Does It Compute?

One Size Fits All vs. Best of Breed

When exploring the options for implementing Practice Management, Document Management and related software, firms are faced with choosing between One Size Fits All programs (“we’re the only software you need, we do it all”) and Best of Breed programs.

The obvious tradeoff here is that One Size Fits All does exactly that: you have one program, one consultant and don’t need to worry about compatibility, integration, etc. However, there is a downside to these programs. Historically, they developed to do one or two things (contacts, calendaring, etc.). As computers got more powerful and the programs grew, they added new features (email, document management). The problem here is that while the original core functions are usually quite good, the later add-ons such as email or document management are frequently second-rate at best. So the firm winds up being short-changed on features and functionality that could be key to its practice.

Best of Breed is also what it sounds like: you pick the programs that best meet the firm’s needs in specific areas: practice management, time & billing, document management, court scheduling, and so on. This potentially raises integration issues and dealing with multiple consultants, but on the other hand the firm has the best functionality available for specific needs.

This is not always an easy choice: if a second-rate feature of a one size fits all program is something that is not critical to the firm’s needs, then that program might be a good choice. Obviously as a consultant for Worldox, I have a vested interest in the Best of Breed solution, but it may not always be the best option for specific firms.

There is an analogous choice when firms select consultants.

Many firms like to pass everything through their IT consultants. This is convenient, since there is always only one number to call. IT firms obviously like it because it increases their revenue.

But very often, IT firms that are hardware-oriented have only a very limited knowledge of software programs that firms are using, such as Worldox or other document management or practice management software. This frequently creates two kinds of problems.

First, the firms get incomplete or bad advice about their software. IT firms may be able to do a minimal install but it is very unusual for hardware-based IT firms to be able to optimize an installation (there are a few exceptions to this rule, but not many). The better IT firms recognize this and work closely with software consultants for specific programs. This works well for both the hardware and software companies, since they each do only what they do best.

The second problem is the delays and expense of phone tag. The firm calls the IT company. They muck around but can’t solve the issue. They call the software consultant, who calls them back and gets insufficient information. So after several back and forths, the consultant finally calls the appropriate person at the firm and resolves the issue. This is a bad, time-consuming solution for everyone involved – and expensive for the law firm.

So, while I may have a vested interest, I still believe it is in a firm’s best interest to go with best of breed even at the inconvenience of multiple consultants. It will be more cost-effective and the firm will have a better configuration in the long run. A simple check to to consult the Worldox web site to see if your IT firm has been certified as a Worldox consultant. To quote one of my favorite sayings: “if you think hiring a professional is expensive, try hiring an amateur.”

The Cost of Cloud Storage

Cloud-based document management programs typically advertise a per user/per month cost, generally around $40 to $50 per user, depending on what additional-cost options may be chosen. But the kicker for many firms comes when, after agreeing to that, they are told, “oh, and there is an extra storage fee of $.50-.75 per megabyte” after a relatively small base amount. So a firm with a terabyte of documents (not unusual) winds up paying $500-750 per month extra for storage.

When you can go to Amazon and buy a 2-TB external hard drive for $75 or less, this initially seems outrageous. Why so much?

The answer basically is that you are paying for much more than simple storage on a low-end drive. The storage cost includes (at least) the following:

• High-speed network drives. These provide the ability for rapid access by multiple users and the ability to change the size of your virtual drives essentially immediately.
• Backup to one or two other remote locations (thus doubling or tripling the stated size of your storage).
• Multiple “snapshots” daily (sometimes 12 times a day). While these are incremental, they do add additional space.
• The cost of software to manage these drives, and the technicians to operate them.
• Backup, anti-virus and other management software to maintain and secure the data.
• Maintaining various certifications now increasingly required: HIPPA, ISO 27001, SSAE 16, Safe Harbor, and various other standards.
• Ongoing penetration testing to ensure the security of the site (this can cost several thousand dollars a month).
• Additional infrastructure and disk availability to ensure the smooth functioning of the installation (this is a capital cost for the provider).

So what you are really getting as part of your “storage costs” is the software and IT services you would otherwise have to purchase separately. True, you might think that this should be rolled in to the base cost, but since it is variable depending on disk space, it isn’t. Life in the cloud.

Review: Kennedy/Mighell, Collaboration Tools and Technologies

The Second Edition of Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell’s Lawyer’s Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies is long overdue. The book is a sweeping panorama of the wide variety of tools available to lawyers today in what is perhaps the most rapidly evolving area of web-based technologies.

The book has two distinct areas: “how to” accomplish varieties of collaboration, and arguments in favor of it. The latter element is probably even more important than the “how tos.” As they put it: “Technology choices are always more about culture than they are about technology.” They return to this theme repeatedly in an effort to address the issue of what I call “dysfunctional” law firms: where each individual senior partner is like a medieval duke in his own little castle on top of his own little hill. One of the most extreme examples I experienced (admittedly 10 years or more ago) was a client whose different partners insisted that any correspondence that went out under their name was in a different font. Law firms without some mechanism for determining what is good for the firm as a whole will always be at a disadvantage. As one of my clients said when reviewing the firm’s adoption of Worldox, “lawyers have to adapt to changes in the law all the time, why shouldn’t they also be able to adapt to new technologies?” But they don’t.

Kennedy and Mighell try to focus on success. “People respond to success” they say. This is true once various projects have started: the question is: how to get them started. One approach that has worked for me is to focus on pain avoidance. Instead of making claims that a particular technology will make life better and improve productivity, start by asking: “what are the five things you find most painful about your practice and wish you could fix/improve?” (This should be accompanied by “what are the five things you like best and don’t want to change?” since “fixing” one thing is not likely to work if it means abandoning a favorite workflow.) So rather than a frequently dismissed generic claim about somehow making life better, you can focus on alleviating a specific felt pain. I find this gives a very good rate of success.

Personally, I think their definition of “collaboration” is over-broad in an effort to argue that collaboration has always existed (yellow stickies as a form a collaboration?). However, there are definitely at least three areas where advanced collaborative tools have become available, and they do a good job in discussing these.

1) Client Portals - you need a way to efficiently and securely communicate documents and other information to your clients. Equally important, you need to be able to control that information. Law firms will attract and retain clients if they “become leaders and act on using collaboration tools rather than simply following and reacting to the demands of their clients.” There are a large number of tools available that they discuss extensively.

2) Collaboration on drafting and writing documents. The key issue here is how to keep control over the evolution of a document, whether through a system of simultaneous editing (via Google Docs or other), or commenting on drafts.

3) The email overload. Social media has made texting and IM widely acceptable – and as they note may become more widely used because it is the only way you can communicate with children and grand-children. The wide range of options here requires considerable experimentation and review, as well as consultation with clients as to what means they prefer. Slack is currently the “hot” application.

Security

As the recent facebook fiasco has made clear, there is no security on most social media no matter what your “security settings” are. By and large it is safe to say that the most popular sites (facebook, dropbox) have the least security, which is a main reason for their popularity. Fine for marketing, not so good for confidential information. Firms are much better off setting up secure client portals rather than making do with substitutes where you have to believe that anything put up on the internet using those tools may eventually become public knowledge.

Productivity - A Thought Experiment

Productivity - A Thought Experiment

Productivity is extremely important, but can be very difficult to measure. One of my favorite anecdotes in this respect is a personal one. In the 1980's, I was working as the assistant for one of the senior partners at a small law firm. He decided to jump ship to another firm and asked if I wanted to come with him. I liked him, so I agreed. When I started at the new firm, I quickly discovered that whereas at the old firm I could usually finish my work by 5:30, at the new firm I was regularly staying to 6 to get my work done. Same attorney, same clients, same workload. Why the extra half hour a day? Nothing seemed different. I finally figured it out. At the old firm, I had a dedicated printer at my desk (a state of the art Diablo 630). At the new firm I had to walk over to a central printer and sometimes wait for things to print. So the difference in printers made me less productive by a half hour a day, or 6%.

Jump to the present and cloud-based programs, particularly document management. There is no question that cloud-based programs like NetDocuments will offer slower response times than network based systems, and hence be somewhat less productive. Think of every time you’ve said to yourself: “the internet is really slow today.” If you are working with cloud-based programs, slow internet means loss of productivity. The key issue here is: how much is “somewhat?” For the purposes of this thought experiment it doesn’t matter, you can plug in your own numbers. Let’s say that the added response time from the cloud makes users 3% less productive (15 minutes a day). Not a lot, but measurable. So for 10 users working 40 hours a week, as a whole, they are losing 12 hours a week (.03 x 10 x 40).

However, they gain productivity because some of the lawyers can access their cloud-based document management system remotely, in the evenings, while traveling, etc. So if those some lawyers are collectively working more than 12 hours a week remotely, then the firm has a net gain in terms of productivity. Otherwise, not.

If you wanted to get really picky, you could note that most on-site systems today have some sort of remote access capabilities, so the net gain due to a cloud-based system is only the difference between the remote access available to people working from home and connecting to their on-site system and the extra available due only to the cloud-based system.

Lastly, you could calculate that lawyer’s added productivity from working remotely is more valuable (worth more in terms of billable hours) than the on-site staff’s loss of productivity.

Plug in your own numbers and parameters and see what you get.

There are a number of reasons for a firm to move to the cloud, but I am very dubious that productivity is one of them.

Happy Winter Solstice

It’s Winter Solstice – er, holiday – time again.

The Winter Solstice has traditionally been celebrated by homo sapiens in the northern hemisphere for at least 5,000 years as marking the point where the days start getting longer. Maes Howe in Orkney (north of Scotland) is a very large chambered cairn. The 45 foot long entrance way is constructed so that the setting sun shines directly through the passageway onto the back wall of the cairn on the shortest day of the year, setting directly over a large standing stone placed a half-mile or so from the entrance. And of course a similar setup at Stonehenge is even more well-known. There are even several hundred such sites in New England (“Mystery Hill” for example).

Pre-historic/neolithic peoples were of necessity acute astronomers – their existence depended on crops and seasons. The Mayan long calender was more accurate than our current calender with its leap years every four years and "super leap years" at the turn of the century once every 400 years. Other calendars (in India and Mesopotamia – Omar Khayyam was a much better mathematician and astronomer than he was a poet) were also more accurate than our current one.

The early Puritans in New England outlawed the celebration of Christmas between 1659 and 1681 due to its pagan roots, as well as the fact that the "lower classes" used it as an excuse for "rowdy public displays of excessive eating and drinking, the mockery of established authority, aggressive begging (often involving the thread of doing harm), and even the invasion of wealthy homes." (Stephen Nissenbaum, The Battle for Christmas). There was a fine of five shillings for “keeping” Christmas. Christmas as we know it, with a focus on children and gift-giving, was not celebrated until the mid-1800's.

It is well-established that some time in the fourth century the early Christians moved the date of Jesus’ birth to December so it would coincide with the Roman Saturnalia and thus avoid persecution. Other religious year-end myths are manifestly modeled on the celebration of the Winter Solstice. So during this winter holiday season, I wish you all a Happy Winter Solstice. Spring is coming.

Remote Access Options

An increasing number of clients seem to be calling me dissatisfied with their current remote access solution (typically a VPN). While this is not directly my area of expertise, there are some considerations and options that need to be reviewed.

The first thing to consider is your workflow. What exactly are your needs? Do you just work occasionally from home evenings and weekends? Are you using all your applications (Worldox, Outlook, time & billing, etc.)? Are you a road warrior or regularly work from home and need full access all the time or do you just need to check emails? How many people at the firm work remotely on a regular basis?

The bottom line is that there are two types of access which are very different (not counting terminal server or hosted solutions which are an entire different type of solution).

Some IT people set up VPNs (on the grounds that they are secure) where a drive letter on the server is shown as a drive letter on the remote laptop. So you are processing locally and uploading/downloading information and files to the server. There are two problems with this. The first is that you are at the mercy of your internet connection. While this may not be an issue if you have a high-speed connection at home, it can well be an issue when traveling, in court, etc. The bottom line here is that this option will almost always be experienced as way too slow and unacceptable. Worldox, for example, transfers a lot of information and will probably not work acceptably.

The second option is sometimes known as “screen scrapers.” In this option, you connect to your PC at the office. You are using the applications on your office PC and only the screen information is being transmitted to and from your remote machine. This is a lot less information than some VPNs since no files are actually being transferred. This solution will be a lot faster than direct VPNs, although hybrid solutions involving VPNs are available.

If the firm has relatively few users that need to connect remotely, one of the classic remote access programs may be good for you. The two leaders in this field are GoToMyPC and LogMeIn. Both these programs have been around for a long time but are still top-rated. You can generally get a 7 day trial to test them out.

If you have a larger number of users or more advanced needs, there are “portal” programs. These let you log in to a secure portal and from there access your PC. You should discuss what options may be available with your IT consultant.

There are other solutions based on entirely different technology (hosted Worldox, terminal server), but for basic one-to-one connectivity to an office PC, this is where you want to start.

Amateurs vs. Professionals

An increasing number of firms like to centralize all things computer-related through their IT consultants, including software issues. This is convenient, since there is always only one number to call. IT firms obviously like it because it increases their revenue.

But very often, IT firms that are hardware-oriented have only a very limited knowledge of software programs that firms are using, such as Worldox or other document management or practice management software. In this area they are, in short, talented amateurs. This can create two kinds of problems.

First, the firms get incomplete or bad advice about their software. IT firms may be able to do a minimal install but it is very unusual for hardware-based IT firms to be able to optimize an installation (there are a few exceptions to this rule, but not many). The better IT firms recognize this and work closely with software consultants for specific programs (who in turn don’t try to mess with the hardware). This works well for both the hardware and software companies, since they each do only what they do best.

The second problem is the delays and expense of phone tag. The firm calls the IT company. They muck around but can’t solve the issue. They call the software consultant, who calls them back and gets insufficient information. So after several back and forths, the consultant finally calls the appropriate person at the firm and resolves the issue. This is a bad, time-consuming solution for everyone involved – and expensive for the law firm.

So, while I may have a vested interest, I firmly believe it is in a firm’s best interest to go with best of breed even at the inconvenience of multiple consultants. It will be more cost-effective and the firm will have a better configuration in the long run. A simple check is to look at the Worldox web site to see if your IT firm has been certified as a Worldox consultant. To quote one of my favorite sayings: “if you think hiring a professional is expensive, try hiring an amateur.”

Email Security Issues

Email security is a large and thorny issue and one that law firms have generally avoided.  For someone sending up to a hundred or even more emails a day, even minimal extra steps to secure/encrypt email and attachments are seen as “too much work.”

Given the dramatic increase in hacking and government spying, as well as recent court rulings to the effect that non-secured sharing of documents voids attorney-client privilege, this is bound to change as corporate clients in particular insist that their emails be properly secured.

Two of the most popular security steps that are relatively non-intrusive are metadata cleaning and sending emails (especially very large emails) as a link to a secure site.  What does this mean and what does it entail?

Metadata Cleaning

Metadata is information in and about a document that you may or may not want the recipient to see. This can include track changes, hidden text or comments, the authors of various comments, the origin of the document, the authors of revisions (and how much time they spent). It can also include proprietary macros, footers, and field text info (paragraph numbering, table of contents and similar functions).

Some of this is information that you may want or need to keep, such as track changes if the recipient is collaborating on the document. Also, be aware that if you clean “metadata” from PDF files that are being used in conjunction with electronic signature software (DocuSign, eSign, etc.), it may prevent the electronic signatures from working.

The need for metadata cleaning becomes abundantly clear from a real-life example that happened to one of my clients several years ago.  They received a document from opposing counsel in a corporate deal they were negotiating. The Word document contained hidden text and comments, but when opened (at that time with Word Perfect) all the comments popped up immediately, including one that said, in essence: “Jim, do you think we can get away with this sort of language?” Obviously my client called the other side and said: “Now, you don’t really think we’re going to agree to that sort of language do you?”  Game over.

However, a firm needs to establish a definite policy concerning metadata cleaning, because there is bound to be blow-back from attorneys and staff that even minimal extra steps are “too much work” or “slow down my computer.” So a firm needs to have a thorough discussion and get definite buy-in before trying to implement such a policy.

Sending Emails via a Link

A second element in email security is to send email attachments via a link, not directly attached to the email. This places the attachment in a secure, encrypted repository from which the recipient can download the attachment.  This may also become necessary if you are sending very large emails that exceed the maximum size allowed by Outlook (50 MB).

An additional advantage of using a product like Workshare or Sharefile to send attachments via link is that it gives you substantially greater control than just attaching an email or putting it in Dropbox for sharing. When you send an attachment via a link with Workshare you can also define what rights the recipient has.  Do they have to log in to the site, or is it wide open? Can they share the document with someone else? Can they download it, print it, edit it, copy it, etc.?

In short, you have considerably more control over the document than you would otherwise have. In many cases, this may not be necessary, but it is the sort of issue that when you need the functionality, you REALLY need it.

Risk and Ethical Analysis

The issue of email security has to involve a risk analysis that turns normal considerations about default settings on their head. The “normal” rule if that if you perform a given operation one way 80% of the time, then that should be the default, and for the other 20% of the time users will have to change the settings.

With email risks, however, a firm needs to take potential damage into account. You may not need to use added security such as metadata cleaning 80% of the time. However, the potential risks in users not properly using the metadata cleaner the 20% of the time are sufficiently great (see the above example), that priorities may need to be reversed in order to protect the firm from major damage, potentially even large monetary damage.

From the point of view of an attorney’s ethical duty to protect the confidentiality of client documents, it is significant that in a recent court decision (Harleysville Insurance v. Holding Funeral Home), the judge ruled that uploading files to the web (Box in this case) without either a password, forcing users to log in, or otherwise securing them voided attorney-client privilege on the documents. In was, the judge said, “the cyber world equivalent of leaving its [plaintiff’s] claims file on a bench in the public square and telling its counsel where they could find it. It is hard to imag[in]e an act that would be more contrary to protecting the confidentiality of information than to post that information to the world wide web.”

Although this is the first published decision to taken this sort of position, it is becoming apparent that similar standards will be increasingly applied in the future.

Review: 2017 Solo and Small Firm Technology Guide

Why should you read this book?  There are two reasons. If you are starting up a small firm or considering upgrades it provides invaluable advice. There is a second reason, perhaps even more important. As Jim Calloway notes in his introduction, the ABA revised its Model Rules to require that lawyers be competent with the technology tools they must use today. 26 states have followed suit and the number is increasing monthly it seems. If you sometimes wonder whether the technology you use is actually productive for your firm or if you are losing ground to competing firms, reading this book will bring you up to speed and give you a pretty good idea of where your firm stands from a technology point of view, even if you choose not to make changes. Increasingly, the argument “I’m a lawyer, not a techie” (in whatever version it is formulated) is simply not going to be ethically acceptable.

This is the tenth yearly edition for the Solo and Small Firm Technology Guide by Sharon Nelson, John Simek and Michael Maschke. As such, the changes from year to year are sometimes minimal, but they always focus on what’s changing and new areas of concern: this year these items include massive data breaches in law firms (the Panama Papers). There are also very useful chapters by Jennifer Ellis on social media and in particular security, privacy and ethics considerations in using them and on the "iPad for Litigators" by Tom Mighell and Paul Unger. David Bilinsky offers an excellent overview of the process and parameters involved in “Taking Your Firm Paperless.”

Since the book comes our yearly, the changes from one edition to the next are sometimes minimal, but they always focus on what’s changing and new areas of concern: this year these items include massive data breaches in law firms (the Panama Papers). Of course, they are always cornered by print deadlines and new items that appear the day after (or so it seems) the print deadline. This year, the book still includes an (inexplicably positive) review of LexisNexis’ Firm Manager, although Lexis Nexis announced on January 30 that it was discontinuing Firm Manager in order to maximize its “growth trajectories and various opportunities in our portfolio.” Read: this product was always a dog and we’re getting rid of it.

The thing I have always appreciated about this book is that the authors actually have opinions and are not afraid to express them. Of course, it also helps that by and large I agree with them, although with the occasional caveat. In addition, they cover what is necessary for a complete office starting from scratch – hardware, operating systems, peripherals, printers, scanners, monitors, etc. They rightly note that they can’t cover everything and have tried to provide “best of breed” advice. If you follow their recommendations you may not make the best decision possible, but you won’t make a bad one. The perfect is the enemy of the good.

A friend of mine used to say "every year I know 10% more and fall 15% further behind." Reviewing software is like that. The book simply cannot provide detailed reviews of software, so the authors stress the need to get trial versions of anything you are planning to use and "kick the tires" a bit.

The book rightly pays a lot of attention to security issues, especially for mobile devices. At the same time, they are realistic ("we know so many lawyers will ignore our advice...") and offer fall-back options that may at least deter casual hackers or simple thieves who grab your laptop or smartphone. After all, as they note, one out of every 10 corporate laptops is stolen or lost every year. They strongly recommend against using iPhones based on their woefully inadequate security provisions. They rightly insist that the main way to protect your data is to encrypt your entire hard drive. If you do any substantial traveling not to do this is like never locking your door. You should definitely change passwords periodically and use a password manager or program such as LastPass or eWallet.

Lastly, the book contains a chapter on "favorite utilities" which should be reviewed carefully. Some more industrial strength programs may include functionality provided by single-function utilities. Thus for example, the using Worldox document management system would eliminate the need for a separate indexer or viewer. On the other hand, stashed among the utilities are indispensable programs such as password managers, the Snag-It screen capture utility, the Payne Group’s Metadata Assistant and more. Some of these utilities (different strokes for different folks) will be indispensable in rounding out what you need for an efficient practice.

It may seem a bit churlish to complain about things that are missing in a book that has so much to offer. But that’s never stopped me. So here are some Quibbles and a wish list.  

The main item that is left over from my complaints of a year ago is electronic signatures, which are not even mentioned. This is a coming thing and I am getting more and more requests for information about it. Some of my small clients with large volume transactional practices (real estate, insurance defense) swear by it.  The three main players are DocuSign, Adobe’s e-Sign and a new program, Citrix’s RightSignature.

In terms of hardware, I put in Solid State Drives (SSDs) on my main computer and laptop a while ago. The speed difference is mind boggling – I would never go back. Prices have come down to the point where the difference is more than made up by the amount of time you save just on booting your computer every day.

Programs that I wish had been mentioned but weren’t: Case Management - Action Step; Document Management - MetaJure (even though I don’t consider it a serious document management program it has gotten a lot of play).

They have a section on “The Rise of Client Portals” and refer to Portals in the chapter on Collaboration.  By next year, this will probably take up more space.

The book is available from the ABA store. If you are starting an office, are at a point where you need to make a decision about where to go next, or just to want to keep up to date on what is currently available, this will be an invaluable primer.

To Cloud or Not To Cloud?

More and more firms are moving, or considering moving, to cloud-based applications.  Cloud-based programs make a lot of claims and quote a lot of facts (and sometimes alternative facts).

What are the basic considerations here?

The advantages to moving to a cloud application are obvious and much-trumpeted.

• You can access the program from anywhere seamlessly and usually from any device (laptop, smartphone, iPad).

• The cloud vendor takes over your IT structure: you no longer have to manage the servers involved with the application, network problems, etc.

• The cloud vendor takes care of updates: they are automatically dropped down to your devices.

• Since there is a monthly subscription fee, there is no up-front “buy-in” cost. Your costs are substantially lower at the outset.

• Disaster recovery. Assuming your vendor is set up properly, you do not have to worry about disaster recovery issues.  This can be a critical element, especially if the firm is in a flood/hurricane zone. After Hurricane Sandy on the east coast in 2012, I had one client call me and say “I don’t care what it costs, I want to move to the cloud.” Their entire office had been essentially non-functional for nearly two weeks.

But what about the disadvantages?

• First and foremost, you are tied to your internet connection.  You will NEVER get the same throughput you would get on an in-house server or even a Terminal Server (now rebaptized a Remote Desktop Server).  Internet service varies widely depending on where you live. In addition to service at your office, be sure to check your users’ home internet connections before you take the leap. You may have to upgrade your office internet connection to get acceptable performance. A cloud application does not automatically mean you will be able to work productively in a Starbuck’s.

• You will not have the same functionality as with in-house network apps. This is partly for historical reasons and partly for bandwidth considerations. Before you have a demo, make a check-list of the functions you use regularly and are critical to your practice and make sure those functions exist in your proposed cloud app.

•  Unless you go 100% internet, you will still have in-house servers, so while your in-house IT expense may be reduced, it won’t go away entirely. Calculate carefully what will go away and what in-house functions you will still need.

•  Over a longer term (3-5 years) cloud applications are almost certain to be more expensive than the in-house equivalent. Sure, you don’t have the buy-in, but you have the same monthly payment year after year after year. This is analogous to leasing a car. You don’t lease a car for three years in order to save money in the long run. This is true even when you make allowances for savings on in-house IT expenses.

Cloud applications can provide essential productivity. But in many cases the drawbacks can be a deal breaker.  Do your research thoroughly before you jump. If you are in a position to stall, there will almost certainly be better cloud options 2 or 3 years down the road.