SAP RISE is indeed more structurally disruptive than O365 because it moves the operational core, not just collaboration tools. Palo Alto's risk is both: the installed base erodes as SAP migrations reveal the old perimeter no longer exists architecturally, while the renewal cycle is where this hits first financially - CIOs face refresh decisions on firewalls for disappearing data centers and reallocate those dollars to Zero Trust access instead.
That healthcare customer avoiding North-South and East-West firewalls is hard CapEx avoidance, not just consolidation; it's revenue Palo Alto never sees and infrastructure that never gets purchased. Once customers choose Option B for SAP, they inevitably question the entire firewall stack, making this architectural shift far more dangerous to incumbents than any competitive feature gap.
Great insight!
SAP RISE is indeed more structurally disruptive than O365 because it moves the operational core, not just collaboration tools. Palo Alto's risk is both: the installed base erodes as SAP migrations reveal the old perimeter no longer exists architecturally, while the renewal cycle is where this hits first financially - CIOs face refresh decisions on firewalls for disappearing data centers and reallocate those dollars to Zero Trust access instead.
That healthcare customer avoiding North-South and East-West firewalls is hard CapEx avoidance, not just consolidation; it's revenue Palo Alto never sees and infrastructure that never gets purchased. Once customers choose Option B for SAP, they inevitably question the entire firewall stack, making this architectural shift far more dangerous to incumbents than any competitive feature gap.