Bromcom-PR Posted February 26, 2014 Author Posted February 26, 2014 Sorry, that's £300,000 for a 300 pupil primary?! Seriously? Just on admin side? Really? Matt40, Key discussion subject of this thread and the test / the report you have asked from. Bromcom-PR that you received is about Cloud, SaaS and SoSaaS. The tests were designed to demonstrate the impact of client-server application's inability to share computing resources (specifically executable code and working RAM storage), falling outside NIST Cloud definition and how this manifests itself massively in terms of RAM usage. Performance or any other aspects aren't within the subject matter. Happy to discuss performance and any other aspects but that should be under a new thread. We do not intend to provide blow by blow response to you. We will leave to other forum members to comment, at least first instant. However you have misread (or our press release isn't clear enough) hence we need to correct a gross misquote in your repose in above. "£300,000 for a 300 pupil primary " - £300,000 refers to LA-wide solution with 300 primary schools!!!
matt40k Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 Matt40 No comment test / the report you have asked from. I've asked for unbiased test. I think @GREED will agree this isn't the case. However you have misread (or our press release isn't clear enough) hence we need to correct a gross misquote in your repose in above. "£300,000 for a 300 pupil primary " - £300,000 refers to LA-wide solution with 300 primary schools!!! I apologies, I stand correct. I was eager to get try out my new graphic card so I was skim reading. However I still thing this is an over estimate. SaaS and SoSaaS First post yes, then Phil sent us waaay off topic and it's barely stayed neutral, pwainewright post was probably the only neutral posts we've had!! You've basically turned it into a marketing post! You've not since posted anything factual since the first post other then sales nonsense, I am quite frankly surprised the mods have deleted\locked this thread!! If you really want to public hard facts that WILL get Bromcom into more school. Don't bother with this rubbish figures and "tests". Get Bromcom on the G-Cloud CloudStore then when LAs\Schools get the large Capita bill, they can, for themselves, look at what other schools are actually paying. PS: Free tip, you've completely missed my point about your security - I've publicly stated your shared resources COULD be insecure and leaking data. If I did this with SIMS, I'd have @PhilNeal banging on about pen testing for the next 4 posts and a phone call asking if I have found any. Anyway I've wasted enough time of my personal arguing with you about "SaaS and SoSaaS", especially when we all agreed SaaS is better then SoSaaS :S All the best
GREED Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Well, let me see if I can add anything here. Firstly, this whole thread is not unbiased, while treading carefully not to blatantly break the rules there has been the underlying message that Bromcom is better than SIMS in a hosted environment. For this thread to have really been worth much it would have been better to have compared two products where there is not a vested interest (Say SIMS and Progresso (when it is working ), or SIMS and Aspen MIS . In fact I think the only reason Mods have let this fly is it encompasses some very interesting fact and stimulus for discussion. Next, yes SaaS should always be 'better' than client/server in terms of performance for the masses. Lets not argue the toss as to what is meant by 'better'. If SaaS applications are not then they have not been built particularly well. I'm still unconvinced by the difference between SaaS and 'SoSaaS' and blurring that with Cloud too, but for the moment lets leave that there too. I'm not saying they are equal I just don't think they exist separately under definition. I have to agree with @matt40k this test was titled at 'Efficiency of Server Utilization' but then focuses simply on memory usage, and I'd be interested to know how this memory usage was checked (not just firing up system manager I hope). Regardless, memory is only one aspect of server efficiency, and I would argue, keeping in mind how cheap memory is these days compared to other requirement, the least important. It is/was also the most obvious that was going to be a winner. @matt40k you lost me on your calculations, I'm not questioning but I need walking through and understanding the point you are making. I agree with @Bromcom_PR you have taken this figure wrong, I read this as £300k for all primary schools, so £1k per school. Not bad. Regardless, there is the argument that with this '50-fold' saving then should Bromcom be proportionally cheaper than SIMS? I'm not suggesting 50 fold as there are different overheads associated with a different style of technology, but significantly cheaper none the less. I'm not commenting further as I really don't know typical prices. My real question though is where is the raw data for comparison, I'd like to know exactly how the test was run, what were the results, under what conditions, what controls were put into place, how often was this test run over a period of time... For this to be as scientific as it is being made out to be I would want to know these things from an objective standpoint. I am forced to agree again with @matt40k (what is wrong with the world!), this being used as sales banter, hard-lined 'evidence' to thrust onto LAs and the likes is not evidence at all. Firstly, this should be run independently of and MIS supplier to ensure fair play. By reputable individuals to produce results, those result able to be used by anyone as evidence to their claims. I'd like to have seen much larger conclusions made on the document too, not a small graphic with a single figure of memory use. This is not evidence nor scientific. I would argue too that such a test, for it to be really useful, would be to routinely test against all major suppliers, and in particular other web based solutions, there are a fair number out there now! As well, is this really sales banter, would an LA really make a huge decision like this based on the fact that one uses less memory than the other? There is no question Bromcom MIS will be more efficient overall that SIMS (all 300 odd installations), don't really think that needed mentioning or 6 pages of posts to work out. SIMS 8 in 3 years will be interesting then... I did consider including a bench test in the MIS Challenge (which is nearly finished now BTW), perhaps if there were enough interested parties I'll consider it for the summer... I'd like to caveat this before I get snotty emails or phone calls; you all know me well enough on here to know I always challenge SIMS and @PhilNeal and while I have no great love or allegiance personally for Capita (Just look at some of my past posts!) I do respect them and their achievements professionally, as much as I do anyone else, and will always put forward an objective opinion on their product and anyone else's. Perhaps I should do a full PC Pro style review of all MISs later in year! Edited February 27, 2014 by GREED
matt40k Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 I agree my initial post ripping into the costs was a bit hastily, however I still question the figures. I just don't want people thinking that they save tons then when you drill down to it, the cost savings isn't that much. The only person who wins then is the consultant you got in and you know my feels about THOSE consultants that we don't speak of! If you quote figures, then it needs to be hard facts that are iron clad. Thus my comment about actually making the final cost public as that is the bottom line and that's all that matters. I am forced to agree again with @matt40k (what is wrong with the world!) I think I might get a lottery ticket now
Bromcom-PR Posted February 27, 2014 Author Posted February 27, 2014 Could I have a copy?! Hi Phil, When we offered the Tests and Report on this form, we did not have suppliers in mind. We also assumed all knew this was not about Company A against Company B but comparison of two different technologies - client server vs web application in hosted/cloud environment and specifically about RAM Storage and sharing exe etc... We also expected grown up discussions on this very serious subject. Press release link was made available to satisfy calls to have the Test and Report public. It is not even new - dated 2012 and it wasn't put on the form to seek a sales pitch. We welcome to have Capita's (and any other supplier) own review and assessment of our Report and we trust that we will have grown up and objective feedback. We hope this will add value and move forward the discussions. Please PM us to deal with the procedure (NDA etc..) and arrange for you to have a copy.
matt40k Posted February 27, 2014 Posted February 27, 2014 Surely it wouldn't be professional for @PhilNeal to publicly post regarding this? I mean I'm not sure how he can provide objective feedback when your asking him to sign a NDA? When myself and Graham didn't? Bizarre. Also, I know keep banging on about it like a broken record, but could you please post publicly about your security auditing you have in place specially regarding your cloud application, this is now the 3rd time I've publicly asked. Maybe it's just me being young but surely a cloud application that shares resources between users, I personally, would kinda think it would be important to be externally audited by a professional security firm to confirm it is actually secure and doesn't have lot of security holes that could let some anonymous hacker access the sensitive data. Just saying, if we're talking about SaaS vs SoSaaS vs Locally hosted - security should be high on the list, like no1. Anyway just my 2p, and what do I know anyway.
pwainewright Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 First post yes, then Phil sent us waaay off topic and it's barely stayed neutral, pwainewright post was probably the only neutral posts we've had!! You've basically turned it into a marketing post! You've not since posted anything factual since the first post other then sales nonsense, I am quite frankly surprised the mods have deleted\locked this thread!! Thanks @matt40k for the kind words but I do have to declare in interest in that @Bromcom-PR did originally approach me to write a white paper for them - however while I may sell my writing skills, my opinions are my own! Anyhow I have now posted a very thorough article on diginomica setting out my conclusions on this whole SoSaaS vs cloud SaaS argument as it relates to the NIST definition of cloud, which I hope @GREED will find persuasive on the differences - interested in your feedback. In @Bromcom-PR's defence, I think it's legitimate to quote the 50-fold RAM comparison as an illustration of the resource wastage that occurs when you virtualize an entire school's Windows desktops in order to deliver an antique client-server app from a datacentre instead of moving to a browser-based alternative. But I do agree with @matt40k that there are many other parameters you have to take into account when evaluating the relative value-for-money of different solutions - including a risk assessment of the security factors. Generally speaking, however, the evidence from the wider market seems to be that the entire pay-as-you-go cost of adopting a properly architected, NIST-compliant cloud application will often exceed just the running costs of a conventional client-server system for which you also have to pay a substantial upfront capital expense. The cost differences are often so startling as to seem unbelievable but it's because the resource pooling hoovers up an enormous amount of otherwise idle capacity. In addition, the cloud application will have more frequent, non-disruptive upgrades, allowing an on-the-ball vendor to rapidly add support for new requirements such as tracking Pupil Premium outcomes. Not talking about any specific schools MIS here as I'm not familiar with the detail of any of the products but speaking from the perspective of someone who's studied business adoption of SaaS and cloud for many years.
Bromcom-PR Posted February 28, 2014 Author Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) Also, I know keep banging on about it like a broken record, but could you please post publicly about your security auditing you have in place specially regarding your cloud application, this is now the 3rd time I've publicly asked. Maybe it's just me being young but surely a cloud application that shares resources between users, I personally, would kinda think it would be important to be externally audited by a professional security firm to confirm it is actually secure and doesn't have lot of security holes that could let some anonymous hacker access the sensitive data. Just saying, if we're talking about SaaS vs SoSaaS vs Locally hosted - security should be high on the list, like no1. Anyway just my 2p, and what do I know anyway. Of course security is of vital importance. The reason why we are declining to respond to questions for specific technical specification relating to Bromcom Cloud MIS is simple: This thread is not about specific MIS from Bromcom or Company X. It is about two different architecture - legacy (@pwainewright calls "antique") client-server vs web application and how they behave in cloud environment. It is clear how the "Test & Report document" and the press releases have come about on this thread. Bromcom never had intention to circulate Test and Report but it did because forum members asked for it. Bromcom did not want to publish about - but it did (in press release format) because forum members asked for it. We have not sought using this thread for sales pitch. Yet we are accused so. So we can't win with some! Misreading our press release, analysing wrongly with factor of 300, not revisiting to correct your figures in your analysis and then saying "However I still thing this is an over estimate." - this is hardly helpful for constructive discussions. Edited February 28, 2014 by elsiegee40 typos and expanding the last paragraph
matt40k Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 Just thinking about this, would this be better in the "Cloud services" area rather then "MIS Systems" just so it is clear this isn't about MIS systems directly but different types of "Cloud". Just thinking a clean "break" might help future discussion so we don't end up keep going back to same discussion of comparing apples and pears. Perhaps if everyone agrees a nice, lovely mod would move this topic? Unfortunately in the realms of MIS systems I fear this isn't a good place to discuss - the fact of the matter is final bill cost is the bottom line. Prime example, Norfolk primary requirement was a cloud MIS system, they picked SIMS. Much as it disgust me that such a thing happened, SIMS is clearly not designed for the cloud, I have to admire Capita for pulling it off.
pwainewright Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 the fact of the matter is final bill cost is the bottom line. Prime example, Norfolk primary requirement was a cloud MIS system, they picked SIMS. Given everything we have discussed in this thread, it astonishes me that cloud-native SaaS vendors allow themselves to be undercut by client-server SaaS competitors. Hopefully initiative like the G-Cloud CloudStore will bring more transparency to pricing matters and help ensure the public sector doesn't continue to pay over the odds for up-to-date computing resources.
GREED Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 Given everything we have discussed in this thread, it astonishes me that cloud-native SaaS vendors allow themselves to be undercut by client-server SaaS competitors. Hopefully initiative like the G-Cloud CloudStore will bring more transparency to pricing matters and help ensure the public sector doesn't continue to pay over the odds for up-to-date computing resources. But this is assuming that the decision is based on cost alone? Or even just because it is cloud? Your argument doesn't take into account anything about the operation or functionality of the software. The cloud offering might be £1 but if it is a rubbish application then it won't be chosen. I might suspect that Norfolk chose SIMS because it is proven to be a functional solution and then got a decent price for it. Cannot believe I would say this, me, but SIMS is a capable solution if old... Why else does it have 18000 odd schools? One might question that the functionality is lacking in other solutions, or something else is missing, otherwise your argument would hold up.
matt40k Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 I know it's odd isn't it @pwainewright, that in a sector where anyone can submit a FOI and get the actual price paid, suppliers become very crypt when talking about prices. I know even looking at about hundreds of schools MIS costs, I can't figure out how the supplier came to that price. For me, a really good example of how "cloud" could save money is this this article - CatN | Migrating the Department for Transport website to WordPress - ok it's bias, they've picked the worse offender for starters, but if the DfT phoned them up, they could actually get that solution for that that price. Clear, open pricing should be the way forward. How dirty do you feel @GREED?
GREED Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 How dirty do you feel @GREED? Like a digital pig in virtual cloudy $#!/
Bromcom-PR Posted March 1, 2014 Author Posted March 1, 2014 (edited) Also, I know keep banging on about it like a broken record, but could you please post publicly about your security auditing you have in place specially regarding your cloud application, this is now the 3rd time I've publicly asked. Maybe it's just me being young but surely a cloud application that shares resources between users, I personally, would kinda think it would be important to be externally audited by a professional security firm to confirm it is actually secure and doesn't have lot of security holes that could let some anonymous hacker access the sensitive data. Just saying, if we're talking about SaaS vs SoSaaS vs Locally hosted - security should be high on the list, like no1. Anyway just my 2p, and what do I know anyway. Thank you @matt40k reminding me about security auditing question. I thought it is obvious why we haven't been providing response to this or specific technical specification of Bromcom Cloud MIS. This is because this thread it is not about product x or company y. From the outset we started this thread to discuss architectural characteristics, behaviour and suitability of client-server MIS @pwainewright calls it antique - we call it more politely legacy software) vs web based MIS. There are number of MIS suppliers and products that fall under these two type of architectures and hence the arguments apply to all. We have been pleased to be able persuade cloud experts @pwainewright to participate in this thread for 'independent' views and as of today this thread has attracted over 2.5k visits within space of 10 days. I trust it has enlighten many and now we understand why client-server is scalability is severely curtailed by its own characteristics. Hence why it is not economical and advisable to deployment approach. It is not because software has been written badly but because programming tools used in developing client-server applications and executable codes are simply are not 'cloud aware'. If you haven’t yet visited @pwainewright ’s article – it is worth doing so NIST and the cloudwashing of client-server SaaS When we started the thread, we did not have in mind to release the Report on our Tests or the related press release - but because they were requested by the forum members we obliged. I do not think it is then to accuse Bromcom making a sales pitch. In this respect we responded to what has been asked by @matt40k, @GREED and @PhilNeal - no more. What has been sad is that despite you analysis was out by factor of 300, rather than re-visiting and correcting your figures, you suffice to say "I still thing (sic) this is an over estimate". I am not sure how this sits within the premise and viewed by the forum that we agreed to share the Report on the basis of you providing balanced/objective feedback. We need to keep this in mind in similar circumstances in future. Clearly other topics appear flowing from the most recent postings on this thread and we should branch off so to keep this thread for the purpose it set out. Therefore probably this will conclude our posting on this thread and thanks to all participating and visiting. Edited March 1, 2014 by Bromcom-PR
GREED Posted March 1, 2014 Posted March 1, 2014 Lets not loose focus here, this has been a very interesting topic with lots of view put forward. That is key, they are opinions. @matt40k has an opinion (doesn't he always!) which has been countered by yourself @Bromcom-PR there is no need to become frustrated because some readers have not come to the same conclusions you wanted. If that were fair, I would have beaten @matt40k with is own keyboard by now! I would say this has walked a fine line on advertising, you started this thread with the aim of showing how Bromcom MIS is more efficient and so more cost effective particularly in LA situations. I would say you have done this well by just staying on the right side of the line. Where you crossed that line was with the now-deleted post where you invited people to call the sales line. I think we can mostly put this thread to bed now, all of us have said our piece and it is clear there is still room for debate without resolution.
matt40k Posted March 2, 2014 Posted March 2, 2014 Mate just emailed me @GREED, recommended I started selling "I survived Matt40k" t-shirts lol! @vikpaw or someone could you move this topic to "Cloud Services" so it's clear this isn't about "MIS systems" and isn't a sales pitch. 1
GREED Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I'm going to get one in time for Edugeek Conference this year. Serious.
vikpaw Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Mate just emailed me @GREED, recommended I started selling "I survived Matt40k" t-shirts lol! @vikpaw or someone could you move this topic to "Cloud Services" so it's clear this isn't about "MIS systems" and isn't a sales pitch. Thread has been moved. Yes the mods have been watching, and some of the material has been borderline. It's an interesting discussion and so long as everyone behaves and keeps the talk technical and general where possible then it's very useful. 1
matt40k Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Thanks @vikpaw. @GREED - HAHA!! You'll be one of very few who could I could honestly say has earnt it and has yet to lose the right.
vikpaw Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) 'I survived Matt40K' It's almost like 'I survived Mount xyz, 40k ft!' and boy is it like an epic climb to change your opinion I like it You should get @SYSMAN_MK to design a Tee. Edited March 3, 2014 by vikpaw
matt40k Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Hahaha, @Schoolcomms climbed mount 40k pretty easily. I think sharing core beliefs help. Capita keeps climbing it only to fail flat on their face moments later. I should do a some like the food hygiene ratings so at least companies would have something to show for the pain I inflict
GREED Posted March 21, 2014 Posted March 21, 2014 I'm bumping this thread and would like to ask @bromcom_PR & @pwainewright to rejoin and push the discussion on the concepts of Cloud vs not cloud and SaaS vs SoSaaS. I'm not saying I endorse SoSaaS quite yet but that is another story. I spoke with @Bromcom_PR last night and while I still feel the approach needs refinement, the topic started and the purpose are still an interesting topic to flesh out, I do agree with that. So if we can keep from mentioning specific product names or obvious features, can we restart? I'm all for being proved wrong!!
matt40k Posted March 21, 2014 Posted March 21, 2014 I think the first post was excellent, posting in MIS section was perhaps not correct, it was let down by the first reply also that sent this really off topic. I agree with the core statement, non-cloud products don't work well in the cloud and they need to be completely re-written. Does anyone disagree? However we must except the bottom line is to decrease the total cost of ownership. This is why people are moving to the cloud. Period. How we prove that is difficult - especially in the context we find ourselves.
pwainewright Posted March 21, 2014 Posted March 21, 2014 @GREED I'm happy to continue the discussion and I'm going to start off by disagreeing with @matt40k when he says: the bottom line is to decrease the total cost of ownership. This is why people are moving to the cloud. Period. Really if that's the only reason you're doing it then you're missing a lot of the value. In the business world we're seeing that people are moving to the cloud primarily for reasons like: - they can get up-to-date functionality without a long wait to plan a physical implementation of new technology - the functionality stays fresh because of frequent updates - it keeps pace with new forms of interaction, eg mobile, Twitter, other cloud services, etc - you can do smaller implementation projects and add extra functions incrementally without being locked into a single proprietary supplier (this is a big part of why the Government Digital Service is pushing cloud first) It's probably also true that it's costing less, feature-for-feature, than older technology, but you probably end up spending the same because you get more value. In fact we're starting to see terms like 'total lifetime value' being used rather than 'total cost of ownership'. The TCO comparison assumes you have two equivalent systems and that each has a set purchase cost and running cost. What it doesn't take into account is the extra cost of not being able to stay up-to-date with a less flexible system. - 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now