If you’ve ever looked into the subject of finance software, you’re probably aware of the difference between “on premise” and “cloud” technology.
One stores the data on your premises, with all the traditional risks of theft and damage, not to mention much more limited functionality. The other involves the provider taking responsibility for looking after everything remotely. The latter kind also goes by the name SaaS (software as a service).
But not all cloud software is the same – a problem which recently led Christian Nentwich, Chief Executive Officer of the data software business Duco to coin the term “SaaS washing”.
SaaS washing is a memorable term for a phenomenon that’s more often been called “fake cloud” or “hosted cloud”.
Fake cloud describes an on premise system that has been adapted to work in the cloud, as opposed to one that was designed with the cloud in mind.
Why should you care, as long as your data is stored away from your office? Because if your software is the product of SaaS washing, you’re likely to be overpaying for a system that won’t function as well as true cloud software can.
Even people experienced in using finance systems can find it hard to know the distinction between true and fake cloud. When iplicit surveyed accountants at the AccountingWEB Live Expo 2021, only 18% of those polled could tell the difference.
However, the key differences between the two kinds of system are these:
The benefits of true cloud software are so clear that you might wonder why anyone is selling any other kind.
But for a software vendor, it can make sense to adapt an existing, on premise product to work in the cloud – especially if the customer knows they are being held back by their on premise system and the provider has little else to offer them.
Adapting an existing on premise product so it works on a hosted basis – or, as one iplicit customer put it, “lipsticking” it to look like a cloud product – can sometimes prevent a client leaving for a newer competitor.
But the customer is not well served if they are persuaded to pass up the benefits of software as a service in favour of the clunky compromise that Christian Nentwich calls “software on a server”.