A highlight for me during Lotusphere 2009 was delivering INV102, the Notes/Domino strategy and roadmap presentation along with Brent Peters. After many years of attending this session, I was actually delivering it! We had almost 1000 people attend the session, maybe more as I heard it went to the overflow room. One observation I had while presenting was that with my conscious effort to speak slowly enough for our international guests, I dropped some of my normal ad-lib humor from the delivery. I need to go read those session evals to see what you thought. Another observation I had is that since this session wasn't billed as a "mini-keynote", it wasn't clear to some of the attendees that it was intended to showcase our future direction and plans for Notes/Domino products. A few people have commented to me that they were expecting us to show more futures in the opening general session. The main reason was that we limited previews in the OGS to products that are announced and planned for specific shipping in the next few months...the mini-keynotes and breakouts were where you could see more of the abstract future plans.
Anyway, Brent and I delineated the content along the "what's shipping" vs. "what's coming" line. I spent a bit too much time on the here and now, especially as we had lined up two demos for the session -- one of our planned ActiveSync support (shown via an Apple iPhone), and one of some of the federated tasks and contacts capabilities planned for the Notes client. Brent did an excellent job of outlining our themes for future development, along the lines of "three I's" -- infrastructure, integration, and improvement.
I've had a few comments since the session that attendees were expecting us to announce a timetable for upcoming releases, but we did not. The main reason for this is that Brent's development organization has adopted the "agile" development methodology. Agile encourages the engineering organization to develop features on a more responsive, less structured timeline, and ship when ready. That means some of the futures we showed at Lotusphere will ship in the next point release, currently called 8.5.1 and planned for mid-year 2009 shipment. Others are not yet attached to a release structure. There's a reference to "Notes 9" in the presentation, but at this moment, I'm not sure whether "Notes 9" is one big-bang release or a few smaller, more incremental releases. We have to trade off consumability and testing types of concerns with the desire to lead the market and be innovative, adaptive, responsive all at the same time. Heck, at this point I'm not sure we'll even call the next one "Notes 9" -- wait, let me be bolder, we will not call it Notes 9. It just sounds tired. (Domino is a different story...but for the end-user, I'd like to do something more innovative).
The slides for INV102 are now available from Slideshare.net. This presentation has also been selected for most of the Lotusphere Comes to You events. Of course, I'll be updating it regularly as we get closer to release (e.g. Alloy on March 3), beta, or plan for our future releases.
Post a Comment
- 2
Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 1/29/2009 11:57:43 AM
"wait, let me be bolder, we will not call it Notes 9. It just sounds tired."
Wow.
- 3
Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 1/29/2009 12:39:44 PM
Wow good or wow bad?
- 4
Andy Stewart | 1/29/2009 12:44:28 PM
Very useful and will allow me to easily increase the confidence levels customers have in their commitments to Lotus products. Also, why not have a competition for the new name - how about (especially with the OpenNTF support) - LookOut 2009 (lol).
- 5
Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 1/29/2009 12:52:23 PM
I like the competition idea... the main challenge we've had in the past when doing something like that is that a name needs to be universal...translate or play well in 26 different languages. If we could do it right, though, it would be fun...
- 6
Rod Stauffer | 1/29/2009 1:33:12 PM
Please make sure this session has a repeat slot next year @ Lotusphere (as it has in years past). Even though this session was always a favourite of mine, I missed it this time. A repeat would have helped immensely.
Thanks for making the slides available!
- 7
Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 1/29/2009 1:34:12 PM
@3 Wow I'm surprised. Neither good nor bad.... yet. :-)
- 8
David Racicot | 1/29/2009 2:19:44 PM
Hello from Winterpeg. Please call it Notes 9. Please do not start renaming or rebranding Notes. The sales effort and dollars should go into selling Notes and Domino. No need to rename/rebrand and then have us have to say "well it used to be called Notes". A Rolex is a Rolex.
- 9
Timothy Briley | 1/29/2009 2:21:03 PM
"'Notes 9' -- wait, let me be bolder, we will not call it Notes 9. It just sounds tired. (Domino is a different story...but for the end-user, I'd like to do something more innovative)."
Please, please don't start being gimmicky with the names. If you stick with the numbering scheme, the user will at least know which version is newer. If you go to a name instead of a number, what are you going to call point releases?
- 10
Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 1/29/2009 2:23:05 PM
@8 -- No way would I remove the name "Lotus Notes". HUGE equity in the market. I just don't want to call it "Lotus Notes 9". And yes, Tim, I realize we'd have to have point release names etc..MS seems to work with service packs and the like, there's plenty of precedent.
- 11
Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 1/29/2009 2:30:19 PM
Notes 2010: The Year We Made Contacts (work)
- 12
Ed Maloney | 1/29/2009 3:12:35 PM
How about calling it R5, Superhuman Software? It worked once... Or how about NotesBox360 or NotesLive?
- 13
Timothy Briley | 1/29/2009 4:52:27 PM
@10 - So if we had called R8 "Impala" for example, we'd be calling R8.5 "Impala SP1"?
As a comparison, I don't think that MS has done anyone any favors with their Window naming "scheme":
Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7.
- 14
JFranchetti | 1/29/2009 7:17:34 PM
On the topic on point releases.
With 8.5 out, why are there still advances to the 8.0 line? 8.0.2 FP1 was released today; and 8.0.3 is scheduled in a few months. Why not have all that in 8.5 and forward?
I understand the 8.5 line has new features that might slow adoption, though it seems confusing (to me). Doesn't seem this sort of split-client concept is used much elsewhere.
** Example: Are all the important fixes in 8.0.2 FP1 (especially the server fixes) inside of 8.5?
- 15
Erik Brooks | 1/29/2009 10:08:54 PM
@Nathan/@Ed - "Wow" crossed my mind too. Also neither good nor bad, just... unexpected.
@14 - No, 8.5 will likely not have everything 8.0.2 FP1 has. 8.5 no doubt has some of those fixes, but there's bound to be a few fixes developed just after the 8.5 code was frozen. Similarly there are things in 8.5 that will be in 8.0.3.
Notes is a monstrously complex piece of software, and many corporations spend months testing a major release before upgrading to it. The Fix Packs are a way to introduce minor subsequent changes with minimal regression risk.
E.g. Upgrading from 8.0.2 to 8.0.2FP1 is a much lower risk than upgrading from 8.0.2 to, say, 8.5.0.
There's also the timing factor. Trust me, they wouldn't move 8.5's ship date a few months later just to line it up with 8.0.3's fixes.
The fastest updates come out with the newest release, and the top devs are always working on the newer versions. For example, 7.0.4 is due out in March. 7.0.3 came out ~18 months ago. The 7.x codestream is the "old version" now, and is only getting minor fixes (albeit a lot of them) -- the push is to upgrade if possible.
- 16
Sjaak Ursinus http://www.socialsoftwareblog.nl | 1/30/2009 3:35:03 AM
@Ed
I don't seem to get the ctach on why we really need a name in stead of a version number for notes ? Whats the win. You only create unnessacery difficulty to the market if you ask me. For instance if we are making comparison to MS. Windows 7 is the name of the new OS and the real version number is 6.1
Well this is a source for confussion if you ask me.
The versioning on Notes is one of the clearest in the market (besides the one of FireFox) so Please don't tune on it. There is nothing to gain in my vision.
- 17
Sean J | 1/30/2009 4:54:00 AM
Interesting....
I've always thought the Office style naming-scheme would be better, so "Notes 9" would become "Notes 2009".
I've often found that end-users stuck-on Notes 6 or earlier simply don't realize how old a version they're stuck-with. They think they are on a recent version and so complain that Notes is old-fashioned.
Using a year number-scheme clearly lets users know how up to date they are and provokes awkward questions for any laggardly IT Dept.
- 18
Henning Heinz | 1/30/2009 5:19:36 AM
Do it like Google, call IBM Lotus Notes BETA.*
* The Author of this post asks that this statement should
not be seen as a statement about Code Quality of IBM Lotus Notes. It was meant as a joke (and nothing else).
- 19
Colin | 1/30/2009 6:55:40 AM
perhaps something about creating a universal desktop with Eclipse by using Notes, Cognos, etc. "plug ins"
- 20
Darren http://www.dadams.co.uk | 1/30/2009 7:47:27 AM
@17 - I can see pros and cons of using the year. When I talked to a customer a while ago and they complained about the old and clunky look of Notes, maybe they would have been more considerate if they'd realised it was Notes 1999.
On the flip-side there's perceptions about how attractive a proposition something looks. Now it's 2009, how would an end-user feel about the rollout of something called Notes 2007? It would be perceived as being old the moment it hits their desktop... "it's called 2007 and we only just got it".
I guess we may have to reserve judgement until Ed reveals all. I get the point about @16 and clarity, but sometimes wonder if it's a good thing - some customers get too hung up on being rigid about client and server versions being in tandem when they don't need to be quite so rigid.
- 21
Martijn de Jong http://www.socialsoftwareblog.nl | 1/30/2009 7:55:32 AM
How about Lotus Notes TNG (The Next Generation)? :-)
I do agree however that some number in the naming would be better let people know which version is newer. if people had never used or heard of Windows they wouldn't have a clue if XP or Vista would be the latest version.
- 22
Wayne Hoath http://www.portalpartnership.com | 1/30/2009 7:55:44 AM
Notes Continuum.....what do I get if you use my suggestion? ;-)
- 23
Graeme Clark | 1/30/2009 8:02:08 AM
I should really wait till the competition but I think it should be called:
Notes Resonance
- 24
Sean J | 1/30/2009 9:47:50 AM
How about a movie based naming scheme... how about
"Lotus Notes IX - Return of the Loti"
;o)
- 25
Irv Schor | 1/30/2009 11:45:09 AM
I'm not worried about the name of the product... I just want to know if all of the web links I asked my dev team to change from webmail>inotes>dwa, ...and now back to iNotes are going to have to be changed again? In all seriousness, what certainly would benefit from a clarification is the whole client naming scheme of the current Basic vs. Standard. To the average person, there is no business differentation between those two words in product descripton. It may be beneficial if one was was called 'Basic' and the Eclipse-base 'Advanced', or some other variation.
- 26
Mat Newman http://www.isw.net.au | 1/30/2009 4:05:41 PM
@17 - SPOT ON!
There is certainly some merit to switching to "Notes 2010" instead of "Notes 9". As an instructor I am constantly fielding questions of "why can't Notes...?". The answer invariably is, "well, your organisation is using a version of Notes that came out in 1999/2002 and * either didn't exist then or was not widely supported."
* - replace with VCS, VCF, RSS, HTML/CSS email, etc
Although the users accept the response and explanation, it doesn't mean that it changes their perception that Notes is #&*^.
By placing the release year in the splash screen/welcome page, at least the end-users (which does - of course - include the CEO's and other decision makers) are aware how OLD their deployed version of Notes is.
I am SO over users in training courses doing comparisons between the (current) version of Outlook they use at home/in their old job, and the (10/7 year old) version of Notes they use at work.
@25 - Totally agree, although with a slight variation.
Why for example, isn't the "Basic" version called "Standard", since this is the Notes "Standard" interface that has been around since 6 (albeit with feature improvements and interface enhancements).
Renaming the Eclipse version "Advanced" then differentiates between the Standard Notes interface that users are familiar with, vs the "Advanced" interface and features provided by the Notes Standard interface overlaid with Eclipse.
Using "Advanced" for the eclipse version then also has the side-effect of informing users/decision makers/infrastructure planners that they have additional hardware overhead for deploying this variation of Notes, without having to explain the difference between Basic and Standard configurations.
- 27
Colin Williams | 1/30/2009 8:25:00 PM
Standard client = Lotus Notes Fusion. Yeah!
- 28
Patrick Kwinten http://quintessens.wordpress.com | 2/2/2009 3:36:37 AM
can you make the presentation downloadable? slideshare is here blocked by the proxy...
- 29
Mike Fr | 2/2/2009 5:41:49 AM
I vote for Lotus Notes 2010, the reasons all stated above.
If a TNG / Continuum / Return of, etc type name change goes through, why not make it, for example, Notes 2010 TNG?
That way, the different stakeholders are taken care of? Also, if the name is keep as short as possible, it will be easier to roll of the multilingual tongue. (My French vote would be to avoid the e, i, j and g sounds if possible ;_)
- 30
David Racicot | 2/2/2009 10:27:23 AM
Notes yyyy fp yyyymm
- 31
Peter Black http://www.energysys.com | 2/2/2009 4:14:21 PM
Notes 9 does not sound tired. It sounds like a mature product with an extensive feature set that is well tested. It sounds like something that you can invest in. It sounds like a quality product. It sounds like Office 11, not like Office 2003 or 2009 or 2007, with an in-built sell-by date. Microsoft have demonstrated on numerous occasions why alternative naming schemes that are devised to imply freshness simply imply desperation.
Be innovative. Tell customers that they are getting the ninth version of one of the best products in the world. Give them confidence. Tell them that millions of people use version 8, and 7, and so on, and that they can trust their lives to 9. Tell them that they have a great past behind them, and that version 10 is coming soon. And that 11, 12, and 14 are already in the pipeline. The future is bright, the future's Notes. Or Domino. Or something. But whatever it is, it's version 9!
- 32
Fabio Pignatti http://fabiopignatti.blogspot.com/ | 2/3/2009 3:54:37 AM
About Lotus and Agile, Mary Beth announced it in 2007. See here:
{ Link }
So it's good to do not know when features will be available.
- 33
Jan Van Puyvelde | 2/3/2009 4:38:50 AM
About the "9": Notes has been pronounced dead so many times, but it has more lives than a cat.
- 34
Sander Zwart | 2/3/2009 6:58:59 AM
As a collegue of my wrot on our internal blog:
New name for notes:
Lotusphere 1.0
An integrated, social, collaborative, enterprise, communication, webbased, networking, productivity, messaging, live, platform customizable for every business or individual need.
It's not in a name.
It's how you sell the experience!
- 35
Patrick Darke http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/03/ibms-sequoia-20x-faster-than-the-worlds-fastest-supercomputer/ | 2/3/2009 12:38:57 PM
Seems Engadget has a dig on the strategy. { Link }
- 36
David Price | 2/4/2009 9:07:33 AM
I just downloaded the presentations from Lotusphere and yours is not there. I read that PDFs, etc. were moving from the LS09 site to LotusLive on 2/6/09, will yours be there as well?
- 37
Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/4/2009 9:27:00 AM
can't answer that... I submitted it before presenting but do not know the linkage of getting it on LS09 or LotusLive. But you can download the PDF from Slideshare.
- 38
Daniele Vistalli http://www.vistalli.it | 2/7/2009 1:42:26 AM
@Ed Now we got "Agile development" and "Agile naming"
That's great. Having features flowing faster than before is good. Having appealing names for products is also good.
Now please ... go back to the dev/planning team and ask for some "Agile deployment" for client updates. The agile model means releases are out more often than before, this in turn means customers are spending more time updating their systems than using those (this happens on a lot of windows servers :).
My criticism is directed at the client. The last few CC updates weren't a piece of cake for distribution.
So please let's have a group in the dev team building a better, faster, cheaper (for the customer) and agile update system that could continuously update our systems with the new features being developed without the cost of doing updates all the time.
P.S.: The agile bug fixing of Lotus Quickr for domino is a sample of what I mean... Too many updates, too much time spent updating.
- 39
Palmi Lord | 2/7/2009 3:44:28 AM
Call it - Lotus Notes Platnium(IX)
- 40
Devis Block | 2/19/2009 1:40:25 PM
I like the name Lotus Studio Work IX! Huahuahuahua...play the part ... We really have many problems with customers these days have to find the version R5 and Notes software obsolete by the fact that the latest version and have few resources. We must make the customer know that this version is outdated and that new versions of the update, if you rename it that way, then go ahead
Let me guess...
Notes IX