<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Web Conferencing Blog &#187; SaaS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/tag/saas/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog</link>
	<description>The Blog of http://www.webconferencing-test.com/</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 06:49:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why do our results differ from Gartner’s?</title>
		<link>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/2010/06/30/why-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%e2%80%99s/</link>
		<comments>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/2010/06/30/why-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%e2%80%99s/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:19:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Miscellaneous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T Connect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evaluation criteria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gartner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intercall Unified Meeting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Magic Quadrant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PGi Netspoke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SaaS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/?p=285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With it’s Magic Quadrant for web conferencing Gartner offers a comprehensive study of the web conferencing market which includes a detailed evaluation of online collaboration tools. Now we have been approached with a justifiable question: Why do their results differ from ours? The answer lies within another question: What are you looking for in a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With it’s Magic Quadrant for web conferencing Gartner offers a comprehensive study of the web conferencing market which includes a detailed evaluation of online collaboration tools. Now we have been approached with a justifiable question: Why do their results differ from ours?</p>
<p>The answer lies within another question: What are you looking for in a web conferencing solution? Which brings us to the criteria of evaluation. Gartner takes a very close look not only at the software itself but also includes the vendor in its evaluation. Overall viability of the vendor e.g. has high priority. Here Gartner assesses the financial health of the provider and the placement of the web conferencing tool in question within the organization’s product portfolio. The marketing strategy of the vendor is also ranked high priority.<br />
This prioritization naturally favors the big players who have the high marketing budgets and are financially better situated than a small vendor who just introduced his 1.0 version to the market.</p>
<p>We have a different focus when analyzing and evaluating web conferencing solutions. The web conferencing solutions we evaluate should e.g. offer an approach different or complementary to what Gartner calls the on-premises-model. Users should not be required to install additional hardware or software to their IT-infrastructure to run an online collaboration solution. We give vendors a higher ranking if they enable you to run the software without great preparatory effort (SaaS – Software as a Service). This is important to us since we test with small to medium businesses in mind, who often cannot afford the costly and time consuming installation. You can find a detailed description of our testing approach and evaluation criteria <a title="Evaluation criteria and testing approach" href="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/en/webconferencing_test_approach.html" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>Gartner also features tools that are not included in our ranking. Most of these tools have been rejected by us previously because they did not comply with our basic requirements, e.g. offering a free test version and pricing information. We will definitely take another look at AT&amp;T Connect, Intercall Unified Meeting, and PGi Netspoke to see if they can be included in our ranking now.</p>
<p>If you know of other tools that we have not tested so far and you feel fit all our criteria for evaluation please let us know. We will definitely have a look at the suggestions.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F06%2F30%2Fwhy-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%25e2%2580%2599s%2F&amp;linkname=Why%20do%20our%20results%20differ%20from%20Gartner%E2%80%99s%3F" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/linkedin.png" width="16" height="16" alt="LinkedIn"/></a> <a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F06%2F30%2Fwhy-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%25e2%2580%2599s%2F&amp;linkname=Why%20do%20our%20results%20differ%20from%20Gartner%E2%80%99s%3F" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/facebook.png" width="16" height="16" alt="Facebook"/></a> <a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F06%2F30%2Fwhy-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%25e2%2580%2599s%2F&amp;linkname=Why%20do%20our%20results%20differ%20from%20Gartner%E2%80%99s%3F" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/twitter.png" width="16" height="16" alt="Twitter"/></a> <a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/delicious?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F06%2F30%2Fwhy-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%25e2%2580%2599s%2F&amp;linkname=Why%20do%20our%20results%20differ%20from%20Gartner%E2%80%99s%3F" title="Delicious" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/delicious.png" width="16" height="16" alt="Delicious"/></a> <a class="a2a_dd addtoany_share_save" href="http://www.addtoany.com/share_save"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/share_save_171_16.png" width="171" height="16" alt="Share/Bookmark"/></a> </p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/2010/06/30/why-do-our-results-differ-from-gartner%e2%80%99s/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Web conferencing appliances</title>
		<link>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/2010/02/01/web-conferencing-appliances/</link>
		<comments>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/2010/02/01/web-conferencing-appliances/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:41:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Requests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GoMeetNow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RHUB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SaaS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/?p=168</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Testing appliances is currently not on our to-do list. And here’s why: To thoroughly test an appliance for online conferencing a complete in-house test environment needs to be set up. That is a very time consuming procedure, which directly leads to the fact that our focus is on easy to install SaaS (Software-as-a-service) solutions, since [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Testing appliances is currently not on our to-do list. And here’s why: To thoroughly test an appliance for online conferencing a complete in-house test environment needs to be set up. That is a very time consuming procedure, which directly leads to the fact that our focus is on easy to install SaaS (Software-as-a-service) solutions, since small to medium sized businesses hardly have the need for any online conferencing tool that requires the installation of hardware within the company’s infrastructure.</p>
<p>So we have to turn down the request for evaluation of the RHUB web conference appliance for now. However GoMeetNow, the SaaS offering from RHUB, is on our backlist of online conferencing tools to be tested.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F01%2Fweb-conferencing-appliances%2F&amp;linkname=Web%20conferencing%20appliances" title="LinkedIn" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/linkedin.png" width="16" height="16" alt="LinkedIn"/></a> <a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F01%2Fweb-conferencing-appliances%2F&amp;linkname=Web%20conferencing%20appliances" title="Facebook" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/facebook.png" width="16" height="16" alt="Facebook"/></a> <a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F01%2Fweb-conferencing-appliances%2F&amp;linkname=Web%20conferencing%20appliances" title="Twitter" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/twitter.png" width="16" height="16" alt="Twitter"/></a> <a href="http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/delicious?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webconferencing-test.com%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F01%2Fweb-conferencing-appliances%2F&amp;linkname=Web%20conferencing%20appliances" title="Delicious" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/icons/delicious.png" width="16" height="16" alt="Delicious"/></a> <a class="a2a_dd addtoany_share_save" href="http://www.addtoany.com/share_save"><img src="http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/share_save_171_16.png" width="171" height="16" alt="Share/Bookmark"/></a> </p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.webconferencing-test.com/blog/2010/02/01/web-conferencing-appliances/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
