distributedlife

I’m going to introduce a pattern that I’ve seen a few times now. It’s not a pattern in the traditional sense of software development, architecture or infrastructure. It’s more of a behaviour pattern.

This pattern can be identified by anyone who is attempting collect the entire suite of products that are for sale from a particular software or hardware vendor. It’s a bit like fanboyism but more expensive.

One may argue that by purchasing all the products from one vendor than you ensure the ability for those applications to integrate, regardless of whether they do the job properly. For some reason having products talk to each other is more important than having the products do the job they are meant to do. In some cases vendors put out skeleton products purely to show that they are in the market without spending any effort to get there.

This is a win-win situation for the vendor. They spent no effort and little money making the product to enter the market. If someone cares about the quality of service of the product then they won’t by the vendor’s product. This is fine because the vendor wouldn’t have made the sale when they had no product at all. If the vendor makes a sale then it’s free money made by leveraging the popularity of their existing products.

Another argument is that the more products you buy from a particular vendor than the cheaper it gets whether it is up-front costs or on-going licensing costs. This is a lot like the bundling of services that infrastructure providers do (internet, electricity, gas, water, sewerage, etc). I see the deal, bundle five services and get 10% off the total cost. If their services cost the least then you wouldn’t need the 10% discount. What they are really saying is that; yes our prices are high, but if you buy five of our more expensive services, some of which you may not actually need, we will go someway to reducing your overall cost. But don’t be fooled, we are not here for you; this will not cost you less money.

So when you buy multiple products from the same vendor the question to ask is: is it really cheaper for you, sure you get the product for less but then you have to maintain, extend and work with an inferior product. The time wasted working with inferior products may end up costing you more in the long run.

I’ve always been taught fit for purpose. I know it’s a vague rule that doesn’t actually say what you are looking for, that is the point. It means find out what you want then find out if any thing meets the criterion. If a vendor does support your needs then go and buy that product. Integrate it later. If you can’t find a product that meets your needs then perhaps you should build it or ask the next best vendor to close the distance.