HP held its EMEA software analyst conference recently, showed us a lot of interesting stuff and then announced the expansion of the availability of its Business Technology Optimisation (BTO) suite via a software as a service (SaaS) delivery / payment mechanism. So I thought I’d put my notes to good use and write this.

What i liked was:

• the lack of messing around explaining the B end of BTO, and instead the story got straight into showing HP product strategy / road map and how it could help the IT guys address the B bit. Neat and crisp;
• HP acknowledged that this particular area needs a much more consultative approach (ie understanding what specific business and IT services are important to individual customers and helping them optimise them via better IT management);
• It also acknowledged that the design - deliver - manage (or dev-apps-ops as HP put it) steps is actually a life cycle and needs addressing as such - or at least should be if you want to manage your IT more effectively.

What i didn't like was:

• it isn't ready as a joined up proposition, and we know that (because we've measured it) fragmented IT management environments are one of the primary reasons why IT shops have to undergo significant changes in both mindset and capability to address running IT in a business context;
• HP, with all its acquisitions, now has a lot of product to shift in the management space - and is recruiting sales people hard, which flies in the face of 'consultative approach'.

And now the SaaS bit. Interesting because its new? Sure. Going to help organisations manage their environments more easily? I'm not sure, but HP and every other exponent of SaaS have made it sound too easy.

And Nigella? For any non UK readers, Nigella is a ‘domestic goddess’ aka she makes lots of money telling us how we can sooo easily achieve her amazing lifestyle with zero effort while we watch her on TV as she cooks food before she’s even taken her outdoor coat off. She's got a new TV show on and my wife and i find it hilarious (its not supposed to be). The tenuous connection (force fitted, which is what happens when you think of a title before you start writing..) –is along the lines of if it looks too easy and simple to be true, it probably is.

Or there's some kind of diversionary tactics going on, designed to distract attention away from what's really important. I think my thoughts here are on the latter, primarily.

I think the SaaS part of HPs IT management play is a bit of gloss that IT shops trying to manage their environments more effectively will find slightly irrelevant right now. I bet it doesnt stop the competition though.

Whats more, if SaaS delivery masks the fact that vendors IMHO, are still far too happy to let their customers expand and expand their IT management footprints, well, that's not right either.

HP's story around IT management is pretty strong - but while the vision is complete, the bit where it exists as a joined up proposition isn't, and neither is the most important bit - making it work nicely with whats already out there. There is quite of lot of actual IT management stuff left to do still. SaaS is secondary.

New ways of delivering and paying for software aside, what I’m keen to hear more about is how HP (and its rivals) plan on integrating new ideas and products into what’s already in play in their customers' IT shops. Ignoring that bit is the reason why IT departments cant really manage their IT shops in relation to business outcomes – because they spent the last decade sticking tools together to manage at an ever more granular level. However, the question needs addressing. And while SaaS might be all shiny and new, its actually another obstacle for the IT management guys to sidestep.