After running across this recent post about FireScope on the IT Skeptic's blog, we offer the following response, posted here in case our original comment submitted to his site does not get published.
First let us say that we’re flattered that the IT Skeptic “Rob England” pored over our site content, and as would an engineer or techie studying a set of equations, source code or a set of black and white facts, he found areas that might-could-maybe-potentially be problematic or crap as he put it. While we can all be grateful for detail-oriented types like Rob, his article suggests that the information we present on our site is errant.
Unfortunately for Rob that is not true as the information provided actually came from our customer’s experiences as well as, from publicly available information about our competitors. So while, Rob may feel that we are not a viable alternative to the Big 4, that is just his opinion, and hopefully most prospective customers are going to download and try our products (try that with the Big4) and see how many happy Fortune 2000 customers we have globally and give us a try. After all, it seems that is all it usually takes.
So why would a person with Rob’s experience ad smarts go out of his way to disparage an underdog startup and aid the Big 4’s high price, extensive services and poor maintenance model that so many are dissatisfied with. Don’t you wonder why the Big 4 continue to buy so many startups, when they supposedly have such great products??? It's called innovation! And why is the dissatisfaction of many Big 4 customers so widely reported by the mainstream press and other notables sources??? Well, I can only speculate that Rob comes from the perspective of an engineer or techie (by the way, many on the FireScope team have been less skeptical techies for many years) and likely believes the following from an insightful article on gaebler.com:
“Right off the bat, you need to recognize that an engineer is wired differently than an entrepreneur. His training and experience have conditioned him to value quantification and objectivity. But in business, many decisions cannot be easily quantified. And when it comes to marketing . . . well, let's just say that marketing is – by nature – a highly subjective endeavor. With that in mind, here are some other things you need to know about why your engineer partner struggles with marketing.
Engineers love facts.
Engineers are skeptical about advertising.
Engineers avoid bells and whistles.
So why does Rob belittle the efforts of a small entrepreneurial company? Is it because he thinks their conclusions are incorrect? Or because he loves the in-efficient model of the Big4? We have no idea. Hopefully, he will try our product and come over to the underdog’s side.
Nevertheless, in the spirit of fair competition and respecting one’s opinion, we strongly recommend that Rob and any readers of the IT Skeptic please go to BMC, IBM, HP or CA’s respective websites and feast on the facts and validation regarding return on investment (ROI) and other marketing efforts. Good luck on that as marketing and presenting a company’s information or collateral in a palatable form is an honored and respectable profession, albeit subjective. We do wish however that Rob would comment on our competitor’s facts in the spirit of fairness and journalistic pride. How about it Rob…is there some fair play in the cards???
Your loyal readers from the FireScope Team. :)