Search this Blog:
IDC eXchange Home

The announcement this afternoon of a Google/Sun agreement (see stories here: CW, CNET) seems pretty small in some ways: distribution of Google Toolbar in Java downloads, agreement to “explore opportunities [together] to promote and enhance” Java and OpenOffice. And, in and of itself, it was small – in fact I couldn’t even find a press release about it on Google’s corporate site. But it reminds me of a conversation I had at the European IT Forum about Google and the future of SAP, Oracle, and other enterprise application vendors, that suggests today’s announcement might fit into a much more sweeping scenario for the future of enterprise software.

The question at hand was how small and medium enterprise customers would migrate to the next generation of more dynamic, business-responsive applications – the ones that are, or will be, running on dynamic platforms like IBM WebSphere, SAP NetWeaver, Oracle Fusion, et al. Because of the significant investment in application infrastructure and skills needed to fully exploit the new model, early adopters have been predominantly large and very large organizations.

At the Forum, I shared the view of a number of IDC analysts that software-as-a service (SaaS) could be a “disruptive innovation” – in the terminology of Clayton (”The Innovator’s Dilemma”) Christensen – that allows small companies to get “good enough” enterprise application functionality, in a model that works for them, by passing the IT skills and capital investment burdens on to the service provider. Salesforce.com is often cited as an example of this approach: it has both reduced the buy-in barriers for smaller companies, and been criticized for it’s limitations (”not good enough”) by the established enterprise software suppliers (even as they themselves have launched SaaS offerings!).

Here’s where the conversation got interesting: one of the big challenges of SaaS is that, by using a number of in-house and SaaS provider applications, an organization creates a major information management headache – business information that needs, increasingly, to be shared across these applications actually gets more fragmented among these applications and services. For SaaS approaches to become more pervasive, there is a need for information management services that can bridge between these applications, giving customers better control over their information, and greater visibility of their information.

In my view, this is where Google really has the opportunity to disrupt the market. If one of the hardest parts of SaaS – or really, network-based business services that heavily leverage enterprise application functionality – is the coherent management of organizations’ information across these services, are there many – if any – companies that have a stronger platform and brand from which to build or support such a next-generation SaaS environment? The center of Google’s compentency is certainly in aggregating and indexing information from a wide variety of sources, and simplifying the act of accessing relevant information.

By agreeing to “explore opportunities” to use and enhance OpenOffice, Google is – of course – a long, long way from offering, say, ERP as a network service for small businesses (of course, one might argue that classic ERP is the last thing small businesses want!). Google’s first destination seems likely to be providing basic office applications (the long-rumored GoogleOffice?), in competition with Microsoft Office. On the other hand, if Google does evolve into an Internet-based enterprise application platform (competing with SAP, IBM, Oracle, BEA, Microsoft and others), it may become a very attractive alternative – or at least an additional channel – for a large community of smaller/niche application providers who are looking at SAP, Oracle, et al., as their current choices for application infrastructure providers.

An important factor in this scenario is that, for Google – which has no legacy revenue streams from enterprise applications – encouraging other software vendors to make money on top of its platform offers no hardship, or strategic (”innovator’s”) dilemma. That could make Google a very intriguing competitor to SAP, Oracle, IBM, and others. Of course, in this time of consolidation, it also means Google could make a very interesting merger/acquisition partner as well.

[POSTSCRIPTS:
1. check out Evan Quinn's comment (click "Comment" below).
2. IDC's Jean Bozman was quoted along the same lines about this deal in this story.]

Bookmark this blog post:

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Live
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • YahooMyWeb

4 Responses to “Is Google the Next “Disruptive” Enterprise Application Platform/Ecosystem?”

Google and Sun, huh?

Philosophically, geographically, and competitively these firms make a good match. Sun has been trying to undermine Microsoft for about a decade now, and Google has taken up the cause in recent years as Sun has had to turn its attention to more mundane endeavors – like making money. Both firms TRULY get the Web and XML, and certainly open source or near freeware Office from Snoogle will garner plenty of uptake among a wide demographic cut of Web cruisers.

But commercial viability comes down to the reactions of enterprise buyers and Dell: Microsoft has taken long strides recently to bring together its nearly singular "enterprise workplace" (an IDC term) offering, which covers portal, content services (incl. Search), Office and collaboration. And it has linked this workplace to its business applications, albeit primarily as a future promise. Until Snoogle steps up with a similar offering in terms of breadth and integration, and actually creates a VAR, SI and ISV channel to push it into the enteprise, the commercial impact on MSFT will be little to nil.

And will Dell decide to forego reselling Office as an embedded product? Heck, even my daughter’s mandated college laptop from Dell included REQUIRED MS-Office. That is alot of sell-through stickiness, even down in the more left-wing Ed vertical, that drags along cash with it.

Snoogle has lots of Elmer’s it will need to dissolve before the commercial side starts sniffing Snoogle glue.

Evan Quinn
Group VP, Applications
IDC

Perhaps lessons can be learnt from the past 8 years or more in trying to get the ASP market off the ground as a key “disruptive tech”. There are after all many similarities. What were the barriers? I don’t know, and don’t trust the company; they are unproven; Who supports this and who do I sue (if you are always in Beta!); what is my SLA and is it ever going to be realy any use to me etc. etc.

SalesForce.com as a “trusted and well funded” company with its new SForce Applications environment, might be well served jumping on this bandwagon by doing a google on google and letting the individual log on for full functionality through “SForce” only asking that they be allowed gather information to provide to resellers, (i.e. google!) or others (i.e. MicroSoft)….

Or am I soft in the head to be thinking this?

Regards

Granted, the Sun affiliation viewed in isolation may not be particularly newsworthy. However, when combined with other recent events at Google — like the addition of Vint Cerf to their executive team — perhaps Google’s future byline will read “the globally networked advertiser formerly known as a search engine.”

IMHO, the Google interest in Sun may really be more about their expertise in pervasive computing and internetworking. Likewise, it wouldn’t surprise me if Google and Cisco announce a new venture. Google’s recent product launches demonstate its strategic foresight is moving the company towards a converged network applications integration model — with advertising sales at the heart of their revenue engine.

There’s greater strategic intent behind their moves than most people realize. These aren’t random acts of progression.

David H. Deans

[...] week we wrote about the potential of Google to be a disruptive force in the business applications/services space, particularly for serving the SMB market. We got a lot [...]

Post a Comment


About IDC | Contact IDC | Privacy Policy | Site Index | Reprints | Worldwide Offices | Objectivity
Copyright 2005 IDC. Reproduction is forbidden unless authorized. All rights reserved. Trademarks | Terms of Use