I completely sympathize with this viewpoint. That said, I've been on the IT support side: 1. You have to support whatever is in use. Even users who say "you

I completely sympathize with this viewpoint. That said, I've been on the IT support side: 1. You have to support whatever is in use. Even users who say "you won't have to support me" end up needing support. This may be due to user error, or a host of other things like incompatibility with current network/firewall/computer policies. Best case, the new app doesn't work and the user ignores it, knowing it's unsupported. Common case, the use asks for help anyway "just this once". Possible case: the new app actually breaks something for other users (a quick example being generating abnormally high net traffic). 2. One big problem is the insistence on keeping all data in-house. This may or may not be more secure depending on a host of things. However, Joe Random user is not necessarily prepared to make the determination of "Is this company a reliable repository for my company's proprietary data?" (Yes, much of "proprietary" data isn't all that, but that's beside the point of this argument). There are a number of companies that I would trust with sensitive information. Regardless, plenty of companies do banking via online portals, but reject putting other data in the hands of third parties. 3. Backups. This is a biggie. If I can't touch it, I can't be sure it's backed up. But, man--I'm a corporate wage slave and these apps I have to use are like pulling teeth. I get that there are obstacles (see above)--but nobody seems to be doing anything to convince people/mitigate risk. And until the guy doing the purchasing can tell good design from bad, this isn't going to change.