Compulsory upgrades or good service?
In a post on the Xero Blog today, Mark Vickers discusses how users of software (desktop or web-based) are always vulnerable to “vendor lock-in” – in essence having their data stuck in a system they now want out of.
He cites the example of FaceBook’s recent change to its privacy policy, then moves on to accounting software providers and states:
“Vendor lock-in has a long and nefarious history in the software industry. Traditional accounting software has been guilty of locking people in with proprietary formats and compulsory upgrades.”
Of course, the point of Mark’s post is to try to convince us that Xero is not guilty in this regard, that it plays fair with your data. He tells us that data can be exported from Xero in commonly used formats. He also reminds us that upgrades to the software are very regular and come free as part of the service.
So, I thought I would examine Xero’s credentials. Are they playing fair with our data? Are they justified in taking the moral high ground here?
Firstly, let’s deal with the “compulsory upgrades” point. In his post Mark outlines this scenario:
“You might buy some accounting software and run it for a couple of years. An upgrade becomes available, but it’s expensive. You decide you don’t need it, because the upgrade doesn’t offer anything new. A few more years pass, as do a few more upgrades, and you choose to ignore them all.”
He then talks about the user finding out that, because they missed some steps in the upgrade process, they are no longer in a position to make the jump to the latest version. Disaster!
Now, I agree with what he is saying. Many readers will have experience of the annual QuickBooks upgrade cycle and the serious consequences that can result from falling behind in the version number race. I well remember the huge problems clients had moving to QuickBooks 2008 – it’s one of the reasons we were able to move many of them over to Xero.
But is Xero innocent here? No it isn’t, because Xero DOES force its users into compulsory upgrades. The fundamental principle of the “software as a service” model is that all users always have the latest version. What about the user who sees the changes coming in the next upgrade and doesn’t want them? The changes may be regarded as an advancement by Xero and most of their users, but seen as a backward step by an individual user. That user does not have the option to say, “no thanks, I’ll stick with what I’ve got please”.
The continuous, automatic upgrades model is the right one in my opinion but there will always be someone who prefers the status quo and, to that user, Xero will be enforcing a compulsory upgrade.
I will explore the data export features in my next post. Is Xero really playing fair with our data?
The quote from Mark here has left off the previous sentence “Traditional accounting software has been guilty of locking people in with proprietary formats and compulsory upgrades.”.
Considering the quote is related to traditional accounting software, I suspect Mark did mean where upgrades are effectively made compulsary and with a financial cost attached to that.
Mark includes the FaceBook example to show where changes may not always be seen for the best but then he doesn’t actually show how Xero is possibly any different to this, and he even states “With Xero, you’re always running the latest version.”.
It is a good point that SaaS is effectively providing compulsary upgrades, at least in the cases I know if not all. I think he would have been better to leave off the locked in to changes part of his blog entry, unless he was pointing out how Xero combats this.
To ensure upgraded software is seen as a step forward by all users is difficult, and the larger the user base the more difficult to keep all users happy.
Our own development team maintains an open development approach with the use of an online development desk, open forums, and close contact with the users of our tools.
If Xero had outlined their own solution to user satisfaction with compulsary upgrades then it would have left some with a feeling of uncertainty having read his blog post.
Lastly to top it off, Mark ends his post with a somewhat contradictory remark – “We believe in people having choices.”
Comparing upgrades of Xero (or any other SaaS app) with upgrades of desktop software is a little unfair.
Upgrades to Xero happen automatically so there’s no cost (time or money) for the customer and no chance of getting it wrong or missing steps.
I blogged earlier this week about how we (another SaaS Accounting app) deal with upgrades and new features. One of our rules is that new features should be off and on-able (defaulting to off) and not cripple existing features. SO there’s no trouble for existing customers if they don’t want the feature.
I’m in no position to speak for Xero, but I’d be surprised if they’re not similarly sensitive to the issues you point out. Until they actually go ahead and make changes that negatively impact their customers, it’s just a theoretical issue – not a real one.
Hi David and Duane, thanks for contributing.
Personally, I think that the automatic upgrade provided by the Saas model is the right one – as I mentioned in my post. I just wanted to highlight the fact that automatic also means compulsory.
Compulsory means no choice, which is the opposite of what the Xero blog was trying to say.
It is very true that automatic upgrade means compulsary upgrade, something Mark probably shouldn’t have been knocking in his blog post.
Like Duane, we have a similar approach with new features being included as options – even with Excel templates where the option is off by default when upgrading.
If Mark had mentioned new features are optional in his blog it would have made more sense but he left it open, effectively criticising his own ‘compulsary’ upgrades.