Wednesday Jun 16, 2010
I am a developer
I like reading Ed Brill's blog . Why you may ask, do I like reading a senior IBM Lotus executive's blog?
Well, he is a superb writer, participates in the online community that he is a part off and gives some key insights into the inner workings of a large multi-national software brand. In the past, he has also left comments on my blog. This showed to me that elements inside of IBM can be approached if the discussion is framed properly. However Ed, I find stands out in the IBM hierarchy and leverages social media, where others are still passive observers. Its a pity that they don't, as until they do they won't understand the innovation that is in the Lotus brand with products like Lotus Connections and Lotus Sametime. We'll come back to this point as tacit knowledge in ICT is important. It is one of the main reasons I started this blog.
I can get quite vocal on twitter about IBM, if I feel that I've been .. well, I can't write those words here. If the IBM Australia Software Channel management team are unresponsive and not transparent, I'll notch it up a tone or two. I'm now finding people inside IBM Australia, not the management team, are responding, as the comments will appear as a red flag on a report. But that is not the reason I'm writing this blog post.
Ed wrote a post "I've never been a developer" and it hit a note with a number of people from across the globe in the Lotus community, with some 125+ comments. It also had resonance with me because I've experienced, and could associate quite strongly, with a number of the points made.
I did not originally sign up to IBM, for the Lotus brand. My interest was with WebSphere & Java (I was mentoring development teams in its use) and WebSphere Portal. IBM moved the WebSphere Portal product into the Lotus brand a few years back. I had to make a choice did I want to continue to leverage the investments in WebSphere Portal certifications through the Lotus brand or resit other certifications to remain in the WebSphere brand? I was tired of certifications so I moved forward with Lotus.
If we found potential sales opportunities we got some excellent pre-sales support from the IBM Lotus guys which also included WebSphere Portal pre-sales. Unfortunately, we either arrived too late to influence a sale and/or when Lotus was mentioned the customer lost interest. Didn't matter if it was Government, SMB or larger business. I kept thinking what is happening here? These products hold significant market share according to all the research I could find. If I keep at it, the effort should result in sales. During this period I learnt a lot of course about cash flow and demand
generation. I became very adept at running marketing campaigns and the pre-sales process (this could be a blog post in its own right).
The sales did not come. The effort I was spending on IBM certifications, meetings and pre-sales was increasing dramatically but the income sources (non-IBM) were drying up as I was neglecting them as the commitment to IBM software increased. In short, none of the IBM pre-sales material helped me achieve any significant sales in the local Australian markets that I tried - Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. Additionally there was no appreciation or understanding with my potential customers what an IBM Advanced Partner was and what specialisation in an IBM software brand (eg Lotus, WebSphere and Rational) meant for them. There were a few small wins, including being the second company in the world to sell IBM Workplace Services Express (the product was briefly introduced to supplant WebSphere Portal Express with more collaborative components. Was withdrawn from market due to poor sales).
During this whole period, I was working 60+ hours a week (sales, technical, business development) for what seemed like a very, very long period. I wasn't winning. It also had a bad affect on my health.
Was it me? Was it just the local market? The analysts statistics were saying that WebSphere Portal had continuously for a number of years held the top spot in sales. Why couldn't I compete and win against Microsoft?
I started researching this and the major two items I found were:
- Customers believed that it was a wiser move to leverage their existing investment in Microsoft; and
- Microsoft realised it was their responsibility to generate demand - that is the channel was a fulfillment mechanism.
I started deeply questioning (some said that I have a very interrogative and probing style) why I had been directed by IBM to performing the activities I did. I quickly came to the realisation that in the IBM Australia Software channel, that outside the technical persons I was engaging with, that there was very limited current understanding of the market and what the customer needs were. I could say a lot more here, but believe it may not be wise to in a public blog (if you want to know, email me directly). The short of it, is that they are mainly vertical experts, that is they understand their area of expertise that they are employed to do (and incentified to perform well) but have no tacit knowledge (which I mentioned before) regarding the actual procurement process the customers had to follow. As well as, no first hand knowledge of how to implement, upgrade or develop new components using the IBM software being sold. Now if I'm wrong with these statements, I'd welcome constructive and evidence (not emotion) based debate on the subject. If I'm wrong, I want to know why?
I've got deep technical skills, and can deploy, administer and develop components. I still cut code and consider this to be an essential skill moving forward and wrote about it in a post here. It gives me that tacit knowledge to understand this technology and how to assist clients with its implementation.
What concerns me is that in IBM, the majority of persons I come across, outside of the technical pre-sales team, have no tacit knowledge regarding implementing IBM software on a customer's project. This may be a cheeky statement to make but it would surprise me if more then 5% of IBM's management could write and deploy a Hello World servlet on a linux based WebSphere Application Server deployment by themselves.
So Ed if you read this, I'd encourage you to become a developer and to participate in actual customer projects and to encourage others in the IBM management to do the same.
If people are looking for a scenario, for a hypothetical SMB customer
(with <10 employees with max 2 internal IT persons), try implementing a records management system from a customers perspective, starting with requirements, moving through vendor selection, implementation and the first upgrade. The SMB customer is more then likely to already have an email system (either Exchange or Google Mail) and is not looking to replace it. I've had this scenario before, with a strong relationship with the customer and the IBM Lotus software group, were unable to provide me with a viable solution and competitive positioning to ensure that I won the deal!
Tags lotus developers brand smb market ibm customer | Comments 1
Tuesday Apr 21, 2009
Why did IBM pass up JAVA to let Oracle grab it?
I woke up this morning to the news that Oracle, which on April 20 said it will purchase Sun for $7.4 Billion USD. This news came, just after IBM withdrew its offer earlier in the month.
One of the key assets of Sun, is the Java programming language. Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle, has said Java is "the single most important software asset we have ever acquired.".
I've been involved with Java since it first came onto the scene, I think some thirteen years ago now. I can remember traveling to one of the earliest Java conferences in Melbourne, Australia and receiving a version of Solaris for Intel. I then spent a couple of days getting it working on my PC (it might have been a 386 or a Cyrix box, can't remember now). But that shows the age, not just of myself, but of the Java language. It has had a long time to embed itself into Enterprise software development and has accrued some good and not so good legacy.
In Jan 2008, I wrote a blog entry "Java losing some of its mojo in enterprise development?", where I was questioning the relevance of Java moving forward. What's more, I was hoping that Java would evolve not to compete against C# and .NET but because it makes logical sense to do so. I see now that with Oracle's stewardship careful focus will be required to see how the Java Community Process unfolds and how R&D efforts will be directed. The pressing question in my mind is will Java's evolution be tied purely to support ERPs moving forward?
On the positive side, I see Oracle taking the fight to Microsoft. Which can only be a good thing, given the current complacency in a number of organisations towards just using Microsoft based environments.
However, why did IBM pass up on this opportunity?
Java after all underpins the majority of its current software portfolio. Or does it?
In my 2008 prediction blog, I wrote at the end of 2007, that we would start to see the further evolution of language neutral SOA standards, such as SCA and SDO. This starts to open the potential for other languages besides Java to evolve in prominance in the middleware space. I've written about this evolution as I've seen the quiet rise in the background of the Composite Service Architecture specificaton through the OASIS Open CSA committee. In parallel I've seen the evolution of REST (Representational state transfer) based approaches, which are more readily understood by developers, than following conformity to standards developed by others.
Firefox, Google and Apple also have a strong focus on responsive browser based applications through the dramatic improvement of Javascript performance (Javascript is not the same as Java). Considerable effort is being expended in this area. It moves a lot of development from the server, back to the client. The side affect, is a reduced reliance on server based middleware and Java.
Friday Dec 05, 2008
IBM offers a 'Microsoft-free' desktop
I've been Microsoft Free for a while and a few people know about my efforts in this area. Giving up on Microsoft software for work was easy and it is not as painful as one may think.
This morning I received a tweet from Ric Hayman (aka Aqualung) about IBM's new offering on a 'Microsoft-free' desktop. Have also spotted the official press release - IBM and Business Partners Introduce a Linux-Based, Virtual Desktop.
A virtual desktop looks like a traditional desktop but is not limited to a single physical computer. Instead, many virtual Linux desktops are hosted on a server. The combined solution includes:
- Virtual desktop provided by Virtual Bridges called Virtual Enterprise Remote Desktop Environment (VERDE);
- Ubuntu, the worldwide leading Linux desktop operating system, from Canonical; and
- IBM Open Collaboration Client Solution software (OCCS) based on IBM Lotus Symphony, IBM Lotus Notes and Lotus applications. IBM Lotus Symphony is built on the Open Document Format (ODF).
I hope there is a concerted effort to break this myth in corporates and government institutions by IBM regarding Microsoft desktops as being the only viable option. The current economical circumstances may also give impetus towards alternatives like this.
However, a good starting point would be for IBM to drink their own champagne and roll it out internally. I guess we'll wait and see what happens.
Sunday Sep 28, 2008
IBM vs IBM in SMB - the competition continues
Following twitter the other day, I noticed a tweet by Ed Brill - "I've been tempted to think about whether failed institutions used Notes vs. Exchange, but all of them are likely IBM customers somewhere.". I sent Ed a tweet containing a link to a blog entry I'd written previously on IBM vs IBM in SMB.
James Governor, picked up on it here in a blog entry and highlighted the issue of X Series advertising and success of IBM software in SMB. Mark Cathcart, jumped in here, with James supporting the case of the underdog (being myself, Aussies are known for coming from behind and winning). Mark commented on the very competitive nature of the x86 market, and eluded if they didn't advertise Microsoft software, they'd be out of business before you could spell b-u-s-n-e-s-s i-n-t-e-l-l-i-g-e-n-c-e. Thinking aloud here, is that why IBM is allowing Lenovo to license their X Series technology in certain areas?
But again his statement conflicts with the view of IBM Lotus as expressed on the comment left by Ed Brill. Through Lotus Foundations, Lotus are intending to deploy an appliance into these SMBs. This appliance will ultimately also have access to Lotus Bluehouse. On a side note, the Lotus Foundations/Bluehouse scenario was what I was looking at eventually achieving five years ago, through WebSphere Portal Express. I'm glad to see that Lotus Foundations runs Linux (no Microsoft required - finally Lotus getting off of Microsoft Operating Systems), think it might use an X Series server (but there is no mention of it that I can point to), and the focus is on your business, not IT. Am a little concerned at the focus on Lotus Notes (but it does allow Outlook connection, not sure about the Mac) but at the end of day, until Lotus Bluehouse is effective, its only email. So for an SMB, why not use Google Apps & Google Mail?
Mark mentioned a product called iDataPlex, which seemed to be targeted at ISPs or larger organisations. Not sure how many SMB organisations, need a "Right-size your Internet-scale data center" type infrastructure? This highlights to me, the difference in thinking between those that sell and support the larger end of town and those that support SMBs.
Its two different worlds, that are equally important but completely separate in what the immediate business drivers are.
Now I did agree about Mark's point regarding the support and incentive to sell, however that's useless if the customers don't want to buy IBM Software in the first place. The x86 hardware market is so competitive that it has now got to the point that it is not worth while quoting, as the winning bid (every one gets the special bid) on a large transaction will have a margin of 1% (that also needs to cover the cost of warehousing and delivery) for the business partner.
The point I'm making here is that the support and incentives are irrelevant, if IBM has not primed the SMB market using business intelligence itself to help progress potential buyers through the product buying lifecycle. I don't want to engage with the customer with an IBM product, if it is the first time they have heard about it. The sales cycle is just too long and hence then unprofitable with considerable training expenses.
In my experience, SMB customer's perceive IBM as IBM, not the individual brands, be it hardware, software or services that make up the organisation. If there is confusion, or mixed messages, they will go to other vendors with clear and consistent messages and experiences. Maybe that is one of the reasons Apple is starting to do so well (this blog post has been written on my Mac Book Pro).
Tags linux google dynamics apple smb lotus+bluehouse lotus+foundations ibm market | Comments 1
Sunday Mar 30, 2008
Getting closer to Java Portlet Specification V2.0 products
The Portlet 2.0 specification (JSR 286) has been a long time in the making. In my mind, maybe a little too long. However the promise of having an event model for inter portlet communication between different vendor implementations and indeed Portal servers in one or more locations, through WSRP 2.0, is very exciting.
I found a good article on IBM Developerworks - What's new in the Java Portlet Specification V2.0 (JSR 286) , where "Figure . A sample portal page" is showing events between various types of portlets. Its good to see integration with Google Gadgets, which I noticed originally (blog entry here) could not participate in inter portlet communication. Now, I've been wondering why IBM has been delaying the release of WebSphere Portal 6.1? So I did a search on google to see if WebSphere Portal 6.1 would support it. Low and behold, there was a forum entry saying that current WebSphere Portal 6.1 Beta does. Looking between the lines one would assume that just after the Portlet 2.0, specification is released we will see WebSphere Portal 6.1 become GA.
Tags specification wsrp java ibm portlet jsr-286 portal websphere+portal | Comments 0
