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?

[Jeroen Mostert]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

Bill Fuller wrote:

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?
>

Whatever there is, it's not C#. Or .NET, even. Try a more general ng. (I
don't know which ones specialize in buzzwords.)

--
J.

http://symbolsprose.blogspot.com

[Bill Fuller]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

Actually, it came up in discussions on how to deploy a multitier C# Winforms
app.

"Jeroen Mostert" <jmostert@xs4al l.nlwrote in message
news:481f45bb$0 $14354$e4fe514c @news.xs4all.nl ...

Bill Fuller wrote:

>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?

Whatever there is, it's not C#. Or .NET, even. Try a more general ng. (I
don't know which ones specialize in buzzwords.)
>
--
J.
http://symbolsprose.blogspot.com

[Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

Software as a Service is a logical concept of breaking out your
"applicatio ns" 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" <someone@nospam .comwrote in message
news:OmxdsTtrIH A.1316@TK2MSFTN GP06.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?
>

[Jeroen Mostert]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

Bill Fuller wrote:

Actually, it came up in discussions on how to deploy a multitier C# Winforms
app.
>

Yes, I see how that makes it a C# question.

This group isn't a stickler for topicality and your question's already been
picked up, so no point in belaboring the obvious (and annoying), but still.

--
J.

[Bill Fuller]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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)" <NoSpamMgbworld @comcast.netNoS pamMwrote in
message news:O2hxD4trIH A.5060@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...

Software as a Service is a logical concept of breaking out your
"applicatio ns" 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" <someone@nospam .comwrote in message
news:OmxdsTtrIH A.1316@TK2MSFTN GP06.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?
>>

>
>

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

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer) wrote:

Software as a Service is a logical concept of breaking out your
"applicatio ns" 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?=]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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

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

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

Bill Fuller wrote:

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?

Same.

Arne

[Bill Fuller]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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.

"Arne Vajhøj" <arne@vajhoej.d kwrote in message
news:481f684b$0 $90272$14726298 @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

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

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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 \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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" <someone@nospam .comwrote in message
news:OzVkmLurIH A.4952@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)" <NoSpamMgbworld @comcast.netNoS pamMwrote in
message news:O2hxD4trIH A.5060@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" <someone@nospam .comwrote in message
>news:OmxdsTtrI HA.1316@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 \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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" <arne@vajhoej.d kwrote in message
news:481f684b$0 $90272$14726298 @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 \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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" <arne@vajhoej.d kwrote in message
news:481f67dd$0 $90272$14726298 @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?=]

Re: Is SaaS nothing more than rebranded ASP?

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