I recently talked to execs from two companies that do exactly the same thing but in completely different ways. In one corner, Yammer, the 2008 TechCrunch50 darling. It's a Twitter-for-the-enterprise service that's hosted by Yammer. Any company can get its employees on to the service, but all the data is run through, and hosted by, Yammer itself.
In the other corner, Presently (found at Present.ly), another Twitter-for-the-enterprise product. Customers can use Presently in the cloud, just like Yammer, but the company makes its money from, and has most of its users on, its software that customers can install on their own networks, "inside the firewall," as they say.
Which is better? Dave Naffis, co-founder of Presently maker Intridea, told me that most of his customers are on the self-hosted version. "They try the SaaS (software as a service) version briefly then install the on-premises version. Over 70 percent of our customers are hosting internally," he says. Presently is installed at more than 50 companies, he claims.
Given what Naffis' customers are saying and paying for, it's understandable that he's going in the software direction. Just announced is a new self-install kit: Companies can sign up for free online and get a 30-day free trial license for the Linux version of the software (for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 or CentOS 5). There's a predictable, one-time license fee of $2,000 (for up to 1,000 users) with maintenance fees running 5 percent to 20 percent a year on top of that, depending on services needed.
Naffis does believe that, "Over time, customers will get more comfortable with data in the cloud." But, he says, "a lot of these large companies are not there yet. Maybe in three to five years."
So the Presently strategy is to sell companies an architecture they can get behind today and will presumably be there for them when they drop their objections to running a corporate communications system through a hosting service. But the company will have to wean its customers off the installed software and back to the hosted service, and there's no way that will be easy.
Yammer keeps getting better, but its critical advantage is its architectural philosophy.
(Credit: Screenshot by Rafe Needleman/CNET)Meanwhile, Yammer, which has more funding, has dropped its downloadable software strategy entirely. CEO David Sacks did tell me that early in the young company's life he heard the reservations of corporate IT guys about running a service like this off-site. His company announced that it would create a downloadable version of Yammer.
But over time, Sacks says, he came to believe that all his clients were all going to get with the program on cloud-based computing eventually. And, he says, Yammer-as-a-service started selling. The service costs $3 to $5 per user per month, depending on features needed.
Yammer has stopped work on the hosted version of the product and is now aligned completely around the SaaS service. Sacks cites a few Fortune 1000 customers using the product, like AMD. The market for his type of communications service is not as big as he wants it to be yet, but, he says, "It's big enough to support us today."
And, of course, Sacks is happy to rattle off the advantages of focusing on the service-based product model: No tedious and expensive upgrade distributions; no need to support legacy users who don't upgrade; the freedom to spend 100 percent of product development on one version of the product (and features for it); and the speed with which updates can be rolled out to customers.
Yammer has the strategic advantage in the hosted-vs-software model due to its deeper pockets (it raised $5 million in venture funds), which allows it to bet on the future instead of selling products based on today's architecture.
I didn't really like Yammer when it launched a year ago. In fact, I liked Presently a lot more and awarded it a special Webware 100 award in 2009. I felt Yammer was too spare. Since then, Yammer has added features (such as integration with Twitter), and rolled out more client apps, including one that embeds Yammer into enterprise e-mail client Outlook. It's a much better service now than it was when it launched.
I don't have enough information to judge the products on purely technical merits. Corporate customers will want to talk to Yammer and Presently reps themselves to see which service they're more comfortable with when it comes to scalability, reliability, and security.
Regardless of the feature comparisons, and even regardless of numbers of current customers, I give the strategic nod to Yammer, because it's not building for today's market, but tomorrow's, and it has the resources to wait it out. The whole enterprise Twitter space may collapse (if, for example, Twitter releases a strong business-focused service on its own), but if it does survive, over the long term, it looks like Yammer is better positioned to slide into the market that will be.
When a business is just starting out and its founders need to fill some administrative holes inexpensively, simple Web apps can fill the void. The apps we're going to look at here are not always good for large organizations; in fact, several are designed specifically for smaller companies that need simple but robust solutions to common business needs.
Manage projects with Basecamp
Once a company starts servicing multiple clients, it needs to manage logistics and ensure that employees are doing what's expected of them. That's where Basecamp comes in.
Basecamp is not only a simple online project coordinator, it's the best of its kind on the Web. Once you sign up, you can immediately start creating projects and share them with employees. The site features to-do list creation, the ability to share files, project progress tracking, time tracking to see which employees have been working on the project, and more. In essence, Basecamp provides a full end-to-end project management service that allows you to see how well your company is performing every step of the way.
Creating and monitoring projects in Basecamp couldn't be easier. But Basecamp is not free. Its Basic edition costs $24 per month and allows users to create and track 15 projects at the same time and store up to 3GB of data. Plans go up from there to $149 per month, which allows for an unlimited number of projects, 50GB of storage, and time tracking (the other plans don't offer time tracking). If you're looking for something simple and effective at managing your projects, Basecamp is worth the money.
... Read more
Today we have a new president to lead a new American path through what will be a tumultuous time. But President Obama won't be able to do it alone. He and his administration need to work together, and communicate with one another and the country, to ensure everything is running well.
That's why I've compiled a "cheat sheet" for the Obama administration, listing five services it should use in the White House. Sadly, it probably won't. Record-keeping laws and security concerns will ensure that none of my suggestions take effect.
AIM for White House staff
Why shouldn't the White House staff be able to communicate with one another over AIM? I'm sure many of them use it in their daily lives and bringing it to the White House to communicate quickly is, in my estimation, a pretty good idea.
Instead of forcing his staff to walk back and forth between wings and offices, what if President Obama was able to instant message his staff from the Oval Office. I can see it now: PrezObama312: "Where's the dossier on the Russian spy we've been tracking?" WHStaffer35: "IDK. BRB." PrezObama312: "K. G2G. L8r."
Wouldn't that be great?
BitTorrent for distributing government documents
I know BitTorrent has been the target of the RIAA and MPAA over the past few years due to its huge supply of copyrighted material, but why shouldn't the government embrace the technology and use BitTorrent to distribute information to the public?
Sure, there's always that issue of "pirates" running the service, but I don't see what all the fuss is about. Who will they tell? President Obama should look to BitTorrent as an ideal way to get the word out. The distributed network reduces the cost of running data centers by allowing all the network's users to share the load.
It makes sense to me.
Present.ly for internal microblogging in groups based on level
Aside from AIM, I think the Obama administration should use enterprise microblogging service Present.ly to allow White House staff and the president to communicate.
The real beauty of Present.ly is its ability to allow users to create groups. A top-level aide can put the president, vice president, and cabinet in one group so they can discuss world affairs in a Twitter-like format, and the rest of the staff can have their own group to take care of their own work.
Sure, someone might be able to hack their way into the president's Present.ly group ("Michelle10" is an easy password to crack, Mr. President), but it still would help the staff communicate far more effectively than walking back and forth between desks.
Did you see 24 Monday night? That's all they do.
Stickam for White House room streams
I don't know about you, but I'm not always convinced that White House staff is really working. I'm not even sure President Obama would ever really know if his staff is working. How could he? He's busy.
That's why he needs to install cameras throughout the White House and use Stickam to monitor his employees. At any given time, he can log in to Stickam, find the White House channel, and start viewing all the different rooms in the house.
I'll bet that would get everyone working.
Ustream with moderated chat for country-wide town hall meetings
Ustream is a fine video-streaming service that makes connecting with others simple and fun. It's also ideal for a White House town hall meeting where President Obama would be on camera and citizens from across the U.S. would have the opportunity to ask him questions in a moderated chat room.
I don't see any reason why the president shouldn't exploit Ustream in this way. He has shown time and again that he has a real desire to use technology to connect with the populace and capitalizing on Ustream to give citizens a voice would be just another example of him doing just that.
I realize that allowing citizens from across the U.S. to comment on the president's policies could be troublesome, considering millions would probably want to join in, but if the room had a cap on the number of people who could join, or an effective team that could moderate comments, I doubt it would be a problem.
I'd certainly like to join in on that chat.
Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter feed, and FriendFeed.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has written about everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Don is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and posts at The Digital Home. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Twitter may be the leader in the micro-blogging space, but it's missing key features--features its competitors offer. Will Twitter pick up on these omissions? We know groups are coming to Twitter, but we're not so sure about some of these other useful features...
Friendfeed: Twitter++
Although some say Friendfeed isn't a direct competitor to Twitter, I think it is. Twitter has one way to deliver content to the service--you type a thought in 140 characters or fewer and post it--but consider the fact that Friendfeed can do that in a flash, as well as import your blog, Flickr photos, YouTube videos, Twitter stream, and countless other update types from services across the Web. It becomes apparent that if you're looking to do more than post a few quick comments, Twitter is inept.
Without doing much work at all, your entire life can be put in full view on Friendfeed. Want your friends to know what you just added to you Netflix queue (or see what movies your friends added themselves)? Check out Friendfeed. Want to comment on new photos your father uploaded to Flickr? Friendfeed is waiting. More services are adding Twitter plug-ins to send links to your Twitter profile, but they're mostly useless: a TinyURL doesn't replace the design, interaction, and usability of Friendfeed's service.
Performing just one task is fine for a while, but as our desire to do more takes hold, it's Friendfeed that satisfies that desire. Not Twitter.
Identi.ca: Open Twitter
What's so wrong with autonomy? That's Identi.ca's model. Unfortunately, it's not Twitter's.
Identi.ca is an Open Network Service with its entire code base made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. It uses the OpenMicroBlogging protocol, which allows friends on other services to receive Identi.ca notices. In essence, Identi.ca's main goal is to give power back to the user and allow them to take their data and source code and create their own micro-blogging service if Identi.ca itself doesn't cut it. That's more than can be said for Twitter.
Sure, it may be tough to monetize that business model, but wouldn't it be nice if you could take your Twitter profile and updates and create your own Twitter network after the service sends you a Fail Whale one time too many? If you're a Twitter user, haven't you come across a slew of issues that you would like to improve? If Twitter was an open platform like Identi.ca, you could take a stab at it. Unfortunately, it isn't and you're trapped in a service that suffers from instability issues and other quirks that can only be addressed by its developers. That's a shame.
Present.ly: Twitter Groups
It may be designed for businesses (more on that in the next section), but Present.ly does something that Twitter doesn't (at least not yet): it allows users to create groups.
Unlike Twitter, Present.ly provides companies with the tools necessary to create their own micro-blogging network on the service and separate all the users into groups. In other words, companies can place management into one group and lower-level employees into others so discussions can be had between members without worry of unwelcome employees joining in.
From a consumer standpoint, adding groups to Twitter seems like a logical move. Friends would be able to form networks around similar interests and, like Facebook groups, Twitter groups would add a whole new level of engagement to the service and create another reason to use it. Get with the program, Twitter.
Yammer: Twitter while you work
Yammer provides the same, basic experience as Twitter, but with one difference: it's for businesses. Much like Present.ly, Yammer provides businesses with the opportunity to create their own, private micro-blog network.
It allows only those with the company's domain name to join an organization's network, which is a sticking point in many businesses employ contractors. But aside from that single issue, Yammer's ability to appeal to businesses highlights a big issue with Twitter: it provides less value to businesses than it could. Granted, Twitter isn't necessarily designed with the business professional in mind, but shouldn't it be? The service has become a hub for individual employees to connect and network with colleagues, but in the process, it has left the companies themselves out of the loop and allowed services like Yammer and Present.ly to pick up the pieces.
As the world's largest micro-blogging tool, it seems only logical to cater to as many customers as possible. With the infrastructure in place already, allowing the enterprise to get in on the Twitter action with access to its huge user base would make the service even more compelling and render Yammer and Present.ly practically irrelevant. The game is Twitter's to lose.
Don Reisinger is a social network addict. Check out his profiles on Twitter, Friendfeed, Identi.ca, Last.fm, and Flickr.
NEW YORK--At the Web 2.0 Expo, I got a quick demo of Present.ly, which is another Twitter-alike for business. On the surface it is similar to Yammer, winner of the TechCrunch50 best of show award. Present.ly, like Yammer, lets you quickly set up a private microblog where you and your co-workers can enter short update messages.
I find Yammer's interface a bit simpler, but Present.ly has a few important features that will make it a better bet for some companies.
It supports file attachments. That's a win in the workplace. Present.ly also lets you segment out groups, which is useful for filtering the flow of info.
Present.ly doesn't require that all users are on the same e-mail domain, which to my mind is a huge flaw in Yammer--it makes it impossible to invite an outside contractor into a work group.
The biggest wins in Present.ly are at the platform level. Unlike Yammer, you can get Present.ly either as a hosted service, or, if you want, you can install in your business, behind your corporate firewall. And Present.ly supports the Twitter API, so tools that work with Twitter, like Twhirl, should be easily modifiable to work with Present.ly.
Present.ly is free for up to five users. After that, the company charges about $1 per user per month; it varies a bit depending on service plan. Installed versions are available but there's no quoted price on them.
If you want something like Twiitter in your business, check it out. Also check out SocialCast, which I still like a lot (it's more like FriendFeed for business). And see this Web Strategy post, List of Enterprise Microblogging tools.
Tastes like Twitter.
Bonus: Present.ly vs. Yammer gossip
I believe that if Present.ly had been at the TechCrunch50 event, it would have split the vote of the judging panel and prevented Yammer from winning the Best of Show award. Present.ly didn't present at TechCrunch50, but it wasn't for lack of trying. Yoshi Maisami, president of Intridea, which makes Present.ly, told me that he submitted his product for consideration for the event. However, he says, his proposal was rejected out of hand--that he never got the chance to pitch his company to the TechCrunch50 selection committee. If true, that's a shame.
- prev
- 1
- next
