Managing Automation - November 2007 - (Page 11)

channel partners to enhance the on-demand BBD offering with features targeting specific vertical industries, experts say. Although SAP officials have described the initial version of BBD as horizontal, without much vertical functionality, analysts say vertical features will be needed if the product is to succeed. SAP’s challenge, analysts say, will be to convince customers that vertical features developed by partners will be supported on a national or even global basis. Microsoft, which is also targeting mid-market companies and relying on partners for vertical industry functionality, has attempted to resolve this problem by agreeing to support some partnerprovided functionality for its Dynamics line of business applications itself. SAP may end up doing the same thing for partner-provided BBD extensions, AMR’s Jacobson says. In addition to finding new channel partners to support BBD, SAP will need to find new customers and avoid cannibalizing its on-premise products for small and medium-sized companies, Business One and All-in-One. In a variety of interviews and public statements, SAP officials have been adamant that BBD will be targeted at companies with 100 to 500 employees. They have insisted that the market segment that would be interested in an on-demand product is distinct from both the markets of smaller companies using its Business One product and larger companies using All-in-One. SAP officials, however, have not said what, if anything, they can do to restrict Business One and All-in-One customers from migrating to BBD. “If you’re an existing customer, what can they do to prevent you from migrating to BBD?” asks Ray Wang, an analyst at Forrester Research. “Many of the SAP mid-market customers we have talked to are interested in the product.” Many current SAP mid-market customers, as well as non-SAP customers, will be attracted to BBD by its user interface, which is more intuitive than the UIs of both Business One and All-in-One, Wang says. On the negative side, Wang says, BBD lacks advanced usability features, such as mash-ups and role-based user interfaces. Also, because BBD is not implemented using a true multi-tenancy, shared database model, SAP may, in the long run, have trouble matching the price of other software-as-a-service (SaaS) offerings, he adds. Still, observers say, though questions linger re- garding BBD, SAP’s decision to offer an ondemand product can do nothing but hasten mainstream acceptance of software-as-a-service. “In general, we’re just thrilled that SAP is spending the time to educate people about what SaaS is,” says Mark Symonds, chief executive of Plexus Systems, which offers the Plexus Online SaaS product. “I think it is going to legitimize the brand acceptance of SaaS in many industries. SAP will get the word out.” Symonds insists, however, that Plexus isn’t feeling any competitive angst due to SAP’s entrance in the market. “I don’t feel threatened — yet,” Symonds says. “SAP doesn’t have a track record yet. And I think the announcement is primarily aimed at NetSuite and the never-ending battle with Oracle.” Scan M Back inMA MA NOVEMBER 2006 anufacturers were looking to software-as-a-service and other innovative software licensing models as a way out of the morass of software pricing. Enterprise software licensing models had grown extremely complex and manufacturers were getting hit with unexpected charges. Changes in software architectures, such as software-oriented architectures, were also pushing vendors to move to more customer-friendly pricing schemes. MA NOVEMBER 2002 PORTFOLIO MGMT. SPECIALISTS LOSING GROUND TO RIVALS T I n the somewhat insular world of product portfolio management software vendors, the loss of one competitor is a major development. So when 9-year-old Integrated Development Enterprise, Inc. closed its doors for business in August, rival software vendors took notice. Waiting in the wings was IDe competitor Sopheon plc. The two companies signed an agreement that affords Sopheon “exclusive access to such IDe assets as its customer list, software code, and all documentation relating to the company’s software,” according to a Sopheon statement. IDe had 18 active client deployments when it shuttered its operations, leaving the larger Sopheon — with nearly five times as many customers — an opportunity to woo those orphaned clients to Sopheon’s Accolade product portfolio software. Both companies count large enterprises among their primary customers. Under terms of the agreement, Sopheon may provide support and maintenance services to former IDe customers, though the company is not obligated to do so. “Sopheon intends to contact IDe’s customers to discuss potential support options, including transitioning to Sopheon’s Accolade software and services,” the company said in a formal statement. All indications are that IDe’s demise owes to its failure to grow its customer base. “Eighteen customers at an average deal size of $250k (ac- he factory floor was the final frontier that Ethernet communications was poised to conquer. MA’s three-part series examined what manufacturers needed to know to link factory devices together and to the executive suite, and where manufacturers stood in adopting Ethernet and other open protocols. MA looked at the benefits of a wireless local area network and checked into whether Ethernet cables and connectors were rugged enough for the factory environment. M A N OV E M B E R 19 9 7 he need for speed was extending beyond manufacturing and into all aspects of the business. What was needed was speed plus synchronization. Technology made such coordination possible, in the form of faster, more powerful computers, workstations, and networks — especially the Internet; material handling and robotics; and, of course, software to help with resource planning, implementation, and scheduling. T M A N OV E M B E R 19 9 2 ith a proliferation of sensor types, the idea of networking the devices was starting to take hold. However, obstacles remained: high prices, a lack of standards, and a certain amount of technophobia. The geographically dispersed process control industry saw the advantages of centralized control systems first and led the charge to establish standards. For discrete manufacturers, the primary advantage would prove to be cutting wiring costs. W 11 November 2007

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Managing Automation - November 2007

Managing Automation - November 2007 Contents Take 1 Mailbox SAP's Business ByDesign to Validate On-Demand Model for Enterprise SW Portfolio Management Specialist Losing Ground to Rivals At Incor, It's Time for Some Deep Breathing Can HART, ISA Get Together on a Wireless Spec? Mesa Tries to Help Improve Plant Metrics Notes Cover Story: The Digital Factory Special Report: Breaking Down Walls Integration: Dreaming of One ERP Industries: Locking onto Cyber-Security Transformation: Not Your Father's Time & Attendance Program Product Scan Advertiser Index Next

Managing Automation - November 2007

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.