
Enterprise Software Is Sexy Again - dgudkov
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/25/enterprise-software-is-sexy-again/
======
Lewisham
Quote: "more and more we’re seeing bottom-up adoption of technology displacing
top-down deployments"

To employ a passive-aggressive Wikipedia edit: [citation needed].

I actually do agree that Enterprise has some really interesting problems, and
they are actually pretty good at coming up with solutions that make you go
"Huh, that's actually pretty cool." It's just that they're so customized,
buried so deeply in the corporate system, you'd never know they were there.
Some of the message queue systems I've read about are quite neat.

But when I worked for an Oracle vendor, and at other IT companies around me,
it seemed that technology adoption was entirely driven by top-down deployments
from old boys clubs and salesmen that promised everything. Remember that old
Dilbert strip where the salesman comes in and tells Dilbert he promised
feature X, and Dilbert replies it doesn't have feature X? Happened to me too.

If there really is a sea change where clever engineering guys can dictate
their software deployments, and not middle-management/sales who complain they
just spent $X million on Y, so you'd better use it, then the market does have
the opportunity to open up in a cool way. I just want to see more evidence
that the market is how he claims.

~~~
skmurphy
Most of the large SaaS firms owe much of their early success to "bottom up
technology adoption." For example: Salesforce, Webex, NetSuite, SugarCRM.

------
thinkcomp
With all due respect to Aaron, and as someone who wants enterprise software to
get the attention it deserves, this reads more like an ad for box.net than a
compelling argument as to why enterprise is making a comeback. Of the few
investments being made these days, venture capitalists are by and large
investing in consumer products and "green" technology, and until they feel
those markets are totally saturated I don't expect much will change.

It's also the rare twenty-something founder straight out of college in the
Valley who knows anything about double-entry general ledger systems or what
CIOs of Fortune 500 companies really spend time worrying about. When I see
headlines about Oracle and SAP worrying about their profits, I'll be more
convinced that something has changed.

~~~
Lewisham
_It's also the rare twenty-something founder straight out of college in the
Valley who knows anything about double-entry general ledger systems or what
CIOs of Fortune 500 companies really spend time worrying about_

That's a great point. Any ideas on how you might start educating entrepreneurs
to know about these pain points? It seems that by the time you've seen this
stuff, you're already at a point in your life where you require stability
rather than living on ramen in a scrappy startup.

I wish I had an answer myself.

~~~
thinkcomp
Well, I started keeping my own books with a pencil and paper when I was
fifteen, and I started paying sales tax to the State of Ohio not long after.
Suffice it to say I got an education in bookkeeping pretty quickly. I'm not
sure I'd really recommend the same to any fifteen-year-old, but enterprise
software is one of those things that is much easier to understand if you've
run an enterprise before.

As for what CIOs (or CFOs) are thinking, you've got to talk to them. They (or
if not them, their subordinates) belong to membership organizations. You've
got to join them. It usually costs a lot of money.

~~~
sandGorgon
_As for what CIOs (or CFOs) are thinking, you've got to talk to them. They (or
if not them, their subordinates) belong to membership organizations. You've
got to join them. It usually costs a lot of money._

+1 - this is the biggest reason why it seems so difficult to penetrate these
markets.

------
callmeed
I wanted this to be a good article ... then I clicked and realized it was a TC
guest post.

I know TC people read HN, so in all seriousness: how do you choose guest
posters?

I like reading TC from time to time but every guest post reads like a 2-page
magazine advertorial on why I should do business in Nashville—sponsored by the
Nashville chamber of commerce ... It's 1 part information and 9 parts "look at
me and my industry, we're awesome"

~~~
levie
Aaron here (post's author) --

I definitely didn't intend it to be an advertorial; certainly it may come off
that way as there's a lot of "this is how we do it, and this is what we're
seeing," but any suggestions on how you see this going differently? Would love
any suggestions... aaron@box.net.

-Aaron

------
div
Going off on your own to solve an enterprise problem in startup mode may be
sexy, but that is far from the typical image associated with enterprise
software.

When I hear enterprise software I think of all the usual anti-patterns such as
big design up front, a smattering of bike shed problems, having to integrate
with legacy crap, arbitrary deadlines, no incentive to avoid technical debt,
division of work in teams that do not communicate, ivory tower UX / architect
/ usability people, etc. etc.

Definitely not sexy, not then, not now, and not in while.

------
csomar
I think there are two main problems for Enterprise Software:

\- Building the product: Can you build a product for, say a big university,
without getting into the uni. and trying things out there? Can you do it from
home, from your small laptop and your Internet connection. The same for
hospitals. You need access to some resources, but who (the boss/manager) is
going to give you permission and for whatever reason?

\- Selling: As a bootstrapping startup can you afford the expensive meetings
and dinners that managers and PDGs are accustomed to when buying something new
for their corporation. Do you think they'll consider a 2x year old guys from
somewhere in the world to implement something in their base.

Enterprise Software is not Sexy, but startups that succeed to walk through
those two difficulties may have a chance to stand out.

------
astrofinch
"$24.2 billion pie for all of US internet advertising"

Apparently Google made almost half of that money.

Google's 2009 revenues were $23.7 billion. 47% of their revenues came from the
US, and they say

"Advertising revenues made up 99% of our revenues in 2007 and 97% of our
revenues in 2008 and 2009."

So of the $24.2 billion made in US internet advertising, $10.8 billion was
made by Google.

Official looking document:

[http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/0001193125100...](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312510030774/d10k.htm#toc95279_8)

------
eitally
Based on a lot of these comments, a decent subsection of the hackers here
don't really understand the enterprise very well at all, much less the types
of barrier to entry technology service providers face when targeting potential
customers (or their problems).

I'm sure I'm not the most experienced here, but I am an IT director in a
global enterprise and have ten years experience managing an internal appdev
group, as well as owning our messaging, collaboration, and content services
platforms/org. If there's interest, I'd be happy to kick off an IAMA to
facilitate Q&A from folks who might like to know more about how the vetting
process tends to work in a large corporation, or things they might do to wedge
their foot in the door.

If this would be useful or interesting, let me know and I'll post.

~~~
GBond
I'd be interested as well. Looking at it from an entrepreneur's POV, being on
the inside give one a competitive advantage. It would be good to share others
who are in the same place.

I agree with your comment regarding most comments here show a lack of
understanding of enterprise IT. But I guess that is the fundamental problem
for new ventures to enter in the realm. Enterprise software operations on a
ecosystem that is archaic and closed.

------
arethuza
My own view is that the more software costs to the end user the worse it is -
and enterprise software can be very very expensive.

~~~
umjames
What about open-source enterprise software? In my experience, it's better than
the vendorware, but that doesn't make it appreciably more enjoyable to use,
develop for, or maintain.

Maybe not all enterprise software is as necessary as it is made out to be. I'm
thinking enterprise portal software here. I really can't stand anything about
them.

~~~
arethuza
It would be interesting to see someone do for ERP systems what salesforce.com
did for CRM - the potential market is _huge_.

------
dgudkov
So, pros and cons for enterprise startup (arguably): <Pros> 1) Range of
opportunities is much more diverse than for consumer market - easier to find
opportunity and differentiate. 2) Enterprise budgets are rather large. <Cons>
1) Salesmen needed for direct sales. Even brilliant product can't sell itself
in enterprise market. 2) Customers are much more sensitive to vendor's history
and stability in comparison to consumer startups. 3) Barrier to entry is
higher. Passing it requires industry knowledge. 4) Not so much buzz about
enterprise applications today. Even successful products do not get so much
coverage in media, as successful consumer startups do.

Anything to add?

------
cousin_it
The suit is back?

~~~
projectileboy
Hah! I was just about to make the same comment!
(<http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html>, for those of you unaware of the
reference)

------
isnoteasy
To summarize: There are many new and interesting problems for a enterprise to
solve and there are not related to marketing. Since the problems are well
defined and there is a lot of money involved, good software is appreciated and
paid according. This is a new landscape. The article include many examples.

------
himmel
No.. Its not.. Sorry

------
andrewljohnson
Bah, these guys are getting smashed by Dropbox.

------
henning
Have you heard that the suit is back?

