CloudHaven vs Chatter, Yammer, …

There are several popular enterprise collaboration tools – SalesForce’s Chatter, Microsoft’s Yammer, Facebook’s Workplace and also Jive and Chanty. However, I don’t think they interoperate – the arrogantly exist in their own huge proprietary silos – a big downside.

One important notable aspect of these tools is that they are “tightly integrated” into applications – they aren’t just used as standalone applications. One aspect of being “tightly integrated” is that they enable context sensitive conversations attached to different pages, objects, or anything. This type of tight integration is one of the key features of CloudHaven but done better – in a vendor neutral, generic way – any CH application can seamlessly integrated this kind of context sensitive collaboration. Instead of emailing someone about a topic, the topic itself where it exists in an application has its own conversation right there. And the user maintains full control of their contribution to the conversation for the life of that contribution, as well as maintaining detailed permission/access control. Then it should be possible to search for, contribute to and manage these conversations directly or in the context of the topic where they occur in an application or as associated with an object like a file (x-ray, image, word doc,…) or simply as defined “topics”. The boundary between what is email and these types of conversations could disappear and be replaced by a universal, vendor-neutral communication mechanism with content that remains within the full control of the user and which is seamlessly integrated IN A CONTEXT-SENSITIVE WAY into any CloudHaven-based application (this could even be extended to non-CloudHaven apps with OAuth mechanisms as part of a migration path to CloudHaven).

CloudHaven for communications and social engagement

I’ve been realizing how many communication options there are – multiple email systems, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, Slack, Twitter, Discord, Signal, Telegram, Messages, Loomio, Zoom, Jitsi, Google Meet, etc. Having so many apps defeats the main requirement for communication, the network – if someone isn’t in your “network” you can’t communicate with them no matter how feature-rich or user friendly a particular app is. This could be called an “anti-network effect”.

Perhaps the driving force behind these proprietary silos of functionality, is that each is owned by a venture-backed capitalist organization with a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value and thus a duty to promote their own proprietary technology and compete with other apps. This cultivates an environment of competition and not cooperation when the latter is precisely what is needed to achieve the widest network. It’s thus reasonable to draw the conclusion that a vendor or organization-neutral platform, open to anyone and democratically governed, could provide the necessary platform for such a universal network. If such a platform had great security, 100% control of data by users and a sufficient roles and permissions capability, it could be used for both personal and corporate/organizational communications.

Not only can CloudHaven offer such a vendor-neutral, universal platform, but it can also match the feature richness and innovation of a plethora of apps through a marketplace of “skins” that emulate those apps – giving users the ability to communicate with the UI/UX model of their preference. For example, one person could have the “Jitsi” UI skin, another person the “Zoom” UI skin and another the “Google” UI skin. etc. While the UI/UX may vary greatly from app to app, the underlying data is the same.

Similarly, I’ve noticed how every app today has some sort of ‘social engagement’, for instance, maintaining a list of friends, building a ‘smart’ contact list, or chat features. To avoid the substantial wasted development and maintenance cost represented by such massive redundancy, CloudHaven can provide a shared and unified chat/messaging/discussion backend with a customizable UI skin seamlessly and effortlessly integrated into each app’s UI.

Note that one may think of CloudHaven as providing these capabilities as a Cloud service, however it is actually the opposite – it’s the applications that are the Cloud services for CloudHaven. The center of focus is shifted from each application to CloudHaven giving each user their own functional “home in the cloud”.