paid to create interesting, engaging and entertaining content.

By doing that, you'll get the page views. Which means if you created interesting, engaging and entertaining content about Enterprise Software, you'll get page views.

You made a career talking about a lot of Enterprise software with Microsoft or have you tried to forget that?

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Se7en — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:39:28 -0000

Wow, Robert, you really stirred up those Enterprise Software guys :p I think its amazing how many of them fell back on the old "its more complex than you realize, you just don't understand" chestnut. Reminds me of all the old mainframe guys trying to defend their turf as everyone moved to personal computers. A change SHOULD be coming, and the old school IT/Enterprise guys are the first that should be put out of work.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Seattle Slew — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:39:22 -0000

On your question about good blogs, you might try reading Keystones And Rivets. The guy who writes it, Paul Wallis, analyzes the whole business IT relationship in a way that as far as I can see is not only unique but easy to understand, and I come from a finance background. If you are skeptical, check out his posts on Alignment, EA and ERP. Speaking to a few tech experts I know, I'm told his stuff is fairly ground-breaking.

Re: Why enterprise software isn’t sexy

Michael — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:10:27 -0000

Aren't you able to get a much higher rate per 1000 with niche areas?