Comments on: SaaS v. On-premises Software: Which One is More Green?

By: MediTouch EMR

MediTouch EMR — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:01:00 +0000

SaaS, Web-based EMRs are obviously cheaper, more versatile, and definitely greener. The lack of in-house servers alone erases a physical and electrical footprint. SaaS EHRs can function on current and new technology, so there is nothing to replace if not needed. SaaS and the Cloud are the future for all technology, not just EMRs --- the days of bulky in-house data servers are quickly becoming a thing of the past.

By: MediTouch EMR

MediTouch EMR — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:01:00 +0000

By: SaaS

SaaS — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 03:27:07 +0000

Great post. I like the power consumption part of the post. This is not often considered in posts about the advantages of SaaS and the cloud. Thanks.

By: Cramer

Cramer — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:33:30 +0000

Definitely SaaS in my book, but it all really depends on how sustainable the provider is…If they are energy guzzling maniacs who aren’t even trying to reduce their footprint the problem hasn’t made any progress. Here’s a post I wrote about the 2 sides of sustainability and SaaS.

http://blog.sonian.com/cloud-buzz-blog/bid/39829/Cloud-Computing-and-the-Green-Revolution-Is-the-Cloud-Green

By: Festus Aleogena

Festus Aleogena — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 10:16:17 +0000

Saas is clearly better, cheaper and greener but what about security and confidentiality of user’s data files

By: Sree

Sree — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:46:43 +0000

No doubt…SaaS is more green

By: Donna

Donna — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:17:22 +0000

Hi Chris, good information!

By: Danny Johnson

Danny Johnson — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:44:27 +0000

SaaSational post!

I’ve been wanting to see something like this for a bit that shows the energy efficiency of SaaS. Very good to compare to on-premise.

Thanks Chris.

Stay SaaSy San Diego

By: Mike E.

Mike E. — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:07:28 +0000

We looked at it as a ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ proposition, with detractors on both sides & suitably imposing arguments. Our thoughts? Please both sides of the equation; an SaaS for those that see its merits – and – a local Server variant. A complete Solution (tables, queries, files, images, actions,pages, etc) – can be selectively bundled on either the SaaS or local server vsn – and restored in its entirety on the other platform. So instead of insisting that only one school of thought is correct, assume that both are correct.

By: Paul Giurata

Paul Giurata — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 23:11:11 +0000

We also quantified the environmental impact of SaaS but not from the server energy consumption standpoint. Rather we looked at using a SaaS collaborative workspace enabled an individual company to significantly reduces its own carbon footprint. Specifically Catalyst Resources was able reduce its carbon impact footprint by 21,000 lbs of CO2 per month, while simultaneously reducing expenses and increasing billable activities by nearly 20%.

So both on the server end of things and on the actual individual level, SaaS, because it enables remote work and collaboration, will play a significant role in reducing environmental impact.

Hard numbers from our study our available at http://www.catalystresources.com/pr/detail/catalyst_resources_uses_rias_and_saas_to_shrink_carbon_footprint/