Microsoft announced this $500M People Ready marketing campaign yesterday (http://www.microsoft.com/business/peopleready/default.mspx)
Microsoft needs to extract significant revenue from their existing customers. Typically this is done through offering more value, but to some customers lately their promise of value seems either far too expensive or not nearly enough - in either case customers are pursuing alternatives or simply not migrating. You will remember the famous "Customer is a Dinosaur" advertisement in Businessweek: - this is both insulting and evident how important it is to Microsoft that their customers pay, and pay and pay.
How much? Well $500M to let customers know that Microsoft software can be used by People! Blame it on Microsoft Enterprise Agreements?
Could it be that Microsoft is trying to become a consulting company? The People Ready website looks very much a consultants page! Could this be a leading indicator of Vista and Office 2007? Franchise protection? Or is this a good example of being product driven vs market driven? Maybe all of the above!
IBM surveyed 765 CEOs, worldwide from 21 industries, in 2006 and shared their insights on Innovation and other business priorities with our customers. See http://www-1.ibm.com/services/us/bcs/html/bcs_ceostudy2006.html?re=wmys for more details
IBM published the Global Innovation Outlook (GIO) - what our customers and thought leaders forsee (http://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/www_innovate.nsf/images/gio/$FILE/GIO_2005_at-a-glance.pdf) - See Irving's blog: http://irvingwb.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/the_global_inno.html
IBM has been delivering solutions to business problems that allows role based execution of business processes for several years!
More recently we have been sharing how IBM has helped companies do special things: http://www-306.ibm.com/e-business/ondemand/us/innovation/index.shtml?sa_campaign=message/1_1/all/makesyouspecial
On Services vs Software - Full of contradictions!
Look at these statements in CNN: http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml;jsessionid=NQY3ZCVFPUV3AQSNDBESKHA?articleId=183700192
Services firm Resolute displayed SharePoint solutions customized for financial services and aimed at Wall Street firms. Regional general manager Christopher Paradise said the event gave him a chance to connect with top executives from Resolute's target customer base. "Steve [Ballmer] is the draw," he said. "He always brings out the crowd."
Ballmer said Big Blue's vision is to drive business improvement by sending in armies of its consultants, whereas Microsoft's answer is software. "I think there's still a fairly prevalent view that IBM is a technology company as opposed to a services and consulting company," Ballmer said. "That may not be the case."
Where are we heading?
Our customers have been telling us: "we need flexibility and choice, innovations for innovators".
Continuing the "one size fits all computing model" is a vestige of the past! You can't put that genie back in the bottle.
Linux isn't going away. Neither is Java, PHP, AJAX, XForms, ODF, Websphere, Workplace and other technologies based on open standards.
Advantage IBM Workplace (http://www-142.ibm.com/software/workplace/products/product5.nsf/wdocs/workplaceoverview)[Read More]
Social Business transformation
AntonySatyadas 1100009CNT 1,102 Visits
From Office Sharepoint Portal Server 2003 to Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007: is a portal? is not a portal?
Check this out! http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/feb06/02-15OfficeMoreOptionsPR.mspx
New: Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007.
Yes, this used to be called Sharepoint Portal Server
So what is going on?
Microsoft is changing Portal frameworks (http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/05/09/WebParts/). So it's possible that customers may have to rebuild all of their Sharepoint Web Parts to take advantage of the new features.
Did you know that Sharepoint Portal Server 2003 cannot run on .Net 2.0 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/907763)
So it's not possible for it to work with the new portal framework included in Net 2.0.
Guess what then? Sharepoint Portal Server 2003 users cannot move to Visual Studio 2005 and .Net 2.0
Here are some reasons why at least one customer has shied away from Sharepoint Portal Server 2003:
- Supports only one language per server or cluster
- Limited development tools for remote deployment
- Active Directory/ADAM (Active Directory Application Mode, LDAP service) does not work together
- Limited out of the box web parts, Poor integration with Domino applications, Limiting Peoplesoft integration
-beyond use as an Office 2003 document sharing server, most everything else for customer portal services would have to be coded, designed and installed or integrated in SharePoint Server... building a server farm for scalability, using Windows load balancing (NLB) for basic data caching, designing roles in Active Directory, doubling performance with SQL Server, adding process management with BizTalk, presence with LCS, and coding or adding capabilities for data abstraction, membership management, localization, mobile transcoding, fuzzy or parametric search, discovery, automated portlet services, portal application integration assembly tools, virtualization, analytics, hot failover, business logic caching...
So, many customers end up federating Sharepoint Server 2003 under WebSphere Portal.[Read More]
The recent Microsoft case study and the report published by Gartner is a good example of how one should not design a solution. Why? For one, the customer in the study spents ~US$1.5M to just do mail migration. They are estimating another US$1.5M atleast for migrating the applications! Alternatively, they could have freed up significant IT budget by not renewing their MS Enterprise Agreement and then spent a portion of the cost of the migration to get the required functionality. Do the ROI math here!!
Let us look at this latest Microsoft study that Gartner published as: Migration From Domino to Exchange Is Easy for E-Mail, but Applications Prove More Challenging 22 February 2006 by Matthew W. Cain. (G00137480)
Microsoft's case study: "Services Firm Switches to Microsoft Collaboration, Cuts Costs and Improves Productivity" is available here:
I like the Gartner one - to the point. The Microsoft title brings up several flags:
- Well, all they switched was email
- The document says they hope to improve productivity
1. Aging infrastructure not keeping up with a growing (85%) mobile workforce
- 50/50 chance of connecting to office: One of the key Notes/Domino value proposition is disconnected usage and replication!
2. Employee communication and collaboration suffered
- No unified up-to-date corporate phonebook online anywhere. Do it in Domino...
- Need to create a sense of community among employees Do it in Domino!
- Eurochem: http://www-306.ibm.com/software/success/cssdb.nsf/CS/DNSD-6LTE5V?OpenDocument&Site=software
3. Internal IBM Lotus Notes applications - complex engagement management - were difficult to use
- Usability - Number of mouse clicks! Design?
- Flexibility and scalability for 7000 users?
1. Broader Options
Broad mobile-communication options!
Really? See : http://www-142.ibm.com/software/sw-lotus/lotus/offering1.nsf/wdocs/matrix2
Concern over long-term viability of Domino and confusion over IBM's road map for Domino.
Improve employee satisfaction with corporate IT services: survey results? study?
2. Increased alignment with Microsoft strategy
Facts about the Business Case:
They spent $214 per user to migrate mail only. They have no established ROI for this expenditure, and don't necessarily believe it will save them any money.
They spent $214 per user -- without implementing coexistence tools which would have eased the migration pain. Expect that the cost per user would have been higher had they put the coexistence gateway in place.
They continue to operate their Domino infrastructure for applications. They think they will have apps moved in two years, at an additional estimated cost of $200 per user) -- but nobody knows if that will work yet.
There are no hard facts in here -- just perspectives.
"the firm hopes the migration appeases these IT services concerns"
"the firm has not done thorough estimates, it believes the ultimate cost of migrating applications will be in the range of another $200 per user,"
" the company believes that managing the Exchange environment is easier than managing the Domino e-mail infrastructure"
"ensured a smooth transition for users" conflicts with "This created challenges in communication".
They imposed 150 MB mailbox quotas on the new system. Is that worth migrating to?
Binary Tree offers migration tool to move from Microsoft Exchange to Lotus Notes Domino: http://www.binarytree.com/website/msg/home.nsf/vContentW/CMT+For+Notes--CMT+For+Notes!Opendocument&migrateFrom=Exchange&migrateTo=Notes
and the case studies posted in their website points to superior collaboration as one of the reasons customers moved from Exchange to Lotus Notes Domino. http://www.binarytree.com/website/msg/home.nsf/vContentW/9D1C66B21191E43586256E850068077A
More than 3000 customers leveraged the Binary Tree tool!! According to Binary Tree, they have helped migrate more than 5Million users from MS Exchange to Lotus Notes/Domino since 1995.
So, maybe its not too late still, to use the same tool to get back using IBM Lotus Notes/Domino, and explore Websphere Portal and related technologies.[Read More]
Microsoft is still referring to a year and a half-old vendor-funded report from the consulting arm of an analyst group that is no longer in business!
Check out this "TCO study": http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/evaluation/compare/METAEx2k3vNotes.mspx
So we still have our analysis posted at http://www-142.ibm.com/software/sw-lotus/lotus/offering1.nsf/wdocs/tcostudy until the FUD is put to rest!
Oh by the way did you know:
This report was done by not the analysts but by META consultants as part of a Microsoft paid engagement.. There is no mention of how they computed the TCO!
META was since been acquired.
Comparing apples to oranges is flawed: Exchange 2003 vs Notes/Domino R5, 6, and 6.5 customers (R5 shipped in 1999). Since the study we have shipped N/D 7. Meanwhile, we await Exchange "12"!
So folks: Be aware of facts. Bust this FUD.[Read More]