Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

[Bill Fuller]

It appears that one of the latest hot buzzwords is SaaS (Software as a
Service). From what I can tell, this looks like nothing more than rebranding
of the old ASP model, which fell out of favor. Am I correct, or is there
really something new and interesting here?

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=]

Bill Fuller wrote:

Actually, it is a hybred. The primary business logic is built into
mobile/anchored business objects from the central application tier. WinForm
is primarly for UI robustness. Altough we provide this as a ClickOnce ERP
app, it is not a requirement and the service can, in principle, be accessed
via WCF for M2M processing, integrating iinto another app, etc.

Maybe you can call it S+S !

:-)

Arne

[Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

If you want to use it as a marketing ploy, go for it. :-)

Yes, a bit humorous, but there is really not a lot in software that is NEW,
at least not underneath the hood. The observation that this was the ASP
model was correct, in some ways. Separation of concerns was important in
both.

In reality, much of the SOA SAAS BS (I love acronyms) is just a "new" way of
looking at two old concepts:

1. Process boundaries
2. Separation of concerns

By thinking as a service, you work towards reuse up front, separating
concerns not only on vertical tiers, but horizontal tiers, as well.You are
creating boxes. How you link them (process boundaries: library calls,
service interfaces, etc.) is dependent on what you need at the time, but it
shoudl be easy to switch the type of boundary (library call to service call,
for example) without retooling the logic. That is SAAS in a nutshell.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP, MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

Subscribe to my blog
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/lists/feed.rss

or just read it:
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/

*************** *************** *************** ****
| Think outside the box!
|
*************** *************** *************** ****
"Bill Fuller" <so*****@nospam .comwrote in message
news:Oz******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

Hmmmm... Interesting. We have designed our solution as a cluster of
specialized WCF modules in a 5-tier logical architecture based upon
Rocky's CSLA framework, so it sounds like we can hype the app using this
new marketing.

Thanks for your feedback. It was helpful.

"Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <No************ @comcast.netNoS pamMwrote in
message news:O2******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...

>Software as a Service is a logical concept of breaking out your
"application s" into reusable parts. It is similar to n-tier development,
which was popular with traditional ASP, but we also use n-tiers with
ASP.NET applications, Silverlight applications, etc.

When you treat software as a service, you group like concerns and, if
necessary, add a service layer so they can be consumed outside of library
calls. WHen you think this way, you can have completely different types
of applications accessing the same bits, as you are thinking in terms of
delivering the goods for a particular requirement no matter who desires
it.

There really is nothing new here.

But, it does go contrary to the way the typical developer operates, which
is from database to UI or UI to database, charting a path, not for reuse,
but from point A to point Z. If we are lucky, this developer will one day
refactor for reuse, but it is more likely he will build the same logic
into his next application rather than reuse bits. If he were thinking as
the output of the classes he was building as products, he can see how
this particular bit would service other applications or services.

Hope that is clear.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP, MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

Subscribe to my blog
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/lists/feed.rss

or just read it:
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/

************** *************** *************** *****
| Think outside the box! |
************** *************** *************** *****
"Bill Fuller" <so*****@nospam .comwrote in message
news:Om******* *******@TK2MSFT NGP06.phx.gbl.. .

>>It appears that one of the latest hot buzzwords is SaaS (Software as a
Service). From what I can tell, this looks like nothing more than
rebranding of the old ASP model, which fell out of favor. Am I correct,
or is there really something new and interesting here?

[Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

SAAS may, in marketing terms, require selling as a service, but underneath
the hood, if the separation of concerns are there and the ability to offer
it is there, he is already in SAAS land, sans the marketing BS. :-)

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP, MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

Subscribe to my blog
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/lists/feed.rss

or just read it:
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/

*************** *************** *************** ****
| Think outside the box!
|
*************** *************** *************** ****
"Arne Vajhøj" <ar**@vajhoej.d kwrote in message
news:48******** *************** @news.sunsite.d k...

Bill Fuller wrote:

>Hmmmm... Interesting. We have designed our solution as a cluster of
specialized WCF modules in a 5-tier logical architecture based upon
Rocky's CSLA framework, so it sounds like we can hype the app using this
new marketing.

No.

You may be able to market it as a SOA architecture.

But to make is SaaS you will need to deliver it to your customers
as a subscription service over the internet instead of selling
them software to run on their own systems.

Arne

[Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

There is really not much to SAAS that is not SOA, except that someone has
added a new marketing term to clarify best practices in software
architecture. And, there is not too much to SOA, other than forcing proper
grouping of classes and a service boundary, between SOA and n-tier
applications. And, there is not much difference from n-tier (DNA) to
properly refactored functional applications, other than organization of bits
into libaries.

BTW, this is not a new observation:

Ecclesiastes 1:9
What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is
nothing new under the sun.

*big grin*

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP, MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

Subscribe to my blog
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/lists/feed.rss

or just read it:
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com/

*************** *************** *************** ****
| Think outside the box!
|
*************** *************** *************** ****
"Arne Vajhøj" <ar**@vajhoej.d kwrote in message
news:48******** *************** @news.sunsite.d k...

Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) wrote:

>Software as a Service is a logical concept of breaking out your
"application s" into reusable parts. It is similar to n-tier development,
which was popular with traditional ASP, but we also use n-tiers with
ASP.NET applications, Silverlight applications, etc.

When you treat software as a service, you group like concerns and, if
necessary, add a service layer so they can be consumed outside of library
calls. WHen you think this way, you can have completely different types
of applications accessing the same bits, as you are thinking in terms of
delivering the goods for a particular requirement no matter who desires
it.

I think what you have described is SOA not SaaS.

Arne

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=]

Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) wrote:

There is really not much to SAAS that is not SOA, except that someone has
added a new marketing term to clarify best practices in software
architecture.

SOA is an architecture.

SaaS is a business model.

SOA is multiple system interfaces.

SaaS is one human or one system interface.

In fact most of the most known SaaS solutions are with human
interfaces not system interfaces.

SOA and SaaS are completely orthogonal.

Arne

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=]

Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) wrote:

SAAS may, in marketing terms, require selling as a service, but underneath
the hood, if the separation of concerns are there and the ability to offer
it is there, he is already in SAAS land, sans the marketing BS. :-)

Not really.

I am not in the tomato business even though I could sell
tomatos. Because I do not sell tomatos.

You are in the SaaS business if you sell software as a service
not if you could but does not.

Arne