

What are your thoughts on having many webapps each responsible for one task? - rudasn

During the recent years (5 or so) we have seen the rise of many relatively small and simple applications each of which is responsible for either one or a few tasks. One of the most notable examples are the applications by 37signals: each of their apps takes care of just one aspect of the business and does it well.<p>What I am concerned about is the fact that small businesses (the target market of 37signals and other such companies) must subscribe to at least 3 or 4 different apps (perhaps from different vendors) to meet their otherwise uncomplicated requirements.<p>This may amount to a quite high monthly fee if all subscriptions are added together. Sure, the makers of such applications don't really see this ($20 a month per client is not much) but for the small business is a small fortune when added up (~$150). Despite this, it seems to me that this way of doing business (sell many different apps to the same company) is working well.<p>My guess at the moment is that it depends on the application and whether the target business can afford to <i>not</i> use it.
======
aeden
When it comes to software tools, the cost of running a small business is lower
than it's ever been before precisely _because_ you don't need a huge amount of
capital to purchase "integrated" solutions. A small business owner can select
the tools they need when they've outgrown a home-grown solution. With the 37
Signals tools (and many others) this usually occurs when multiple workers are
collaborating on one or more projects.

As an added benefit, thanks to the fact that most of these services use
monthly billing it's possible to _stop_ using the service when you need to or
at least allowing you to downgrade a to a version that meets your
requirements, helping reduce monthly burn.

The only downside is that integration between various services often involves
bubble gum and duct tape. Or maybe that's an opportunity for entrepreneurs.
:-)

~~~
rudasn
Well I wasn't really thinking about "integrated" solutions like ERP systems
(ala SAP) but something simpler but not _that_ much.

I guess what you are saying the "sweet spot" for a "simple" app is to do
exactly one set of things that each one of them cannot/should not be done
separately (eg. milestones and project management) and be separated from other
stuff (like contact management). In this way, a business that cannot afford
(or doesn't want) one of these should not forfeit the other.

But is it best (for both the vendor and the client) to have these as two
different applications or have them as plugins or upgrades? The end result is
the same ("you pay for what you need for as long as you need it") but it's how
you get there that bothers me.

To be more specific, is it best to say "pay me $x more per month to have
contact management" or "if you want contact management have a look at this
other app I make".

