My point was that in no case (Google/Facebook/Apple) does anyone have "a copy" of the core product that they can extend. The developer platforms of each are in a sense extensions to the core products and most "hacking" around Google/Facebook/Apple is related in some fashion to B2C products. SAP also has an army of suits creating B2B products, which makes sense since it is their core market (e.g. B2B offerings instead of B2C).

That said, I completely agree that there are (apparently) higher barriers to entry to SAP and it mystifies me why this would be in their best interests -- I assume in some sense it is the security of the "gated community," where one knows that if one engages a SAP consultant he/she has already been vetted in some fashion.

This sort of approach (which I find typical of Germany) leads to a high average but a real handicap when it comes to innovation. But then again if you are doing something very well it is easy to make money hand over fist and then use that money to buy the latest greatest new sauce once it is ready (which is what SAP has done here with this acquisition).

I need to defend SAP on this subject. While I agree that they are pretty poor about reaching out beyond their own ecosystem they acknowledge this is a weakness of theirs and they are trying to fix it. They've done a lot over the last year or two to try to make it easier to dabble and they are continuing to push for a more open environment for 3rd party developers.

I think I probably meant the emphasis to be on the "own time for their own pleasure" rather than the "at home" part of my comment.

Maybe there should be another version of that silly Gartner diagram where the axes are "importance" and "interestingness" - SAP would be high importance and low interestingness .