April 18, 2008

Appirio Cloud Storage for Salesforce.com

Appirio today announced Appirio Cloud Storage for Salesforce.com, a new software-as-a-service (SaaS) offering that uses Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3) to extend the capabilities of salesforce.com. The new service lets Salesforce.com users store more documents and larger files directly through the salesforce.com interface, giving companies a more comprehensive view of customer information in one place, without dramatically increasing storage costs or adding user complexity.

Appirio Cloud Storage for salesforce.com can be installed via AppExchange. It is the latest in a series of products from Appirio that combine capabilities from today's leading SaaS applications and cloud computing platforms to help customers lower operational costs, improve user productivity and get more return from their on-demand investments.

Salesfore and Google Apps

The announcement of Salesforce for Google Apps has again raised questions about why Google hasn't been successful in getting major corporations to widely deploy its Web-based productivity applications, particularly the Google Apps Premier Edition.

With the Salesforce for Google Apps announcement, it looks like Google is hoping that Salesforce.com will be able to jump-start the migration of Google Apps into the Enterprise, said Guy Creese, research director with the Burton Group.

In an interview with eWEEK, Creese said the Salesforce.com deal was unlikely to add significant momentum to enterprise adoption of Google Apps.

While the "integration within the Salesforce.com application is quite nice," Creese said, the Salesforce for Google Apps deal is "an installed base play—non-Salesforce.com customers won't be touched by this initiative."

Click here to read more about the Salesforce for Google Apps deal.

In a blog on the Burton Group site, Creese wrote that Google still faces a tough sell in getting Fortune 500 enterprises to switch from Microsoft Office applications to Google Apps because Google Apps is still missing important features that enterprises want, such as role-based administration, the ability to work offline, records management for documents and automatic footnoting.

Google is working on some of these issues, Creese noted, but their absence means that even corporate users who want access to Google Apps may face opposition from IT and their business managers.

Records management is an important issue to enterprises who always have to be concerned that they may be hit with a lawsuit or a regulatory inquiry that would require them to produce huge volumes of corporate documents, Creese said.

Creese said he believes there are situations where Google Apps could be successful, perhaps in enterprises that need low-cost productivity apps and are "a bit leery of spending all that money on Office."

The good news, Creese said, is that users get "nice cheap e-mail and a word processor and everything they need to get their jobs done because they aren't power users." But the requirement for users like this is, "They must be pretty much self-contained," he said.

However, Narinder Singh, founder of Appirio, which provides applications and services to support the adoption of both Google Apps and Salesforce.com, claimed that significant number of large corporations have at least launched pilot programs to deploy Google Apps to workgroups of 200 to 1,000 users.

"We have got a bunch of manufacturing and biotech companies" and one large bank that have started major Google Apps deployments, Singh said, but they generally work under strong nondisclosure agreements and "prefer to fly under the radar."

One of these organizations that has gone public is the Republican National Convention, which is running the organization on Google Apps and is also using Salesforce.com, Singh said.

He said Appirio has also worked with Telecommunications Services of Trinidad and Tobago to deploy Google Apps Premier Edition and to transfer users' e-mail boxes from an older e-mail system to Gmail.

Singh also noted that biotech company Genentech made a splash early in 2008 when it announced that it was deploying Google Apps across the enterprise. Arthur Levinson, Genentech chairman and CEO, is also on the Google Board of Directors.

Most major enterprises are very shy about publicizing their Google Apps deployments and pilot projects because "they don't want to cause panic in their own company" with speculation that the company is planning a full-scale deployment of Google Apps, Singh said.

Nor do they want "to find themselves getting pressure from Microsoft if they reveal that they might be considering a large-scale move to Google Apps," he said.

February 12, 2008

WSJ Profiles Salesforce's Susan St. Ledger

WSJ Profiles Salesforce's Susan St. Ledger

In last weeks Wall Street Journal "How I Got Here" feature, the Jounal profiles Salesforce.com's Susan St. Ledger. St. Ledger is Senior vice president, High Tech and Manufacturing Vertical.

September 30, 2007

Building New Apps on the Salesforce Platform

Learn how to build and deploy simple yet powerful applications using salesforce.com's revolutionary platform for building, deploying, and managing on-demand applications. And no, you don’t have to be a programmer or developer to join the revolution: Watch the informative video.

September 26, 2007

Another Salesforce Exec Jumps Ship

According to an 8-K filed today by Salesforce.com, John Freeland has resigned from Salesforce.com effective September 28, 2007. Freeland was hired as President, Worldwide Operations.

Read the complete filing here.

Benioff's Dreamforce Keynote

Salesforce has posted the video from Marc Benioff's Dreamforce  keynote.

2007 Salesforce.com Dreamforce Keynote .

Is Salesforce.com getting it right with Force.com?

Force_logo

Platform as a Service

Force.com delivers Platform-as-a-Service, a new way to create and deploy business apps that makes companies and developers successful by letting them focus on what their applications do, rather than the software and infrastructure to run them. By replacing the complexity of software platforms with a complete, scalable service, Force.com provides developers the fastest path to turn ideas into business impact.

Force.com Platform-as-a-Service provides the building blocks necessary to build any kind of business app, simple or sophisticated - and automatically deploy them as a service to small teams or entire enterprises. The Force.com platform gives customers the power to run multiple applications within the same Salesforce instance, allowing all of a company’s Salesforce applications to share a common security model, data model, and user interface. The multi-tenant Force.com platform encompasses a complete feature set for the creation of business applications such as an on-demand operating system, the ability to create any database on demand, a workflow engine for managing collaboration between users, the Apex Code programming language for building complex logic, the Force.com Web Services API for programmatic access, mash-ups, and integration with other applications and data, and now Visualforce for a framework to build any user interface.

June 01, 2007

Salesforce-related Domains For Sale

I'm selling two Salesforce.com-related domain names:

  • salesforceadnet.com
  • salesforcetalk.org

If anyone is interested, make offer. Otherwise I'll be putting them up on eBay soon.

May 26, 2007

Salesforce.com's Dumbest Decision

I started this blog a while back now because I was dissatisfied with Saleforce.com in several material ways. I've blogged about a few of those ways but I have yet to blog about the main reason I was upset with Salesforce.com and why I started the blog in the first place; their not offering the Salesforce.com API or AJAX to users of Team or Professional Editions.  I've been waiting to write this to ensure that I would do the topic justice, but for reasons you'll see in my next post, I can wait no longer to finally get this off my chest.

There are many other issues I have with Saleforce.com, but limiting their API to premium customers only is by far one of the most serious. I believe it is their dumbest decision, bar none. 

I knew from my prior experience as founder and president of Xtras that one of the best ways to improve the fortunes of a technology business is to cultivate add-on solutions for the business' core offering(s). The existence of a broad swath of add-ons adds value to the core product (a.k.a. platform) and hence generates a lot more interest in the core product. Having a significant number of add-ons also adds greatly to a product's market resiliency, especially if those add-ons are driven by actual market needs. Further, when there are many add-on developers with have a financial incentive in the core product maintain a large marketshare there is tremendous inertia generated for the core product from people outside the company. Those add-on vendors are essentially unpaid and uncommissioned sales reps for the company, and their marketing is in-effect marketing for the core product as well. You can't get much better than that as Kevin Kelley wrote in New Rules for the New Economy when he said:

"Every time a closed system opens, it begins to interact more directly with other existing systems, and therefore acquires all the value of those systems."

And Salesforce.com knows this of they would never have created AppExchange.

But what Salesforce.com still doesn't get is how limiting access to the API (in hopes to make an upsell) is only limiting Salesforce.com ability to grow its company's value long term. I think it is probably a sales culture that has made them so short-sighted. They want to upcharge you for everything. They want to make sure there is never any money left on the table for an given customer. And that approach is just so incredibly short-sighted when you consider what is required to empower people to create add-ons.

Of course Salesforce.com and their apologists will argue "But the Developer Edition *is* free. Salesforce.com *do* recognize the value of empowering people" to which I just sadly shake my head and sigh. I know from significant experience that the best add-ons, the ones that truly meeting a market need are the ones developed by small scrappy companies that experience the need themselves. And small scrappy companies aren't going to build add-ons with the Developer Edition if they can't use those add-ons for their own business in their Team or Professional Edition accounts.

Large enterprises may create the add-ons but they have their own real business to run and won't be bothered to bring their custom add-ons to market. Taht leaves the companies that develop add-ons for a business; they are essentially speculating on what the market needs and try to address those needs but they almost never have ongoing first hand experience as they only experience those needs vicariously through their customers.

And this is not an indictment of software companies; no, not at all. They are doing a great job offering the add-ons they offer. And the good ones have developed sales and support processes that are needed to serve their customers which is something the small scrappy companies I mention don't start with. But this latter group, the software companies are rarely likely to identify a truly underserved need or innovative solution and then bring it to market simply because they don't experience the need as a pain point on a daily basis like the small scrappy companies who have the need do.

But what differentiates the small scrappy company from the large enterprise is that the former often realizes that bringing their add-on to market would be a better business than they are currently running whereas that will never happen with the large enterprise. To paraphrase the name of a 1988 movie you might even call the former "The Accidental Add-on Vendor" as they don't start building add-ons to sell them, they start building add-ons because they need them. Almost without exception, the market leading add-on vendors in my former business Xtras started developing add-ons because they needed them for their own business, not because they were trying to be add-on vendors and build software to sell to someone else.

And these small scrappy companies can't afford Enterprise Edition so they are not going to use the Developer edition to create add-ons because they can't use those add-ons they create for their own business. So the people in these small scrappy companies just do without, or do it elsewhere. Kevin Kelly also said in New Rules for the New Economy that you should "maximize the opportunities of others" which is something Salesforce.com just doesn't do.

Empowering small scrappy companies to become accidental add-on vendors is the tremendous opportunity that Salesforce.com just fritters away because of their almost pathological need to upcharge for everything. And that's the dumbest decision they have ever made.

UPDATE: Phil Wainewright of ZDNet talks about how AppExchange seems to be all hype and few success stories. Given the situation as I explained it above, is there any wonder at all in this?

February 17, 2007

What Every Smart Company will soon have...

Salesforce.com IdeaExchangeThe tone on this blog has been rather negative lately, I admit, but I generally rant about the things that bother me not about those that don't. :-) 

However, I really do have to give Salesforce.com credit for this one: IdeaExchange is one incredibly great idea (pun intended), and every smart company either will or soon should do the same.

I've been meaning to blog about this since they first released it but Mark Mangano's post over at SalesforceWatch.com just reminded me to get off my duff and write about it.  By the way, another company now doing the same that Mark didn't mention is Yahoo Suggestions.

Now if Salesforce.com will just listen to those submitted ideas... ;-)