Replies (15)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Struth, words like Nirvana.. What could possibly go wrong.
Loose all your data? Privacy? Security? Resillience? Data ownership? Tie ins to specific vendors? Subscription model? Uncontrolled costs? Migration in (and out)? Switching vendors?
One person's Nirvana is another person's purgatory.
You cannot simply switch to "The Cloud" without careful consideration of the implications.
Why is a vendor pushing that particular model. A benevolent vendor? Do you believe in fairies too?
Tremendous stuff - once the Cloud providers' storage locations and contracts are sorted out vis-a-vis the constraints of the GDPR.
The combination of MTD and the advent of GDPR within the same timeframe
o MTD because its been thought about but not thought through.
o GDPR because its been thought through [thus far] only by very few lawyers and not at all by data-flow architects
is beyond a nightmare of confusion and cost.
I see nothing in Xero regarding the consents for storage, processing, portability to name a few.
I think the rush to the Cloud as mooted is both naive and dangerous.
"Evans hinges this background talk on Xero’s design-led approach to its software and how the cloud doesn’t require software to be installed".
...and this change in working practices has resulted in it taking much longer for users, clients and accountants, to get through the basic processing work these last couple of years we have been using cloud based software.
We are still running in tandem software on our in-house server and software in the cloud. The differences in the time taken to process transactions is noticeable.
We find we are spending extra hours on every assignment that involves remote software (and this is in Manchester with fast broadband speeds available for uploading and downloading of data).
The truth is that currently when clients and their accountants are using cloud based software they are finding the "screen refresh" time is lengthy and (tbh) just "tedious".
The transaction response times from the cloud based software are noticeably slower when you have just finished working on a job which involves posting transactions to a program installed on your own hard-drive, (desktop or laptop).
Do others find this? Please just say.
One of the main reasons cloudy stuff runs slowly is that it's out of your control and in the control of goodness knows whom. As any cloud-based application will be running at a *much* larger scale, all sorts of scalability issues will be encountered.
A lot of the smaller applications which run on a PC or a small company server simply cannot scale to the application sizes encountered in cloud computing. Thus you need all sorts of specialists to untangle the mess and apply the performance enhancements required. This isn't cheap as it's like having a team of specialist accountants running an investigation and audit. Suddenly you're needing specialist enterprise/solution architects, communications and security specialists, web developers, application developers, testing teams, and a bevy of project managers to put it all together. Loadsamoney.
Then there's the simple issue of many customers sharing the same server stacks: a failure of which will bring down everyone. If you're lucky this will often this can be peak time delays -- HMRC for example. If you're unlucky you could loose the lot.
Somehow all of this gets forgotten in the rush to proclaim the Cloud as The Promised Land.
When done properly, cloud applications are superb. Poorly implemented they're an utter disaster.
What's not mentioned is that Cloud computing is pretty much analogous to the old Mainframe computer model. You're centralising all your data and application development. What goes around, spins around, etc.
The luddites are out in force today LOL ;-0
You're being a little unfair, carnmores. I too find that computers tend to be very slow. In fact, even pen and ink is too much of a fad for me. I think that the ancient Egyptian system worked very well, so I use a reed brush and papyrus to record my clients' transactions! :)
Seriously, dogsbreath, ggilmour51 and P2, are you really so stuck in 20th century thinking? Sure, if you or your client have VERY slow internet access, then cloud accounting may occasionally be problematic, but you don't need your broadband to be very fast. I've run QBO on a tablet tethered to my mobile phone's data connection at a busy conference (when the data speed was at a crawl) and it worked fine. The advantages of the cloud so overwhelmingly outweigh any benefits of desktop software that I could not imagine going back.
Dogsbreath, you say that building cloud computing systems to scale costs "Loadsamoney" - that's true, but guess what? The major players like Intuit and Xero have spent hundreds of millions developing their platforms so you don't have to spend much at all. The advantage of the cloud is that ALL of the infrastructure is located on the provider's servers, so the cost to the user is limited to buying the cheapest computer that can run a web browser and then just paying the software license fee. You don't need to run an office server and there are no ongoing IT maintenance costs, as there is almost nothing on your premises to go wrong. If your Chromebook gets a bug, just run a factory reset on the hardware and it's good as new. No need to call an engineer. Why do you think you need a "bevy of project managers"?
P2 says that "transaction response times from the cloud based software are noticeably slower" than desktop. Not in my experience. The cloud offers so many solutions that dramatically increase the speed of data entry (eg automatic bank feeds and receipt processing software) that I look back at my days using desktop software and heave a huge sigh of relief that I don't need to do that any more.
I'm presenting a panel at QuickBooks Connect in London on March 6th and 7th. Come along and hear from your colleagues how the majority of the profession are migrating to the cloud and the benefits they obtain.
Throughout history computer architectures have drifted between a centralised model and the client-side model. Cloud computing is, in essence, a shift back to centralised computing.
The beauty of this model is the centre's managed by people who are experts in this. Professional administrators, architects and developers.
All good.
Now, step away from flogging your latest wares and get into what the end-client needs. End-clients need software solutions that work - everything that you've said.
You, as a vendor, want the client locked in as tightly as possible paying a "subscription" every month on pain of deletion. This is completely at odds with end-clients who do not want is to be permanently tied into a specific vendor, i.e. a monopoly supplier. If they are, then they're tied to whatever that vendor supplies; they've little chance in changing or staying on an old version that "works" for their business.
For example, the monopoly supplier changes their terms of use to say all your data are ours. Or just massively hikes up their prices (they're a monopoly now, so have all the power in the relationship). What can the end-client do? They're utterly stuffed. Take it or face a massive effort to leave it.
Similarly what when the aggregated data becomes very interesting to some seriously good hackers: you're stuffed and reliant on that supplier having met their duty of care. Meet collateral damage.
I think Cloud Computing is great. To be able to configure an environment in minutes -- not weeks -- is amazing. To stand up a test stack temporarily for next to no cost is truly amazing. But you must have people who know what they're doing, you know, professionals. These people aren't cheap and are in great demand.
Accountants are famous for knowing the cost of everything. There's a massive value in Cloud Computing; but it's got to be carefully managed and takes a big change in the mindset of the end-client.
You, as a vendor, want the client locked in as tightly as possible paying a "subscription" every month on pain of deletion. This is completely at odds with end-clients who do not want is to be permanently tied into a specific vendor, i.e. a monopoly supplier.
I'm not a vendor. I'm an accountant in practice, so I have no vested interest in what systems you use. I'm simply giving you my opinion on the benefits of the cloud. Some desktop software requires an annual licence to continue its use, so those are not that different to cloud licensing. Some desktop software can be used indefinitely for a one-off purchase cost and you are right that the cloud pricing model is different. However, many cloud products will allow you to cease payment and continue access for free on a read-only basis. If you want a desktop copy, you can download all of the relevant reports as Excel files.
Similarly what when the aggregated data becomes very interesting to some seriously good hackers: you're stuffed and reliant on that supplier having met their duty of care.
I agree with you; you need to do your due diligence and pick a vendor that you can trust. But where, I'm guessing, that our opinions differ is that you perhaps believe that you can take better care of your data than a reliable software supplier can. Whilst the lure of hacking thousands of data files at once via a single cloud server may be more attractive, I strongly believe that the major cloud providers have security systems that are orders of magnitude better than my own. I know accountants whose servers have been hacked or whose laptops have been stolen but I do not know of a single cloud accounting provider of note that has had its servers hacked. The hacking reports one reads about tend to be for free, personal products such as email, rather than commercial (i.e. paid), professional products.
I think Cloud Computing is great...... But you must have people who know what they're doing, you know, professionals. These people aren't cheap and are in great demand.
This is where I must disagree with you (if I've understood you correctly). Once you've picked a cloud provider that you can trust, you don't need to spend a penny on hiring the professional software experts. That's the whole point of cloud. With desktop software, you need to install it on your PC or a local server, which requires a certain level of expertise (either your own or you pay to hire someone) and you then need to keep it maintained, updated, backed-up, etc. You don't need to do any of that for cloud software. You just open up a web browser on any computer and log in. You don't need any experts to help you, as none of the software (beyond a simple web browser) is installed on your hardware.
I'm a techie that builds this stuff and I have had to go through the "paradigm shift" (yuck) that the Cloud computing architectural change has brought.
We're looking at two ends of the spectrum here; you're looking at general purpose applications, I'm looking at bespoke developments.
My biggest concern is security. You have to take it on trust that the cloud vendors do what they say they do, because you no longer control where your data is and who can get to it. If you have secret data -- e.g. PCI card numbers -- then you must build the appropriate security into the systems assuming that everyone can look at your data.
The architectural changes are also huge. The database tier is provided by the vendors (e.g. Amazon's RDS) and this is resilient out of the box, but your application will need to be written to cater for this - it's no longer a simple connection to a single database running on the same box.
Anyway, I spend a lot of my time integrating with other vendors who have real problems with scaling. There is a large amount of learning how to properly develop to exploit all the cloud has to offer.
I have a deep dislike for marketing gimps who give the alternative truths to the Cloud, painting it with the rosiest of tinted spectacles -- no, I'm not accusing you of this!
Managers and accountants need to appreciate that costs will change. You can't buy the asset and have a fixed cost. Cloud computing is uncharted waters when it comes to costs -- you just don't know what the bills will be as there's so many variables: network bandwidth, virtual server types, CPU performance, storage, memory, etc., etc. Obviously this is offset by not needing "men in white coats" to look after your kit, there's no power bills, maintenance, etc.
But you will get big bills. And you will still need specialist developers, architects, security specialists, network people, etc. Little boutique development consultancies are good places to seek out people with those skills.
The future's bright. For developers:-)
I'm a techie that builds this stuff and I have had to go through the "paradigm shift" (yuck) that the Cloud computing architectural change has brought......
Managers and accountants need to appreciate that costs will change. You can't buy the asset and have a fixed cost. Cloud computing is uncharted waters when it comes to costs -- you just don't know what the bills will be as there's so many variables: network bandwidth, virtual server types, CPU performance, storage, memory, etc., etc. Obviously this is offset by not needing "men in white coats" to look after your kit, there's no power bills, maintenance, etc.
But you will get big bills. And you will still need specialist developers, architects, security specialists, network people, etc. Little boutique development consultancies are good places to seek out people with those skills.
accountingWEB is designed for accountants, not developers, so it seems reasonable to me that the responses on here should be focused on the needs of the former group, not the latter. If I understand you correctly, dogsbreath, you are saying that the cloud has created new problems for developers. I'm sure that's true, but I don't care and nor, would I guess, do the overwhelming majority of readers on here.
As an accountant, all I need to know (in regard to the cost and network issues you raise) is what will it cost me to buy a licence for my chosen cloud product(s). Contrary to your view, this is an easy question to answer as it is a fixed monthly cost. I wholly disagree with your assertion that there are "big bills" from "specialist developers, architects, security specialists, network people, etc.". NO - there won't be for the accountant using the cloud product. That's the whole point. Those problems are yours (as a developer) to contend with and, once you have solved them, you will market a product with a fixed price for us accountants to consider purchasing. When I buy a car, i don't care about how emissions regulations have made it harder and more expensive for auto manufacturers to develop new models. I simply look at the cars that are in the marketplace and consider their features and costs.
Most of us won't need bespoke developments, as the cloud has enabled a huge ecosystem of supporting apps that provide thousands of narrow-focus add-ons that would cover the needs of most companies. Sure, there will be some businesses that still need bespoke features that cannot be provided by existing add-ons, but they are in a very small minority that won't impact the rest of us. I don't dismiss BMW as a provider of my car just because my neighbour needs a tractor.
I'm talking to the target audience; accountants. My warning is simply that the Cloud is most definitely not the panacea it's often portrayed as being. The reason that large companies such as Microsoft like the cloud is because it locks customers in to a subscription model from which it's hard to extricate themselves.
Buying off-the-shelf, or rather, out of the cloud solutions, particularly from the medium and smaller vendors, needs scrutiny. These people own your data and it may be hard to get it back in the format you need to move to another vendor later.
Most companies need some kind of system to run their business. The most cost-effective is often COTS - commercial off-the-shelf systems. If running in the cloud there are many new caveats to emptor.
And, of course, if choosing developers for a bespoke cloud solution, be careful that they have the experience behind the scenes. There's many a pig in pretty lipstick. What they're selling you now may well be impacted by other customers of theirs as it could well be a shared environment. Or they may well update it in ways that doesn't suit you - just look at the mess that is LinkedIn.
Cloud is good. Cloud really is the future. But see the reality as well as the hype.
Sure, if one is buying a bespoke system, one needs to take great care that the vendor has the experience and ability to maintain what they provide, but that remains true whether it is in the cloud or not. For the overwhelming majority of users, the cloud is the obvious and (with MTD on the horizon) necessary platform. There are just as many issues to be wary of from an off-the-shelf, installed system as there are in the cloud, so COTS are not likely to be the most cost-effective any more. As for extracting data from a cloud provider with whom you have fallen out of love, there are ways of doing it and companies that can manage the process for you at reasonable prices. The same was true for a long time with desktop software. Cloud is the future and MTD will make it compulsory. We need to embrace it and explain the pitfalls to avoid, not scare new users away so that they remain forever in 20th century thinking.
you had me going for a minute. I am in Spain for a few days and been updating QBO for a few clients while here all very simple even with a slow connection there were no hanging delays. Its the way forward and combining QBO with Taxfiler saves me about 40% of my time; I haven't quite got the hang of Receipt Bank didn't like their attitude but I suspect I will succumb shortly
you had me going for a minute. I am in Spain for a few days and been updating QBO for a few clients while here all very simple even with a slow connection there were no hanging delays. Its the way forward and combining QBO with Taxfiler saves me about 40% of my time; I haven't quite got the hang of Receipt Bank didn't like their attitude but I suspect I will succumb shortly no doubt