Oracle Fusion Runs Into Oracle Apps Unlimited

Oracle is not taking well to a recent Forrester Research report, entitled, "Oracle Dilemma: Applications Unlimited Versus Oracle Fusion Applications."

Forrester's argument in a nutshell is this: based on its survey of  139 Oracle customers, Forrester contends that Fusion has had "low levels of adoption by existing Oracle customers, in part, because Oracle's Applications Unlimited policy has provided them with little incentive to migrate."

Oracle's rebuttal is difficult to put in a nutshell. Oracle goes into great detail, taking issue with Forrester's research methodology, specific survey questions, and the sample size/composition. But in my opinion, Oracle's strongest argument is against Forrester's report title. In Oracle's view, there is no "versus." Customers do not need to make a choice between Apps Unlimited and Fusion. Rather, Oracle points out that it has a co-existence strategy between Fusion Apps and Oracle's existing applications, such as E-Business Suite, Peoplesoft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel.

I'll leave it to Forrester to defend its own report. However, it is hard to argue with Forrester's conclusion: that Fusion adoption has been slow, in part, because of the success of  Oracle's Applications Unlimited program. To better understand why, it is helpful to review some history. 

The Original Strategy

When Oracle completed its acquisition of PeopleSoft in late 2004, it had two strategic decisions to make.

1. For new customers, would it continue to actively market PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards (which PeopleSoft had acquired) in addition to its E-Business Suite? 
2. For existing customers of PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards, would it continue to invest in and support those products indefinitely? 

Interestingly, at the time, the answer to both of these questions was no. As I reported in January 2005,  Larry Ellison held a press conference in which he said that Oracle would not actively market PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards but would try to push new prospects to E-Business Suite. In addition, he promised to support existing PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards products only until 2013. "Circle that date 2013 on your calendar," Ellison said.

In the same press conference, Ellison announced Project Fusion, which would be a massive development effort by 8,000 developers to develop a new suite of back-office software products, based on the best features of PeopleSoft, J.D. Edwards, and E-Business Suite. At this point, Fusion Applications were positioned as the successor to Oracle's existing suites. "We expect people to at some point between now and 2013—sometime before that—to upgrade to Project Fusion," Ellison said.

A Mid-Course Correction

By 2006, however, Oracle realized that its strategy was not in its own best interests. By only marketing E-Business Suite, it was missing sales opportunities where PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards were a better fit than E-Business Suite.

Moreover, Oracle's announcement that it would not support PeopleSoft and J.D. Edwards beyond 2013 took Oracle off short lists where it could PeopleSoft or JDE were good fits. In my own software vendor selection consulting, during the 2005 time-frame, I didn't short list J.D. Edwards and PeopleSoft, for this very reason.

Finally, Oracle's policy put J.D. Edwards and PeopleSoft customers on notice that they might want to consider a migration to products other than Oracle's. With software maintenance fees pulling in over 90% profit, that was the last thing Oracle wanted.

Give Oracle credit for correcting its mistakes. In 2006, Oracle announced its Applications Unlimited program, to provide ongoing enhancements to all Oracle apps beyond the delivery of Fusion. (Siebel, which Oracle acquired in January 2006, was also put under this program.) In addition, Fusion would not be a successor to Oracle's other suites: it would not be functionally equivalent to E-Business Suite, for example. Rather, it would comprise a series of applications, such as CRM and Human Capital Management (HCM) that could be implement alongside E-Business Suite.

The Tradeoffs

Oracle's decision to continue support for its existing applications, while developing Fusion as a set of complementary next-generation applications, was the right decision.

• Replacing Oracle's existing applications suites with Fusion was too ambitious a goal. Thousands of developer man years had been invested in developing E-Business Suite, JDE, and PeopleSoft, which would need to be repeated by Fusion developers. Furthermore, since 2005, Oracle has been continuing enhancement of these products, meaning that functional parity is a moving target. Finally, during the course of Fusion development, Oracle continued making other acquisitions, such as Siebel and Hyperion, further moving the target.
• Customers retain the value of their prior investments. Oracle's existing business suites are not dead-end platforms. The Apps Unlimited program preserves customer investments and keeps maintenance dollars continuing to roll in, which Oracle needs to fund Fusion development. 

But Oracle's strategy comes with a price. In a sense, Oracle's Application Unlimited program has been too successful. By continuing investment in its existing application suites, Oracle gives customers little incentive to move aggressively to Fusion. There is no burning reason for customers to change. To be sure, if Oracle customers are in the market for CRM or HCM, for example, they will have a reason to consider Fusion. But in any given year, this will be a small percentage of Oracle customers.

Perhaps this is the reason that nearly 18 months after Oracle announced general availability of Fusion Apps, Oracle has sold it to only 400+ customers, with only 100+ in production. Oracle refuses to disclose a breakdown of these 400+ customers, but word on the street is that they are heavily weighted toward Fusion HCM.

But there are other reasons that Fusion is not selling as well as one might expect for a product that is 18 months in general availability.

• Fusion is not a complete ERP solution. It lacks core functionality for manufacturing and operational support in other industries. Fusion Apps are, for the most part, really a replacement for pieces of an enterprise suite, a collection of complementary modules. 
• Fusion has functionality gaps. For this reason, Fusion is often sold to new prospects in conjunction with older Oracle products, if at all. For example, in a recent CRM deal, Oracle proposed a solution that comprised pieces of Oracle CRM On-Demand, Siebel, and RightNow. Fusion CRM was not even part of the solution, as apparently it did not satisfy certain industry requirements.
• Fusion is difficult to implement. Anecdotal reports of early adopters indicate that Fusion Apps have a fat footprint. They have complex infrastructure requirements, and as a result, Oracle says that two-thirds of customers are choosing to have Oracle host their systems.

Nevertheless, the success of Oracle's Apps Unlimited policy is the primary inhibitor of Oracle Fusion Applications adoption. Enterprise applications are sticky. It is difficult enough for vendors to get customers make a change, even when vendors announce end of support for an existing product. Imagine how hard it is to get customers to take action when you are promising them continued investment in their existing products. Oracle's Applications Unlimited program--though good for Oracle and Oracle's customers--has served to slow adoption of Fusion. 

Chris Kanaracus at Infoworld has a summary of the two sides of the debate. As usual, Dennis Howlett has his own point of view. Holger Mueller actually thinks it's good that Oracle customers don't know about Fusion.

Update, Feb 19: Floyd Teter has an incredibly informative post on customer options for deploying Oracle Fusion Apps, confirming and going beyond some of my points here. 

Related Posts

Oracle to Steer New Customers Away from PeopleSoft Products
Fusion to Build on Oracle's E-Business Suite
More on Oracle's Fusion Strategy
Oracle's Secrecy on Fusion Specifics
Oracle's Roadmap for Fusion Apps

SAP Goes Back to the Well for a Maintenance Fee Hike

Jarret Pazahanick alerted me to an email that went out this morning to SAP partners, announcing a unilateral price increase on standard support, for new maintenance contracts signed after July 15, 2013.

The email reads, in part,

To be able to provide the same level of support in the future, we will change the maintenance rate for new maintenance contracts with SAP Standard Support from 18% to 19%, effective July 15, 2013.

This moderate adjustment does not apply to any existing maintenance contracts for SAP Standard Support closed before July 15, 2013. We also want to be respectful about budgets being planned for 2013. Therefore, we encourage you to take advantage of the opportunity to place purchase orders with SAP Standard Support ahead of this change at the existing 18% rate until July 14, 2013.

I would point out that this is not a 1% increase in maintenance fees: it is a 5.5% increase (1/18 = 5.5%).

If I were an SAP customer, I would have four questions for SAP:

1. What improvements in SAP support will SAP deliver to justify this 5.5% price increase? Can we expect our internal costs to drop by at least 5.5% as a result of SAP's improvements in its support program?
    
2. What is the gross margin on SAP's maintenance business today, and how will that change after this increase is in effect? Maintenance is the most profitable segment in SAP's financial performance. Why should it become even more profitable? 
    
3. How have SAP's cost of support increased to justify this increase in my maintenance fees? Normally the cost to support mature products decreases over time, as issues with the program code are resolved. Offshoring of application support and deflection of support activities to SAP's user and partner network also have introduced support efficiencies. Shouldn't SAP be considering a reduction in maintenance fees rather than an increase?
    
4. Since SAP uses some of its maintenance revenue to fund development of new products as well as make acquisitions, will SAP provide these new products to customers at no charge? It seems SAP charges customers for new products twice: once, when it charges maintenance fees, and again when existing customers buy those new products. 

Several years ago, SAP customers fought back SAP's attempts to impose a maintenance fee increase by forcing all customers to move from standard support (at 18%) to enterprise support (at 22%). After a great deal of public outcry, SAP backed down.  Now SAP appears to be trying to impose a smaller price increase, with no apparent improvement in service, in hopes customers will not notice.

The only good news in this announcement is for providers of SAP third-party maintenance, such as Rimini Street.

Update: Chris Kanaracus at IDG News Service reports on the SAP maintenance fee hike. Larry Dignan at ZDnet also chimes in.

Update, Feb 5: Dennis Howlett has a deeper dive, and he gets clarification from SAP on several issues. 

Related Posts

SAP backs down on 22% maintenance fees
Mad as hell: backlash brewing against SAP maintenance fee hike

Mitigating Risk in Software Vendor Support

Credit: Ryan O'Connell

For implementation and ongoing support, most customers rely on their original vendors of major enterprise applications, such as ERP, CRM, and supply chain management (SCM). But what happens when the vendor is not up to the job? What steps can buyers take to mitigate the risk of vendor support failure and protect their investment?

These are questions that come to mind when reading about a recent lawsuit by a governmental agency in Puerto Rico against Infor, alleging that Infor "has been absolutely incapable of resolving serious problems" with the agency's implementation of an Infor product.

The Allegations

The agency, known the Municipal Revenue Collection Center (or, CRIM by its Spanish acronym) originally purchased a license for a computerized tax management system in 2006, prior to Infor acquiring its developer, Hansen, in 2007. Complicating matters, CRIM originally purchased its Hansen license through a Hansen partner, Rock Solid.

Reading the agency's lawsuit, CRIM appears to have done at least a partial implementation of Hansen starting in 2006. Then in 2009, CRIM negotiated and executed contracts with Infor totaling approximately $1.1M to provide services and support for its Hansen system.
Sometime after signing these agreements with Infor, things appear to have broken down.

The details of CRIM's complaint against Infor are summarized by Chris Kanaracus at IDG News Service. In summary, CRIM alleges that the original resources Hansen assigned to the project left Infor after the acquisition, and that Infor was unable to provide other resources that were up to the task. As a result, CRIM claims it has had to create patches and workarounds to keep the system active and working, a job which is made more difficult by not having access to Hansen source code. According to CRIM, serious problems remain unresolved.

Take Steps to Mitigate Risk

Although any legal complaint will, by definition, be one-sided, there are important lessons that buyers can learn, regardless of the outcome of this legal action. In fact, lawsuits of this type are often settled without disclosing the details, meaning we may never know who is at fault.

Therefore, it is more important to focus on what buyers can do, before entering into a vendor relationship, to mitigate the risk of getting into a situation similar to what CRIM claims. 

1. Implementation success is ultimately the buyer's responsibility. By all means, reach out to the vendor, or a vendor's partner, for implementation and ongoing support. But recognize that you cannot delegate success. Ultimately, it is your implementation, and your responsibility to ensure you have support. 
    
   
2. Every mission-critical system implementation plan needs a risk mitigation plan. It appears that CRIM's system was core to the agency's mission--to "collect, receive, and distribute public funds corresponding to municipalities." Inasmuch as its Hansen system supported that mission, the system is, by definition, mission-critical. Did CRIM have a risk mitigation plan? Did that plan identify the risk of losing key vendor support personnel? Apparently, not.
    
3. Software product change of ownership introduces risk. Your risk mitigation plan should include a scenario where your software product changes ownership. In some cases, support actually improves under new ownership, especially if the new owner views the acquisition as strategic and the previous owner did not have the resources to deliver required levels of support. But in other cases, the vendor may be viewing the acquisition as simply an asset purchase and may be looking to drive support costs out of the business to improve profitability. Either way, a customer should pay close attention whenever a software product changes hands, and certainly before making new investments in that software, whether in purchasing additional licenses, or as in this case, in negotiating new service contracts.
    
4. Avoid single point of support failure.  It is important for customers to always have alternative sources for support. The vendor does not need to be the only source. Sometimes local partners are a better source. Other times, third-party support may be available from organizations that are not vendor partners. Even individual consultants, if they have the right skills and experience, can be a good source, and an excellent value. A combination of vendor support and support from other sources can often be the best approach, to minimize risk and ensure continuity of service.  
    
   
5. Secure access to source code. Finally, customers should negotiate access to source code as part of their initial license agreement, to allow the customer to take over its own support. If the vendor does not accommodate this need, then it often can be negotiated as a condition of a change in control, such as a buyout or acquisition of the vendor. In cases where the vendor goes out of business, a software escrow agreement can at least deliver original source code to the customer.

Commercial software is an attractive alternative to in-house custom system development, in part, because it relieves the customer of the need to provide its own ongoing support. Most of the time, vendors deliver their end of the arrangement. But customers should plan for the times when they don't.

Related Posts

Twenty Years of ERP Lessons Learned
SAP botching up support transition for Business Objects
Infor's opportunity: value in maintenance and support
Oracle applications customers: wedded bliss or battered wives?

Four Needs Pushing Microsoft Dynamics into Large Enterprises

Early in November, I attended a series of analyst briefings offered by Microsoft Business Solutions (MBS), outside of Seattle. The briefings and interviews with MBS executives  provided an opportunity to catch up on where Microsoft is going with its Dynamics line of business applications. Coming away from the event, I was impressed with several overall trends that are encouraging Microsoft to move up-market, into territory that for many years has been dominated largely by SAP and Oracle.

I recently developed these thoughts more fully in a new research report at Computer Economics, Microsoft Dynamics Stepping onto Enterprise Turf. This post provides a brief introduction.

Evolving Market Solutions

In the early 2000’s, Microsoft jumped into the business applications market by making acquisitions that brought Great Plains, Solomon, Navision and Axapta into its product portfolio. These products, aimed at small and midsized businesses, established the perception that Microsoft was aiming its business applications primarily at smaller companies. When it came to enterprise applications for global organizations, Microsoft was viewed as out of its league. Those were markets for players such as SAP, Oracle and other vendors with multinational capabilities.

But the market landscape is changing. Over the past year, the Microsoft Business Solutions (MBS) division has been demonstrating that it is capable of delivering two of its business applications—Microsoft Dynamics AX (the descendent of Axapta) and Microsoft Dynamics CRM—to large and multinational organizations. Moreover, Dynamics product enhancements now rolling out will accelerate this trend.

Four Needs Encouraging the Up-Market Move

There are at least four customer needs that create an opportunity for Microsoft to move up into larger enterprises, as shown in the figure nearby.

• Multinational localizations, formerly a requirement only for large companies, are being are increasingly demanded even by small businesses.
• The desire of organizations large and small to manage their people, facilities, and equipment as one global resource pool.
• The continuing pursuit of improved productivity and tighter control, through worldwide business process consistency. 
• The need of global organizations to have operating systems that are appropriate to serve the needs of both their large and small operating units.

The MBS division continues, of course, to offer software that is aimed at small and midsized businesses (SMBs), those with single-site operations or with limited international presence. Microsoft reseller and systems integrator partners often introduce Dynamics NAV (formerly Navision), Dynamics GP (formerly Great Plains), and Dynamics SL (formerly Solomon) in these situations, sometimes in combination with Microsoft Dynamics CRM for customer relationship management.

Nevertheless, larger enterprises can now take Microsoft Dynamics under consideration when selecting a vendor for its enterprise business applications. In the large company market, it is Dynamics AX along with Dynamics CRM that form the solution offering. Although MBS is seeing success with large organizations in several industries, the retail sector appears to be particularly receptive to Microsoft's move up-market.

Although the Tier I ERP providers--SAP and Oracle--are well entrenched in the world's largest corporations, if Microsoft is able to compete effectively at this level, it will give enterprise buyers additional choice and options that they have not had in the past.

My full report discusses in detail the four customer needs that are driving Microsoft Dynamics up-market and three ways in which Dynamics now has become capable of serving these large organizations. Challenges facing Microsoft in gaining market share among larger companies are also discussed. The report concludes with examples of customers that illustrate the move of Dynamics into the enterprise market and recommendations for large enterprise buyers who are considering Microsoft Dynamics.

Related Posts

Microsoft Dynamics ERP on Azure: What Are the Benefits
What’s new with Microsoft Dynamics AX 2012

Tablet Computers to Begin Displacing Laptops

Tablet computers, such as Apple's iPad, are making inroads into corporate settings, but only a small percentage of corporate employees today are using them. This will likely change, however, as tablets and tablet-like devices evolve in their capabilities and form-factors.

Market Definitions Blurring

The market for tablet and tablet-like devices is developing quickly, but there is still quite a bit of confusion. For example, in Intel's most recent quarterly conference call, CEO Paul Otellini wondered out loud about the definitions of the various types of new tablet-like computers coming on to the market.  He said,

When you start seeing an ultra book with a detachable touch screen, is it a tablet? And [if] it's based on [Intel's next generation processor] Haswell, is it a tablet, an ultra book or a convertible? I don’t know. We’ll have to invent some names for these things as we go along but what I can tell you is the level of innovation there is unbounded.

Later in the call, he answered a question the potential for tablets to cannibalize sales of personal computers and laptops.

Pressed by one analyst on how much of the slowdown in consumer PCs was related to timing of Windows 8, versus how much was related to cannibalization by tablets and phones, Otellini said that “I think it’s a bit of each.” Otellini said that once Windows 8 ships, and consumers begin to try it out, “and we have all of the touch-based ultrabooks out there, we’ll know a lot more so we’ll try to quantify that a bit more for you in 90 days.”

In other words, the line between laptop computers and tablets is blurring. Moreover, tablets themselves are evolving in their form factors and capabilities, enabling them to begin to encroach on sales of laptops.

Corporate Penetration of Tablets Low But Growing

When considering the issue of cannibalization, Intel and other suppliers are considering both consumer sales and business sales. But the evidence so far shows adoption of tablet computers is much stronger on the consumer side than the business side.

As shown in the figure nearby, our research at Computer Economics indicates that about one-third of business organizations are supporting tablet computers to some extent among their user populations. However, the percentage of corporate employees actually using tablets is quite low. At the median, less than 5% of business users carry company-supported tablet computers today. These statistics vary, of course, by industry and size of organization.

Although tablet penetration into the corporate workforce is quite low, there are signs that the usage rate will increase sharply in the coming years, based on the percentage of organizations considering these devices or planning additional investments. 

Tablet Capabilities to Mature Rapidly

To this point, corporate PC makers have not had much to worry about in terms of tablets taking market share away from personal computers. Today, most tablet computers, specifically the market-leading iPad, do not have the capabilities of laptop computers. For example, cutting and pasting text on an iPad is cumbersome.

iPads today, therefore, supplement laptops and desktop computers rather than replace them. As the market leader, Apple can afford to deliberately limit the functionality of the iPad so as to not cannibalize sales of its own MacBook laptop computers. However, as other tablet manufacturers catch up and even surpass the functionality of the iPad, Apple is likely to expand the capability of its tablet computer line.

The maturation of tablet computer capabilities will come sooner rather than later. Microsoft's introduction of Windows 8, a touch-enabled operating system that will run on PCs, laptops, tablets, smartphone and other handheld devices, is a full-featured platform. It will be able to run Microsoft Office, the core desktop application suite for most business organizations, as well as single-purpose mobile applications that are so popular on today's tablets. Tablet manufacturers will leverage these capabilities to introduce devices that are much more capable of replacing laptops than the iPad is capable of today. This will force Apple to follow suit if it wants to continue to make inroads in corporate settings. Makers of Android-based tablets will no doubt do the same, as has been rumored.

Tablets Will Begin to Displace Laptops in Corporate IT

Corporate IT organizations are not the ones taking the lead today to push tablets, or tablet-like devices, into the workforce. In most cases, it is individual business units that are forcing the IT organization to support these devices. The pressure generally is coming from sales organizations, field service, or top executives directly, who want these devices to perform simple tasks while traveling, such as checking email, scheduling appointments, entering expenses, and performing workflow approvals.

Tablets are just the latest example of the "consumerization of IT." In this regard, adoption of tablet computers in business will likely take a similar path to the adoption of personal computers over 30 years ago. When personal computers first made their appearance in business organizations, IT organizations were quite happy with having employees use IBM 3270 green screen terminals. It was business leaders that bought those first PCs and then turned to the IT organization to support them. Ultimately, IT organizations took over the procurement and management of desktop computers and addressed issues of connectivity with the corporate networks.

Likewise, today, it is business leaders who are buying tablet computers and pushing their IT organizations to support them. As these devices mature, they will become a standard part of the IT portfolio of most business organizations. At that point, we will see tablets and tablet-like devices take a serious bite out of laptop and desktop sales.

That day may come faster than IT leaders imagine.

Related Posts

Laptops Displacing Desktops: Impact on Support Costs (Computer Economics)
ERP in the Lead, But Mobile Apps Gaining Ground (Computer Economics)

How to Optimize Your ERP System

Earlier this month, I gave a keynote presentation on the subject of ERP optimization, at the Manufacturing ERP Experience conference in Cleveland. This post provides a quick introduction to the subject of ERP optimization and a video of my complete keynote.

Not Enough Just to Select and Implement the Right System

When it comes to ERP, most business leaders realize that it is critical to select the right system and implement it successfully. Likewise, when it comes to advice about ERP, most analysts and consultants focus on their attention on best practices for ERP vendor selection and implementation. 

But very few analysts pay attention to what happens after the implementation. An organization will spend many more months using an ERP system than it will selecting and implementing it. A company might take three to six months to select a new ERP system and another year or two to implement it: but it will be using that system to support its business operations for seven years, 10 years, or hopefully even longer.

How ERP Systems Become Sub-Optimized and What to Do About It

There are many opportunities for ERP system to no longer fully serve the needs of the business--even ERP systems that have been correctly selected and implemented. Business requirements may change, due to organic growth, mergers and acquisitions, introduction of new products and services, changes in business models, new demands from customers, or any number of other factors. As a result, organizations frequently become dissatisfied with their ERP systems.

Business leaders, therefore, need to periodically optimize their ERP systems, both on the benefits side and the cost side. This ERP optimization effort encompasses four main tasks:

1. Analyze Root Problems. Trace each ERP problem according to a four-way framework, that is, problems related to (1) the software itself, (2) how the software was installed, (3) the business not using the system, and (4) the business not using the system effectively.
    
2. Identify Corrective Actions. By understanding the root causes, the corrective action often becomes clear, and it often does not mean an expensive and disruptive exercise in selecting and implementing a new system. Rather, the existing system can be optimized.
    
3. Identify Potential Cost Savings. After three years, the majority of ERP total cost of ownership is not in the up-front implementation costs: it is in ongoing support. Therefore, it is essential to optimize the ongoing support costs for ERP, considering a number of practical recommendations.
    
4. Execute the ERP Optimization Roadmap. Finally, the recommended actions need to be prioritized, planned, and carried out with just as much discipline as the original implementation demanded. If done correctly, optimizing ERP can effectively extend the life of a current system to better serve the business for years to come.

You can watch my full presentation on optimizing ERP by clicking on the image at the top of this post. 

If you'd like a full copy of the presentation slides, just email me. My email address is in the right hand column.

Related Posts

Factors that Affect ERP Implementation Cost 
Twenty Years of ERP Lessons Learned
Optimizing ERP Support Staffing in Smaller Organization

SAP's Emerging Cloud Platform Strategy

I participated last week in two days of SAP briefings with a group of about 15 bloggers. Part of the time was devoted to explaining SAP's evolving cloud strategy, which I will attempt to summarize in this post. 

Keep in mind that what I'm sharing here is not SAP's own messaging around its cloud strategy. Rather, it is my interpretation of where SAP is going and what it needs to do to be successful.

SAP Has a Proliferation of Cloud Assets

Over the past few years, SAP has been at work rolling out a number of cloud services. The most well-known is Business ByDesign (ByD), a full-suite ERP system, written from the ground up for software-as-a-service (SaaS). This was an enormous development effort, and it went through two development iterations until 2011, when it was ready to scale in production. SAP now has over 1,000 customers running ByD.  

Following initial delivery of ByD, SAP also began rolling out its line-of-business applications. These were built on the ByD cloud platform to meet the needs of specific business functions, such as sales force automation (Sales OnDemand) and expense reporting (Travel OnDemand). There are others, also.

Then in 2011, SAP acquired SuccessFactors, a well-respected cloud-only HRMS vendor. This greatly increased SAP's stature as a SaaS provider, but it also added another set of cloud assets and executive leadership to the mix. Further adding to the complexity: SAP is in process of acquiring Ariba, the venerable provider of supplier networking services.

From Cloud Applications to a Cloud Platform

In my view, the current situation has led to a number of problems. First, SAP's cloud portfolio is largely a collection of unrelated systems, and several different cloud platforms. There has been no common architecture, and no integrated product roadmap.

Second, the rest of SAP's product porfolio is not standing still. Specifically, SAP has been making large investments in its in-memory database technology (HANA), and it has acquired and developed an impressive array of mobility applications and mobility platforms. All of these products have cloud-delivery aspects. 

Third, SAP lacks a single extensible cloud development environment. (ByD does have a PaaS capability, for partners only, but it is limited to ByD.) Customers and partners don't just want cloud apps, they want the ability to extend those apps and build new applications that can interoperate with them. In other words, they want PaaS (platform-as-a-service) in addition to SaaS.

SAP's emerging cloud strategy addresses all of these issues: it embraces all of SAP's existing applications as well as its database and mobility platforms, and it gives customers and partners a development environment to build upon and extend these services.

Here are key aspects of SAP's cloud strategy, as I see them:

1. Everything as a Service. Behind the scenes, SAP has been rearchitecting its SaaS offerings to be delivered as web services. For example, it has broken up ByD functionality into 32 "honeycombs," so that no two of them share a common database. Rather they communicate via messaging. SAP has taken the same approach with its line-of-business applications.  In fact, all of SAP cloud applications will be deployed as web services, including its mobility and database offerings. I have to believe this also includes SuccessFactors. SAP will now be able to sell individual modules (e.g. Finance), or a complete suite, or combinations in between.
    
2. Platform-as-a-Service. SAP has built a PaaS capability, now referred to as the SAP Netweaver Cloud (earlier code-names included JPass, Neo, and Project River.) It is intended as a multi-language/multi-framework platform. It is primarily a Java-platform, but its open nature also allows development in a variety of other languages, such as Spring and Ruby. Furthermore, it allows developers to access all of the SAP cloud applications, database services, and mobility services that are now accessible via web services (see point #1).  It even allows applications to access SAP on-premises systems such as SAP ECC, CRM, and HCM. Conceivably, therefore, the Netweaver Cloud could be used for customizations/extensions of SAP on-premises systems that have been traditionally done with ABAP coding.
    
3. Ecosystem. The SAP Netweaver Cloud can be used internally by customers or their system integrators, and it also can be also used by third-party developers to build new applications for sale on the SAP Store. This facilitates the growth of SAP's developer ecosystem.

The Netweaver Cloud runs in SAP's own data centers (including those gained through the acquisition of SuccessFactors). There are a number of other features, such as identity services and document services, which I won't go into in this post.

The Pluses and the Minuses

There are several things I like about SAP's emerging cloud strategy.

1. Integration. SAP's is finally integrating all of its cloud assets into a single platform. If successful, nearly anything SAP delivers should be available and accessible through Netweaver Cloud.
    
2. Openness. Netweaver Cloud does not use a proprietary language, like Salesforce.com's APEX. Use of public development languages, such as Java and Ruby, facilitates adoption by developers and also works against lock-in to a single platform. Likewise, the PaaS makes use of open source projects from Apache and Eclipse, which should further facilitate adoption by developers. 
    
3. Availability. Netweaver Cloud has already been released to customers, and it is scheduled for general availability at the end of this month. A free 90 day trial is already being offered. This puts SAP out ahead of Oracle, whose Oracle Public Cloud is still in controlled availability (though hopefully there will be announcements at Oracle's Open World conference next month).  

On the other hand, there are some aspects that give me concern.

1. Will Customers Understand It? The cloud-only providers have one great advantage: simplicity. Everything Salesforce.com builds is on its Force.com platform. Likewise, enterprise cloud leaders such as NetSuite and Workday grew up with single platforms. Their platforms are relatively easy to explain and easy to understand. SAP, on the other hand, has a variety of on-premises and cloud systems. Furthermore, it has built or acquired a variety of database products and mobility applications and platforms. The SAP cloud platform must now deal with all of these products. It's not easy to explain, as witnessed by the difficulty SAP's own team had in communicating it with our group of tech bloggers. If the bloggers struggle with understanding it, what hope does SAP have to make the message clear to customers or prospects?
    
2. Will Developers Adopt It? Developers are a key to success in cloud systems, just as they are in mobility applications. Salesforce.com already has a large and enthusiastic ecosystem of developers for its Force.com platform. Microsoft has an enormous ecosystem of development partners, for whom Microsoft's cloud platform (Azure) is more-or-less an incremental step in using existing Microsoft development tools. Will SAP's current population of partners readily embrace Netweaver Cloud, or will they be content to continue development in the SAP tools they have been using for years? 
    
3. Is SAP Too Late? Salesforce.com's PaaS was first introduced in 2006 (I wrote about it at the time, here). NetSuite has had CloudSuite for years. Microsoft has already rolled out and continues to refine its Azure PaaS. SAP is only now rolling out Netweaver Cloud. Though SAP denies this, I do believe that its cloud development efforts in recent years have taken a back seat to its database and mobility development efforts. So now, SAP is playing catch-up. SAP has a lot of work to do to be perceived as a cloud leader.

Regarding that last point, on the other hand, my research at Computer Economics shows that PaaS is a technology that is still in the early adopter phase. Most organizations are still buying individual SaaS applications and have not yet made a strategic commitment to cloud computing as a platform. They have hybrid systems: some on-premises, and some in the cloud. Of course, there are exceptions: these are the early adopters that embrace cloud computing not only for SaaS applications but for PaaS as a development strategy. Nevertheless, the majority have not yet seen the vision. Therefore, if SAP can quickly make its cloud strategy clear and deliver working product, it may still have a shot at being a major player.

Here are some reports from other bloggers who were at this event:

• Vijay Vijayasankar: SAP Needs A Better Cloud And Platform Story, And A Good Story Teller 
• Jarret Pazahanick: SAP Briefing - Cloud, Mobility and HCM 
• Fellow bloggers Vijay Vijayasankar, Jon Reed, John Appleby, and Harald Reiter: Video discussion on SAP Cloud, Mobility, and Database Strategy

Disclosure: SAP paid for part of my travel expenses to this event. 

Related Posts

SAP in Transition on Mobile, Cloud, and In-Memory Computing
SAP innovating with cloud, mobile and in-memory computing
Salesforce.com to allow customization of its hosted service 

2012 Technology Trends: Call for Survey Respondents

Over at Computer Economics, we've now launched our 2012 Technology Trends survey, and we're looking for qualified IT executives to take a 15-minute survey about their technology investment plans.

What's in it for you? If you complete the survey, we'll send you a complete copy of the final report (a $995 value).

Start the Technology Trends Survey Now 

In this year's survey we're asking about your organization's adoption and experience with 13 technologies:

• ERP
• Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
• Supply Chain Management
• Human Resources Management Systems (HRMS)
• Data Warehouse/BI
• Social Business/Collaboration Systems
• Legacy System Renewal
• Software as a Service (SaaS)
• Public Cloud Infrastructure (IaaS)
• Platform as a Service (PaaS)
• Unified Communications
• Desktop Virtualization
• Tablet Computers. 

Want to know more? See a summary of the final report from last year.

Oracle's List of 100-Plus Cloud Applications

Oracle has now responded to analyst requests for a list of the 100+ cloud applications that Larry Ellison claimed in his Oracle Cloud presentation last week. I've just checked, and his exact words were "Over 100 enterprise-grade applications running in the cloud."

But the email cover for the list sent this morning refers to them as "100+ application services." As I speculated last week, Oracle is defining "application services" at very fine-grained level, almost down to individual programs.

For example, within "Oracle Fusion Customer Relationship Management - Marketing" is "Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 500,000 records" really a separate and distinct application from "Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 1,000,000 records?"

Update 1: Upon further review, I'm wondering why Oracle CRM On-Demand, a multi-tenant SaaS application, is missing from Oracle's list.

Update 2: I'm also wondering, using Oracle's definition of "applications," how many does SAP have?  In his presentation, Ellison said, "SAP only has SuccessFactors." Leaving aside my point that Ellison did not credit Business By Design or SAP's line of business applications as cloud apps, how does "SuccessFactors" count as one application, but Oracle's Taleo counts as 24 (see list below)?

---

Here is the complete list of what Oracle claims as its 100+ cloud applications:

Oracle RightNow

Oracle RightNow Dynamic Agent Desktop Cloud Service: Seats
Oracle RightNow Standard Dynamic Agent Desktop Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Enterprise Dynamic Agent Desktop Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Enterprise Contact Center Dynamic Agent Desktop Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Standalone Chat Dynamic Agent Desktop Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Dynamic Agent Knowledgebase Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Chat Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Cobrowse Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Cobrowse Remote Support Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Contextual Workspaces Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Guided Assistance Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Agent Scripting Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Desktop Workflow Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Product Registration Cloud Service
Oracle RightNow Social Monitor Cloud Service

Oracle Taleo

Taleo Enterprise Cloud Service Platform
Taleo Platform Cloud Service
Taleo Analytics Cloud Service
Taleo Recruiting Cloud Service
Taleo Recruiting High Volume Cloud Service
Taleo Onboarding Cloud Service
Taleo Performance Management Cloud Service
Taleo Goal Management Cloud Service
Taleo Succession Planning Cloud Service
Taleo Development Planning Cloud Service
Taleo Learn Cloud Service
Taleo Learn External User Cloud Service

Taleo Enterprise Recruiting Assessment Content
Taleo Hourly Assessment Content Cloud Service
Taleo Store Manager Assessment Content Cloud Service
TBE Recruiting Standard Active User Cloud Service
TBE Recruiting Premium Active User Cloud Service
TBE Recruiting Manager Cloud Service

Taleo Business Edition - Per Employee
TBE Recruiting Premium Cloud Service
TBE Smart Sourcing Base Cloud Service
TBE Smart Sourcing Per Posting Cloud Service
TBE Onboarding Cloud Service
TBE Compensation Cloud Service
TBE Performance Management Cloud Service

Taleo Business Edition - Learn
TBE Learn Cloud Service
TBE Learn External Trainees Cloud Service

Oracle ATG

Oracle ATG Live Help
Live Help Interactions On Demand
Live Help Chat On Demand
Live Help Email On Demand
Live Help Cobrowse Chat On Demand
Live Help Cobrowse Phone On Demand
Recommendations Single-Channel On Demand
Recommendations Multichannel On Demand
Recommendations Additional Catalog On Demand
Recommendations Large Catalog On Demand

Oracle Fusion Applications

Oracle Fusion CRM Base Cloud Service
Fusion CRM Base Standard Offering Cloud Service
Fusion CRM Base Enterprise Offering Cloud Service
Fusion CRM Base Premium Offering Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Customer Relationship Management Cloud Service
Fusion Enterprise Contracts Management Base Cloud Service
Fusion Incentive Compensation Cloud Service
Fusion Opportunity Landscape Cloud Service
Fusion Quota Management Cloud Service
Fusion Sales Campaigns Cloud Service
Fusion Sales Predictor Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Marketing Cloud Service
Fusion Marketing, Enterprise Edition Cloud Service
Fusion Marketing, Additional Volume Cloud Service
Fusion Marketing, Additional Email - 500,000 Messages

Oracle Fusion Partner Relationship Management Cloud Service
Fusion Partner Relationship Management for Channel Managers Cloud Service
Fusion Partner Relationship Management for Partners Cloud Service
Fusion Territory Management for Channel Managers Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Customer Data Management Cloud Service
Fusion Customer Data Steward Cloud Service
Fusion Customer Management Foundation for Organizations Cloud Service
Fusion Customer Management Foundation for Persons Cloud Service
Fusion Data Quality Address Cleansing Cloud Service
Fusion Data Quality Matching Cloud Service
Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management Cloud Service
Fusion Human Capital Management Base Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Human Capital Management Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management Cloud Service Options
Fusion Global Payroll Cloud Service
Fusion Goal Management Cloud Service
Fusion Payroll Interface Cloud Service
Fusion Performance Management Cloud Service
Fusion Talent Review Cloud Service
Fusion Workforce Compensation Cloud Service
Fusion Workforce Lifecycle Manager Cloud Service
Fusion Workforce Predictions Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Talent Management Cloud Service
Fusion Talent Management Base Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Talent Management Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Talent Management Cloud Service Options
Fusion Goal Management Cloud Service
Fusion Performance Management Cloud Service
Fusion Talent Review Cloud Service
Fusion Workforce Compensation Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Financials Cloud Service
Fusion Financials Cloud Service
Fusion Expenses Cloud Service
Fusion Advanced Collections Cloud Service
Fusion Automated Invoice Processing Cloud Service
Fusion Financial Reports Center Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Financials Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Procurement Cloud Service
Fusion Purchasing Cloud Service
   Option: Fusion Supplier Portal Cloud Service
   Option: Fusion Sourcing Cloud Service
Fusion Procurement Contracts Cloud Service
Fusion Self Service Procurement Cloud Service
Fusion Enterprise Contracts Base Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Procurement Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Project Financial Management Cloud Service
Fusion Project Financial Management Base Cloud Service
Fusion Project Control Cloud Service
Fusion Project Billing Cloud Service
Fusion Project Contracts Cloud Service
Fusion Enterprise Contracts Base Cloud Service
Fusion Project Performance Reporting Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Project Financial Management Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Project Execution Management Cloud Service
Fusion Project Management Base Cloud Service
Fusion Collaborative Project Management Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Project Execution Management Cloud Service
Fusion Project Resource Management Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Risk and Control Management Cloud Service
Fusion Risk and Control Management Base Cloud Service
Option: Fusion Risk and Compliance Management Cloud Service
Option: Fusion Risk and Compliance Intelligence Cloud Service
Option: Finance Controls Cloud Service
Option: Procurement Controls Cloud Service
Option: Human Capital Controls Cloud Service
Option: Fusion Controls On-Premise Connector Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Supply Chain Management Cloud Service
Fusion Inventory Management Cloud Service
Fusion Product Hub Cloud Service
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Supply Chain Management Cloud Service

Oracle Hyperion Cloud Service
Hyperion Planning Plus Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Cloud Service Additional Add-On
Fusion Applications Extensibility Framework Cloud Service

Oracle Fusion Financials
Fusion Accounting Hub
Fusion Advanced Collections
Fusion Automated Invoice Processing
Fusion Expenses
Fusion Financial Reports Center
Fusion Financials
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Financials

Oracle Fusion Procurement
Fusion Procurement Contracts
Fusion Purchasing
Option: Fusion Sourcing
Option: Fusion Supplier Portal
Fusion Self Service Procurement
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Procurement

Oracle Fusion Project Portfolio Management
Fusion Project Billing
Fusion Project Contracts
Fusion Project Control
Fusion Project Costing
Fusion Project Integration Gateway
Fusion Project Performance Reporting
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Projects

Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management
Fusion Benefits
Fusion Global Human Resources
Fusion Global Payroll
Fusion Global Payroll Interface
Fusion Goal Management
Fusion Performance Management
Fusion Talent Review
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Human Capital Management
Fusion Workforce Compensation
Fusion Workforce Directory Management
Fusion Workforce Lifecycle Manager
Fusion Workforce Predictions

Oracle Fusion Supply Chain Management
Fusion Distributed Order Orchestration
Fusion Distributed Order Orchestration User
Fusion Global Order Promising
Fusion Inventory Management
Fusion Product and Catalog Management
Fusion Product Hub
Fusion Product Hub Data Steward
Fusion Product Hub for Communications
Fusion Product Hub for Retail
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Supply Chain Management

Oracle Fusion Customer Relationship Management - Sales
Fusion CRM Base
Fusion CRM Desktop
Fusion Enterprise Contracts Base
Fusion Incentive Compensation
Fusion Opportunity Landscape
Fusion Quota Management
Fusion Sales Campaigns
Fusion Sales Catalog
Fusion Sales Predictor
Fusion Smart Phone Edition
Fusion Territory Management
Fusion Transactional Business Intelligence for Customer Relationship Management

Oracle Fusion Customer Relationship Management - Marketing
Fusion Email Marketing Server
Fusion Marketing
Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 500,000 records
Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 1,000,000 records
Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 3,000,000 records
Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 5,000,000 records
Fusion Marketing Segmentation - up to 10,000,000 records
Fusion Marketing Segmentation - unlimited records

Oracle Fusion Partner Relationship Management
Fusion Incentive Compensation for Channel Managers
Fusion Partner Relationship Management for Channel Managers
Fusion Partner Relationship Management for Partners
Fusion Territory Management for Channel Managers

Oracle Fusion Customer Relationship Management - Customer Data Management
Fusion Customer Hub Data Steward
Fusion Customer Hub for Organizations
Fusion Customer Management Foundation for Organizations
Fusion Customer Hub for Persons
Fusion Customer Management Foundation for Persons
Fusion Data Quality Address Cleansing
Fusion Data Quality Matching

Oracle Fusion Application Tools
Fusion Applications Extensibility Framework

Oracle Fusion Governance, Risk and Compliance
Fusion Application Access Controls Governor
Option: Fusion Application Access Controls for Fusion Applications

Related Posts

Oracle's Behavior Undercuts Its Own Cloud Accomplishments

Oracle's Behavior Undercuts Its Own Cloud Accomplishments

Oracle held a much anticipated "Oracle Executive Strategy" update event for its Oracle Cloud services yesterday. With Larry Ellison leading the presentation, there was much thunder and lightening--but not much rain. This is unfortunate, because Oracle has put together an impressive set of cloud services. Ellison's inability to resist slamming the competition led him to overstate what Oracle has actually delivered, and to minimize the success of Oracle's competitors.

This post serves as a summary of the key points I gleaned from the webcast and from an analyst question and answer session afterwards with Thomas Kurian, Oracle's EVP of Product Development, who is always a pleasure to listen to.

Is There Anything New?

On Twitter and in back channel Skype conversations with other analysts, many of us were questioning: what exactly is being announced today? Nearly everything presented had been previously been presented at Oracle Open World in 2011.

Reading carefully through the pre-event summary document and scanning through my notes, I can only come up with two things that are new:

1. Oracle is announcing new Oracle Fusion cloud applications and services in addition to those  announced during Open World (which were CRM, HCM, Social Network, Java Service, and Cloud Service). Larry Ellison indicated that Oracle now has 100 cloud applications and services.
    
2. Oracle demonstrated some of the social marketing functionality from its Vitrue acquisition, which Oracle announced in March. 

Other than that, it's difficult to find anything that Oracle had not announced or presented earlier. So the event was largely a re-presentation of Oracle's cloud services, some demonstration, and a healthy dose of competitor-bashing.

Essentially, the 90 minute event fell into a pattern of presentation that is becoming all too familiar in the past several Oracle Open World conferences. There are too many issues to list individually, but I'll point out what I see as some of the things I found most troubling in Oracle's presentation.

Oracle Exaggerates Its Cloud Apps Availability

Oracle claims 100 Oracle Fusion cloud services but provides no list of the applications. Seeing that Oracle announced five during Open World, it's difficult to understand how it is now claiming 100, unless it is talking about very small pieces of functionality. During the post-event analyst briefing, I believe Tom Kurian did promise to deliver a list--so we'll have to wait for that. Update: Oracle has provided the list.

Furthermore, not all of the capabilities that Oracle showed or referred to during the event are in general release. Tom Kurian did review what products were generally available, but I was not able to capture that information. Again, we'll have to wait for some public clarity from Oracle on what customers can buy today and what is still waiting for general availability.

Oracle's Developer Cloud Still in Controlled Availability

Specifically, Oracle Java Service and Database Service are not yet available via customer self-service, as shown in the screen shot below. With a public cloud infrastructure service, you should be able to walk up to the website, submit a credit card and gain instant access to a development environment, run it for a few hours or days, then shut it down. Amazon Web Services has offered this for years.

A quick test on the Oracle website shows that if you try to sign up for cloud services, you are led to a screen as shown below, where you can leave your contact information. The message on that page reads,

When you submit this form, your information will be placed into a queue for access to controlled availability services. We will be provisioning Java and Database services in batches over the next several months. Our Fusion Application services will be made available shortly after that. You will be notified by email when your instance is ready.

I questioned Tom Kurian on this point and he indicated that this is a temporary measure during the ramp-up period. He said that Oracle is currently signing up about 150 development customers a week for its Java and database services and that by the end of August, the sign up process should be available entirely on a self-service basis. But today-there is still friction at the point of sale.

Ellison is Rewriting History

At the beginning of his presentation, Ellison claimed that Oracle began to rebuild all of Oracle's applications for the cloud, calling it Project Fusion. But some of us have a long memory, and we've written blog posts on Oracle's Fusion program over the years.

At the beginning, Oracle did not pitch Fusion as a cloud program but as an integration strategy for its disparate applications. Fusion would be the successor to Oracle's E-Business Suite, PeopleSoft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel systems. As Oracle made many acquisitions, it needed a strategy, using middleware, to integrate these applications with one another and a successor set of applications based on the best features of each of its acquisitions.

See my many posts at the end of this post, and try to find one where Oracle ever used the word "cloud" in talking about Fusion. Oracle has not been working on cloud applications for seven years. It has only been in the past year or two, as Salesforce.com and Workday began eating Oracle's lunch that Oracle responded with its own cloud pronouncements.

I have heard off-the-record that the early leaders in the Fusion group made sure to architect the product to allow cloud deployment. But Ellison's early presentations indicated that Fusion would be a traditional sold-as-a-license product, deployed on-premises, not a cloud service. To now claim that Fusion was a 7-year cloud development effort is simply not true.

Ellison's Characterization of Competitors is Out-of-Bounds

For example, Ellison claims that SAP has done nothing in the cloud except for its acquisition of SuccessFactors, and that it will have nothing otherwise in the cloud until 2020. He conveniently overlooks SAP's five or seven year effort to develop Business ByDesign, a full-suite multi-tenant cloud ERP system, which SAP has has sold to over 1,000 customers.

Whether SAP has met its objectives for ByD is not the point: Oracle has by its own numbers claimed only 200 sales of Oracle Fusion. So, even by Oracle's own numbers, SAP has sold more cloud customers with its own developed products. (Ellison also conveniently ignores SAP's own cloud-based line-of-business applications.) SAP may have its own problems in transitioning its business to the cloud, but Ellison's mockery of SAP is simply unfair and inaccurate. 

Ellison's slamming of the competition continued with a mis-characterization of Workday's in-memory technology and a straw-man argument that other SaaS providers tell customers "not to worry about security." Can Ellison point to any cloud competitor that has told its customers "not to worry about security?"

Oracle Exaggerates Adoption of Fusion Apps

Oracle claims just 200 sales of Oracle Fusion Apps, and it refuses to break down that number into how many are CRM, HCM, and so on. Although Oracle will not release that information, I have reason to believe that most of those sales are for HCM and that there have been few new sales of Fusion CRM.

Tellingly, there were no customers on stage with Ellison or Hurd. Except for a couple of slides with logos of companies that Oracle claimed as wins over its competitors, there were no customer mentions, no customer testimonies.

Oracle Customers Choose Cloud Because of Fusion Complexity

Back-channel discussions indicate that nearly all Oracle Fusion application sales are for cloud deployment, not on-premises. It appears that this is the case not because Fusion can only run in the cloud  (like Salesforce.com or Workday) but because Fusion technical requirements are so complex that virtually no organization wants to deploy Fusion Apps on-premises. It is easier to simply turn over the infrastructure and application management activities to Oracle.

On a Positive Note

The dissatisfaction felt by many of the event attendees is unfortunate. Oracle does have an impressive array of cloud services, although some are still in the process of roll-out.

• Specifically, I like the fact that Oracle is offering a full and complete IaaS platform, similar to Amazon's (although Oracle's is limited to Oracle technologies).
   
• I also like that everything in Oracle's cloud is based on public standards, such as SQL, Java, and HTML5. 
   
• I like that customers can freely move applications (Oracle's apps, or custom apps) from Oracle's cloud to on-premise deployment, or to other public clouds such as Amazon's--without modification. I questioned Kurian on this point, and he confirmed that there is no intent to lock in customers to Oracle's cloud. This is, in fact, a differentiator against Salesforce.com as a development platform, which because it is based on proprietary languages, does not offer portability. 
   
• Finally, the user interface or Oracle Fusion Application is cutting edge. From what I saw in the Ellison's demonstration, along with other Fusion apps I've seen demonstrated, Oracle has set a high bar for ease-of-use, embedded BI, and integration.

Oracle has fallen into a pattern in its public events of overstating its successes, misrepresenting its competitors, and touting statements-of-direction as accomplishments. This is unfortunate because it causes observers to discount what is in fact some very impressive technology. I hope that, in the future, Oracle will take a more understated approach that will do justice to its people, products, and services. 

Related Posts

Oracle's roadmap for Fusion Apps (2009)
More on Oracle's Fusion strategy
Oracle's Fusion strategy: clear as mud
Fusion to build on Oracle's E-Business Suite
Oracle going dark
Oracle's new reseller strategy and speculation on the future of JDE
Is Oracle's Fusion really half complete?
SAP slams Oracle's strategy as, Project Confusion