Tag: technology

Posted on

Growing Up: Software buying decisions throughout the business life cycle

Two-TallThere are two certainties in life – death and taxes. While both are unavoidable, at least the taxes issue can be managed. Managing taxes and business finances in general takes detailed information. Considering how most small businesses get their start with business bookkeeping and accounting, it’s no surprise that information gathering becomes one of the most time-consuming and frustrating tasks around tax time. Fixing the problem from the beginning and implementing a system to manage the detailed information the business needs on an ongoing basis is key to avoiding the rush as well as building a business information framework that might span the life of the business entity.  Yet fixing the problem for this year’s tax information gathering is relatively simple compared to figuring out how to format, retain, and continuously collect and compile new data for analysis throughout the life of the business.

In order to understand how to address the problem, it is important to understand the evolution of business accounting. Not how the concepts or practices have evolved, but how technology has (or has not) been applied to certain problems, and where the gaps are.

Starting Up

The first things a new business owner generally does is get a business license, get a computer, and run down to the discount store to buy a copy of QuickBooks or maybe Microsoft Excel. Now, this business owner isn’t necessarily prepared to properly handle the accounting for the business, but he understands that he has to do something. Keeping a check register, at the minimum, lets him know how much money is in the bank. And that’s what it’s all about for the small business person – cash flow and cash availability. But the focus on the checkbook frequently causes the business to postpone implementing deeper, more beneficial processes.

With a focus on the checkbook, the business manages cash by counting payments out and receipts in. But the nature of the payment or the receipt is the true question that must be answered and accounted for. It is surprising how many businesses still keep ledger cards – those manual 3×5’s in a box – where customer and vendor information is kept. It is a simple method, and provides the business a way to keep individual account records. But the fact that this detail information is not part of an integrated system creates a greater potential for lost or inaccurate data. Further, the greater the volume the more difficult and error-prone managing the information becomes.

It is at this point that the business seeks to find a more comprehensive means to manage the additional business data. This is another buying decision the business owner must make, introducing a new system which can handle the additional activities around accounts receivable, accounts payable, inventory and sales orders, etc. The business was already keeping track of products or services, customers and vendors. But here we are at a step where new systems and processes must be introduced. Although a belated effort, this after-the-fact implementation of customer, vendor and item tracking now establishes the means to manage more business activities as part of an integrated system.

The difficulty comes in loading the historic information and learning new systems. Depending on volume, the quality of the manually kept data, etc., it may be determined that historic transaction details are not to be entered. So, the business moves forward with a better system for managing business activities and data, but loses the value of the early transaction detail.

Volume and Growth

The business has implemented an accounting system which helps to keep track of customers, vendors, items, and cash. More detailed processes are introduced as the business requirement grows – offering perhaps more specific information on costs of certain products, or summaries of customer purchases or item sales activity. This data provides a much more informed basis for business decision-making, but also impacts the systems as the volume of data to be managed grows.

Growth may present itself in many ways – growth in the number of products or services offered, growth in the number of transactions processed regularly, growth in the dollar value of transactions, or growth in the number of employees who need access to the system. All of these areas impact the ability of the system to continue to support the business requirements. Quite frequently, a certain “density of data” is reached and the current system is not able to efficiently manipulate and manage the volume. Here again is another buying decision. Can the existing system be expanded to handle the additional volume? Or must a new system yet again be introduced? The business process requirements may not have changed, but the earlier choice of systems may cause a forced change simply due to business volume or number of users.

The frustrations of changing business systems are compounded the further into the business life cycle the change comes. Much of the historic intelligence of the business is derived from the earlier days of operation; data which reflects the stages and activities of the business over time. When a business reaches a point where data volumes force a systems change, a worst-case scenario occurs: The volume of historic data is too great for the current system, and loading it into a new system takes a huge amount of time and effort. Unfortunately, this task often proves too daunting for the company, so again valuable historic detail information is lost and summary information is loaded into the new system.

Operationally Specific Systems

As the business matures – and in order for the business to mature in a healthy manner – specific and detailed information must be captured and analyzed. Systems which take a broad view of the business, offering only general information and process support, frequently do not supply the business with the levels of intelligence truly required. For example, a manufacturing business needs to fully understand and manage the manufacturing processes and materials supply chain to ensure profitability and consistent product quality. A retailer needs to know which products sell in which markets in order to ensure product stock and availability to key customers. And all of this information is time-critical if the business is to make necessary adjustments in time to benefit from them.

This level of detail can only come from a system which incorporates a certain specific orientation towards the operational processes of the business. The fact of selling a product to a customer is an activity which gets recorded, but the additional details of the customer location, pricing levels, purchasing levels, salesman, inventory item, and warehouse location tell the rest of the story. Over time, the business owner can then better understand customer purchasing habits, inventory item turnover, supplier dependencies – a wealth of business intelligence. This data is then used to assist the business owner or management in determining the specific activities or actions necessary to keep the business moving forward and improving performance.

In the end, it is the demonstration of well-defined processes, deep insight into the business operational metrics and financial performance, and the ability to effectively and accurately report on this information that creates a basis for provable business value.

No Best Answer

When looking at the business accounting and finance systems available in the market – particularly considering those which have earned a level of market share – there are visible gaps – big ones. This is clearly reflected in the numbers, where Intuit QuickBooks leads in the small business market, but has no reciprocal in the midrange or enterprise markets. QuickBooks fits into that early space, where the business is just starting out and, maybe, extending into keeping more detailed customer, vendor and item information. MS Excel is also a winner for very small and new businesses, as the spreadsheet is a simple and easy solution to creating an electronic check register. But there comes a point where a business has requirements that extend beyond the ability of the small business software. Sometimes, the mere thought of change is so abhorrent (usually based on a bad initial implementation experience) that the business attempts to use the software far beyond what it was built to handle.

Other application makers offer systems that have a number of small business features, but that also offer more in-depth or complex capabilities to handle the growing business. These systems, too, have a great potential to be outgrown, and can be costly implementations which handle only a portion of the business life cycle.

Larger, module-based systems and frameworks offer a broad range of functionality, integration, and data management capability. They typically address more – and more detailed – business processes, and can scale to very large sizes. But the cost and complexity of these systems is often the barrier, and given that there is no clear seed product (small business version of the big business software), the upgrade path is unclear and problematic. Given the huge gap between the “typical” small business system and the upper-levels in the enterprise applications catalogue – the transition from very small to very large software is not likely to be made in a single step.

Losing intelligence with each step

Each stage of business requirement typically drives to a buying decision. This buying decision is met with angst, as considerations include not only cost, but data conversion vs re-loading, new process or system design and setup, user training, proofing the system (running parallel?) and a host of other issues, not the least of which is the business benefit to be derived.

The emergence of SaaS solutions and multitenant web applications has compounded this issue, as there is a tendency for such solutions to provide only list data and other easily exported data.  Transaction information and details are frequently unavailable for export to another solution, or the data may be exported but not necessarily in a meaningful form.

Small Businesses should be particularly concerned about whether or not the solution will fit the needs of the business for an extended period of time and through a variety of business conditions. The small business should also determine if there is a way to continue use of the solution (or transition from the solution) if the solution or the provider stop meeting the needs of the business. Small business owners are particularly at risk, because the SaaS solutions oriented towards small business users often don’t have the on-premises options that some of their enterprise counterparts offer. And small businesses are the ones who are most likely to need to transition to another solution as the business grows. Further, the small business user often lacks the technical knowledge to manage the conversion effectively, and doesn’t typically employ skilled in-house IT personnel to handle it for them. The result: consulting dollars get spent, just to retain the data the business already has.  http://jcmann.blogspot.com/2009/11/salvaging-business-intelligence.html

If information is power, too many businesses are losing that power when they migrate from one software product to another – they are losing valuable historic information by leaving transaction and other detail data behind when they convert from one system to another.  This should be an area of focus and key discussion point when any change to systems is considered.  After all, the insight and business intelligence gathered over the years was likely instrumental in helping the small business grow up to become a successful big business, and will continue to be important for years to come.

jmbunnyfeetMake Sense?

J

Posted on

Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due | Accounting and Business Technologies

Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due

or – That was then, but this is now…

It constantly amazes me, seeing the number of conversations, forums, talkbacks, emails, etc. flurrying about the Internet that are focused on finding the way to “win” against Microsoft and Intuit – both companies, in certain circles, being referred to as “big brother”. Well, the 800lb gorillas, anyway.

There are the Linux community members, very appropriately using TCO (total cost of ownership) and security messages to get the attention of the market… you’ve got the Mac devotees who believe that computers can and should have good fashion sense… and then there are the Windows users who use it, but complain nonetheless.

With Intuit, you have a clear market-share leader in SMB accounting. As for the other market segments – it’s anybody’s guess who wins there. It’s arguable.

But what do these two companies have in common? In a word – success.

Let’s face it. Without them, there wouldn’t be a world of computer users representing a potential customer base for new products. Walk with me – let’s talk.

Computers were once quite expensive, unintuitive, and basically unavailable for most businesses. Then PCs emerged, Microsoft hit the market – and Windows opened across the world. (Yes, I realize the timeline here is seriously compressed, and DOS lived for a long time and we liked it).  First, businesses broadly became computer users. Then consumers became computer users. Then everyone became a computer user.   Granted, the guy at home playing “Flight Simulator” was a driving force in getting the mouse and better graphics into mainstream computing. But let’s remember that accounting and finance was among the first primary applications of general computing technology (the BETTER adding machine).

Changes in the accounting industry were also occurring at this point. Professional accounting practices began to move away from business bookkeeping, being a low-margin and labor intensive task. Intuit hit the market with QuickBooks, marketing based on the concept that “if you can write a check, you can do your own books”. While this was in direct opposition to the professional accountants’ belief that businesses need professional assistance with their accounting, it solved the dilemma of doing the books directly. So, many accounting practices at this point actually became focused on selling and supporting accounting software – looking at the technology as both a means to avoid direct bookkeeping as well as introducing additional revenue-earning services for the practice.

Both Microsoft and Intuit recognized a need in the market, and filled those needs quite nicely. They earned their market share largely based on useability and the concept of empowerment. This is what it took to build the size of market we see today. And let’s face it. They did it very well.

Today’s computer user is more savvy – more aware of the options and choices. But choice often seems like complexity. With Microsoft and Intuit being viewed by many as the defacto standards for small businesses, the choice seemed like it was already made and therefore the complexity of making the right purchasing decision was removed. This is not as true today as it once was.

There are other options available. Will they gain the same levels of adoption that their predecessors did? Doubt it. The concept of “one size fits all” isn’t true any more. People want tools that are specific to their requirements. Businesses want their computing platform and applications to do more for them than simply maintain status quo.

But we must always remember how we got here. Kudos to the big guys who built the market for the rest of us. We should revere these companies, and acknowledge the great thing they did – they created potential customers for all of us. Lots of ’em.

via Accounting and Business Technologies | Joanie Mann: Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due.

Posted on

Considerations for Disaster Recovery Planning | Accounting and Business Technologies

Disaster Recovery Planning is currently a leading topic of discussion for business IT administrators and owners, just as issues relating to business and technology operation and continuity have become a central point of discussion for many organizations. After the disaster occurs is the wrong time to determine whether or not your company is adequately protected. Unfortunately, when you need your plan most is when you find that you either do or do not have things well in hand.

Hurricanes, floods and tornadoes have taught many companies some hard lessons ranging from the inability to locate or communicate with employees to the entire loss of the business and surrounding community infrastructure. Certainly, the current situation is a reflection of the worst-case scenario, but it also points out some fundamentally important considerations that a company must incorporate when creating a technology plan for disaster recovery and business continuity.

EMPLOYEES ARE PEOPLE

One of the first things to remember in any disaster is that your employees are people. They have families, homes, lives outside the office, and responsibilities. They have fears and concerns. In short, they are human beings. This is a reality that is frequently overlooked in a disaster plan.

Much consideration may be taken with respect to handling business issues such as customer or vendor communications, technology and systems continuity, etc. But in the event of a disaster where lives are at stake, can the company expect personnel to overlook those personal impacts that present themselves, all in the name of keeping the company going? Probably not, unless perhaps they are in health care, law enforcement, or the military. Even in those cases, caring for family and loved ones may take precedence over job responsibilities. Businesses need to make certain that there are SYSTEMS in place to assist with continuity and recovery, as personnel may be hard to come by.

YOUR BUILDING IS NOT AN ISLAND

Businesses rely on facilities.

Facilities are created from infrastructure.

Infrastructure, more often than not, is not in your control.

Telephone service, connectivity, electrical power, street access to the building, access to the surrounding areas – these are infrastructure elements that you have little control over, if any at all. The loss of infrastructure, however, impacts you significantly. It does not matter how much backup power you have if you have no physical access to the building. And telephone service becomes valueless (frequently) if the power is out.

Redundancy can come in many forms, but creating fully redundant facilities means being redundant with the infrastructure. Opening offices in multiple locations, distributing personnel and resources to various locations – these all come with potentially tremendous cost impacts to the business. There are, however, affordable technologies and services available today which can help mitigate the impact of the loss of a location or facility, and whenever possible these services should be incorporated into your daily processes to ensure portability and a smooth transitioning of systems should the worst occur.

DEGREES OF PROTECTION

Developing an IT recovery and continuity plan is similar in nature to purchasing various types of insurance. The level and cost of protection must be evaluated based on the benefit to be derived, and weighted by the risk. For example, low-cost flood insurance is probably not worth the investment where there is no water. Obviously, there is cost associated with different levels and types of protection, and different situations warrant different types and levels of coverage.

In terms of IT continuity and recovery, the most frequently implemented form of “insurance” is redundancy or the duplication of a resource. Every business, however, has requirements that extend beyond a reasonable ability to fully duplicate. A small flower shop, for example, cannot reasonably afford to implement “alternative business locations” or a remote office in the event of the loss of the primary facility. With this reality in mind, the business must focus on addressing those conditions that are within its reasonable ability to control, as well as those that it can mitigate to some degree.

via Accounting and Business Technologies | Joanie Mann: Considerations for Disaster Recovery Planning.

Posted on

Licensing the Cloud: Software Distribution and Use in a Remote Access World

Licensing the Cloud: Software Distribution and Use in a Remote Access World

Whether we like it or not, and whether we agree or not – software developers have a right to decide how and where their licensed products are run.  There have always been arguments in this area, where software license purchasers take the position that they should be able to do what they want with their licenses, and where commercial software developers believe they have the rights to dictate authorized usage.  Truly, when it comes down to the legalities of it all, the software companies will win because they have the legal footing to fall back on  – the EULA containing use rights and terms which licensed users have agreed to.

The problem has been ongoing, with software developers constantly and consistently seeking methods to reduce unauthorized software distribution and unsupported use, and users spending amazing amounts of time and resources finding ways to break the rule.  Copy protection, “phone home” license validation models and all sorts of approaches have been developed to prevent software theft and unauthorized distribution.  But it happens anyway – a lot – and the cloud is turning into a great facilitator.  Surprisingly, it’s an “in your face” approach, too, where the previous iteration of web-enabled software theft (unauthorized digital downloads and license cracking) was fairly quiet and tried to be secretive to stay out of the gun sights of the developer.  Today’s “flavor” is right out there, being marketed to any and all who care to view the ads.

With businesses more frequently turning to “cloud” server providers to run business applications, it is no wonder that the IaaS and PaaS companies would want to make their services easier and more valuable to acquire than the next guy’s.  Aside from a groovy control panel and great networking and VM pricing, the added value from these providers is in the applications they are able to service.  More frequently, hosting service providers are marketing their solutions in the context of the applications customers run on the service (which makes sense, because the application’s what really matters).  Leveraging the brand value and recognition of popular commercial software products makes sense, as it improves overall visibility and increases the potential of the “right” kind of prospect engaging and becoming a customer.

The problem arises when these service providers sell hosting services for, or which support, applications they are not authorized or licensed to deliver, and this is where the argument comes full circle.  The hosting provider wants to host applications customers use, customers have licenses for those applications, but not a right to have them hosted.  The host deploys the application anyway, because that’s what the customer wants.  “What’s the risk?” they ask… “the customer has the software license”.

The risk is, unfortunately, greater for the service provider than for the customer.  Even if the customer has a license for the software product, that license may not actually be eligible to run on a hosted server.  “Businesses lease computer equipment all the time, and they can run the software on those systems” is the next argument generally offered by the service provider.  But, in the eyes of the software developer, there may be a big difference between leased equipment run in-house versus subscribed platform services deployed via a commercial hosting provider.  Even Microsoft recognizes the benefit and value of providing “mobility” of application licensing, and has specific licensing models to allow commercial hosts to deploy customer-owned licenses.  While many service providers understand and recognize the requirements to ensure that customer applications are properly licensed for hosted delivery, there are a great many who think the rules simply do not apply to them.  These folks are introducing a great deal of risk into their hosting businesses, even if they are not willing to recognize it.

When a customer runs their software in an unauthorized manner, they risk losing the rights and benefits associated with their software license.  When a commercial hosting company runs software on their servers that they have no right to install and run… they are potentially guilty of unauthorized software distribution and copyright theft.

Actions against facilitators of unauthorized content distribution – you can equate “software” with “content” – have received much press in past months, yet much of the discussion centers on music and video content (as in the Megaupload story).  Actions involving commercial software products tend to be somewhat less visible, probably due to reluctance by commercial developers to have what could be perceived as negative press flowing through social media venues.  It’s popular to protect music and videos, but hosting providers aren’t seeing the wisdom of preserving the integrity of a commercial software product license.  Instead, they’re relying on the customer to indemnify them (the customer has a license, remember?).   But the customer can’t protect the host; the host must protect the host – it’s the prudent business approach.

Infrastructure providers, platform providers and businesses operating as application hosting companies should pay close attention to the content living on their servers.  Taking a position that the customer has the right to do whatever they want with the system is not a viable position; the precedent has been set that the hosting provider is responsible for the content on their systems.  In the case of hosts offering service for small business applications like Microsoft Office and Intuit QuickBooks, for example, it is essential that a service model which conforms to and supports proper license usage be in place, and that any required authorizations are, too.

Software is just another form of content, and the cloud makes distribution of and access to content a lot easier, even when it shouldn’t be.

Make sense?

J

Posted on

Better QuickBooks Access, Management and Security – QuickBooks Licensing and Hosting Models

Whether hosted in-house or offsite, licensing models for hosting QuickBooks can be very confusing.

driving1-ANIMATIONThe demand for solutions to address user mobility, better collaboration and improved information security is increasing as connectivity improves and cloud services and threats evolve. Server-based computing models and application hosting are increasingly popular as businesses seek to embrace teleworking and telecommuting models for their entrenched applications and systems, creating a foundation for improved productivity and work/life balancing (or integration).  On the technical side, the benefits of centralizing applications and data include improved efficiency in managing, maintaining and securing systems. For many small businesses, this means centralizing the installation and maintenance of core business applications like Intuit QuickBooks Pro, Premier or Enterprise.

Whether it be offsite with a commercial hosting provider or on a co-located server somewhere, or an onsite installation on the in-house server, hosting Intuit QuickBooks licenses can be straightforward or complicated depending on what you are trying to do with them. Because QuickBooks was designed as a standalone single-user application, there are a number of challenges when it comes to preparing it for server-based use.  The primary issue is often simply understanding the QuickBooks licensing model, which is not particularly INTUITive (sorry).

Licensing hosted QuickBooks applications comes with two different sets of implementation issues: the technical implementation (the installation and setup) and the logical allocation of licenses to users (the licensing rules).

When it comes to the technical implementation, many an experienced engineer has beaten their head against the wall trying to get QuickBooks to work properly in a workspace or session-based system (e.g., terminal server), all because they expect the product to implement like a “normal” client/server application. While QuickBooks may use the Sybase database manager guts to handle multi-user access to QuickBooks data files (I think it is still Sybase), the architecture required to properly service a networked QuickBooks installation does not necessarily mimic what would be used with, for example, a .NET desktop client application with an MS SQL back-end.   First, the QuickBooks data files cannot be remote to the application, meaning that both the client and the database manager (which is actually working as an adjunct to the client) must exist on the local network; it will not work over a WAN connection, which is why so many folks get frustrated when they put their server “in the cloud” and attempt to connect from a local client using a VPN.  It just won’t work that way with QuickBooks; it all has to be on the local network – client, server, data… all of it.

It is notable that many businesses use Dropbox and other file sync solutions because they want to be able to get to their data from multiple locations, but the data they’re getting must be “local” to the apps that use it.  It doesn’t allow for simultaneous multi-user access, but it can be an effective way to share a file.  The caveat is that the file (at least in the case of a QuickBooks file, or Outlook PST file, etc.) should not actually be used from the sync folder.  Sync folder should contain copies of data files that users wish to sync or share with other devices.  But I digress…

With a server-based implementation of QuickBooks, technicians will install the QuickBooks desktop software on the server, and will determine whether or not that same machine will also handle the company data files.  The QuickBooks DB manager is part of the installation of QuickBooks, and the file system and drive where the QB files are to be managed must be recognized as a local drive on the server running the QBDB manager.  The overhead used by the database manager isn’t huge, but it can impact the performance of users on the server.  For this reason, some techs will decide to implement a separate file server to manage the QB data files, taking that load off the app server.

  • The QuickBooks software uses the database manager to “host” access to company files.  This simply means that a single server with the data on it is providing managed access to remote-desktop-sessionsQuickBooks application users.
  • When QuickBooks application software and data is installed and centrally managed on a server (instead of QuickBooks being installed on individual PCs), that means QuickBooks application is being “hosted” on that server.
  • When a 3rd party provider supplies the server, the QuickBooks installation, data storage, and your way of connecting to it all,  that provider is a “host” providing hosting services for your QuickBooks.

In a dedicated hosting environment, the data is often stored on the same server as the applications, whereas in a shared hosting environment, the data is often stored on central file servers which serve multiple customers. This is why, in some shared hosting situations, one bad data file can take down the database manager services for all the customers using that same file server.

Users open the QuickBooks application on the server instead of having the application installed on individual PCs.  The single server-based installation of the software is able to be used concurrently by all users logging in to that computer. With the database manager running, the file is essentially “hosted” on that machine, and the file may then be opened in multi-user mode.  OK so far.  The problem generally comes about when a second user on the same computer/server wants to open the same QB data file as the first user.

Because the QB database manager is looking at the license of the client application accessing the data file, it will recognize when two different users/sessions with the same license key attempt to open the company data file.  If that license key is a single-user key, then the database manager knows it should allow only 1 concurrent user in the file.  QuickBooks doesn’t get installed for each user on a computer or server; it is installed one time on the machine and each user on that machine runs from that single shared installation. Any particular version of the QuickBooks application may be installed only once on a single computer, but it is possible to install multiple editions, year versions, and “flavors” of QuickBooks on a single machine (cannot be more than one installation of each unique product). There will be more than a few annoyances when running a variety of QBs on the same computer, but it is technically possible.

In order to allow multiple users to simultaneously access the same data file from a central installation of QuickBooks, the license key installed on the computer must be a multi-user key.  QuickBooks Pro, for example, can be keyed to 3 concurrent users, meaning that the license will allow up to 3 users with that same license key to simultaneously access the same company file.  Technically (but not lawfully) this installation of QuickBooks on the machine could allow a virtually unlimited number of users to launch the QuickBooks application simultaneously, limited only by machine resources.  This is where the logical allocation of licensing comes in.. the rule of licensing QuickBooks.

The logical allocation of unique licenses for each QuickBooks user is a little easier to understand than the technical implementation.  The rule is simply that each user of QuickBooks is required to have a valid registered/activated license. That valid license is a license purchased and activated for that business.

total-businessMaking QuickBooks desktop editions more useful by adding secure remote access and centralized management makes a lot of sense.  For companies who rely on the functionality and features of the desktop products (QuickBooks Pro, Premier and Enterprise), a hosted approach is the only way to really address mobility and multi-location requirements.  Remember that hosting doesn’t necessarily mean offsite, although that could make sense for the business, too.

Centrally-managing QuickBooks applications and data creates greater efficiency and improves overall IT management capability for the business.  At the same time, a centralized model introduces a better strategy for mobilizing the workforce and connecting remote users and offices. The struggles of understanding and implementing proper QuickBooks licensing begin to seem very small when compared to the benefits of deploying a centralized system that’s easier to access, manage and secure.

Make sense?

J

Posted on

Intuit QuickBooks 2014: Another Move Towards Unification of Features and Software as Service

Intuit QuickBooks 2014: Another Move Towards Unification of Features and Software as Service

qb2014Intuit QuickBooks is the recognized standard for small business accounting, and the introduction of the QuickBooks Online Edition was a testament to Intuit’s understanding that users are looking for SaaS solutions as well as traditional desktop products.  While it may seem that the entire market is moving to online applications and everything-as-a-service, the Intuit desktop products remain the leading business computerized accounting tools.  Intuit does seem to recognize that many things can be done better with a “software-as-service” model , and that the number of businesses seeking purely web-based solutions is growing, and this is evidenced by the fact that many features and presentation elements in the Online edition are making it into the desktop editions.  Creating consistency throughout the product line makes sense for users, and leveraging the benefits of shared service makes sense for Intuit.

In a previous blog article entitled Changing How We See Software: QuickBooks 2013 interface frustrates power users, I had suggested that many of the interface changes introduced with the 2013 QuickBooks desktop editions were a step towards unification of interfaces (to the degree possible) between desktop and Online editions.  Additionally, integrations with various connected services, Intuit payroll and payment solutions, and other online service elements clearly demonstrate that certain functionality and service offerings will be provided consistently through either solution set.  Another new “unified” feature announced for QuickBooks desktop is the Income Tracker, a feature that originated with the QB Online edition.

The Income Tracker provides you with a fast way to see the status of your unbilled and unpaid transactions, and provides you with features to improve billing/collections as well as perform a number of batch procedures… This feature was first developed in QuickBooks Online, and this year Intuit has brought it into QuickBooks Desktop

http://www.sleeter.com/blog/2013/09/quickbooks-2014-income-tracker/

The introduction of a purely subscription licensing model for the desktop products is yet another move towards enabling the pay-as-you-go subscription model for purchasing software.  Businesses are able to purchase “plus” subscriptions, which provide not only perpetual most current version software but also deliver support for the life of the subscription.  This is another change from the more traditional boxed software approach, where the product was a one-time purchase and came with short-term or limited support.

It seems that many of the changes introduced with 2014 indicate that online service and subscription pricing models will continue to introduce themselves into the QuickBooks desktop products, and users who change from one solution to another in the product family will find more familiarity and consistency in the attached Intuit services they also use.

Many independent software vendors and developers of business applications are recognizing the value of subscription service models and the benefits of leveraging web-based applications and shared services within their solutions.  For software companies, turning a one-time sale into a recurring revenue stream is highly desirable.  From a development perspective, one project could service the entire product line, rather than efforts being divided among multiple products.  From an operational perspective, infrastructure and personnel are able to centrally service the functional requirement, providing the same benefits of shared service that users of SaaS solutions experience (it may simply be internal rather than external customers being served).

The point of the discussion is that, while QuickBooks desktop editions may not be going away any time soon, there is wisdom (and business necessity) which is likely to drive even more subscription model SaaS inclusions in those products that were once purely and firmly planted on the desktop.  Even good old QuickBooks must change, and for the most part, users are seeing benefit in those changes.

Make Sense?

J