4 ms·

> software which eventually runs on the customer's computer I gather then that you're not a fan of SaaS. True, one can cynically explain the rise of SaaS as re

> software which eventually runs on the customer's computer I gather then that you're not a fan of SaaS. True, one can cynically explain the rise of SaaS as rent seeking. But there's undeniably value in selling whatever functionality your software provides without burdening the customer with having to run it on their own computer(s). And when we do that, it's our responsibility to make the service reliable, which is what a lot of these tools are trying to do.

loxias 5y ago
> I gather then that you're not a fan of SaaS. I'm neutral, I think? I don't quite see the point of it would be more accurate. I don't think I've used any SaaS in my personal life (other than streaming services. Which I'd prefer as a local app anyway, and I still do, for music, but not video) I'm sure it's a matter of opinion, not something with an objective answer, but "burden of running software on their own computers" genuinely confused me as I read your comment, I thought "burden? what burden?". As a user: If software is designed properly (and most isn't...) you download it once, and it runs. Is the burden the time it takes to do the download? Compared to the noticeable burden of using a webapp, with problems like crappy and frustrating responsiveness, an inability to work without an internet connection, and frequent inability to handle tasks of real complexity, I'd choose a local program any day. As an employee: Heck yes SaaS! $/month >>> $$$/customer :D Of course it's rent seeking, and I take (and give) no shame in that.