Ed Brill

Post a Comment

1. 1  Colin Williams  | 9/22/2009 4:22:41 PM

   YES!

1. 2  Patrick Picard  | 9/22/2009 4:25:21 PM

   Yay, IBM is growing some cojones :D

1. 3  Bill Dorge  | 9/22/2009 4:44:13 PM

   hmm, what can you say but, "THANK YOU!!!"

1. 4  Sean Cull http://www.seancull.co.uk | 9/22/2009 5:08:14 PM

   Brilliant

1. 5  Olaf Boerner http://www.bcc.biz | 9/22/2009 5:14:59 PM

   Hi Ed,

   good point to question MS figures in public. However i am a little bit confused.

   "Picciano says customers are expanding their investment in Lotus software and he cited as examples Accenture, BASF, Chrysler, Coca-Cola, Colgate-Palmolive, Continental AG, Finishline, General Motors, GlaxoSmithKline, Gruppo Amadori, KBC Bank, Nationwide, Novartis, Phillips Electronics and PNC Bank."

   As far as I know is that GlaxoSmithKline nad Phillips are claimed as big wins by MS. And Accenture is an old MS Migration story.

   Can you explain this please. We need to explain that to our customers.

   Best regards

   Olaf

1. 6  Darren http://www.dadams.co.uk | 9/22/2009 5:29:55 PM

   @5 - there is a company mentioned in this thread who has grown their number of Notes seats since migrating to Exchange for e-mail. Anyone who thinks that's a good cost-of-ownership situation, please make an appointment with the doctor. No, they won't be a reference... would you?

1. 7  Jim Casale http://www.jimcasale.net | 9/23/2009 4:03:55 AM

   @6 I know of one company not mentioned that did just what you said. Increased Notes seats while claiming to migrate to Exchange (well they are in the process of migrating - we will see how good that goes).

1. 8  Henning Heinz  | 9/23/2009 6:32:50 AM

   If that is true then I am even more surprised that IBM does so little for the "old" application model. I mean XPages are really great but if millions of customers are using old but valuable Notes applications wouldn't it be great if they get more functionality or features that would improve existing applications AND enable great new applications?

   One example would be Picklists that really have a very bad implementation for title and prompt (hard to read, not customizable). Add a full text search functionality and this would provide real added benefit to many Notes applications while being fully backwards compatible (and yes I know that you can develop custom picklist behaviour on your own).

1. 9  Henning Heinz  | 9/23/2009 6:38:21 AM

   I am surprised to read so many names that are known for being MS success stories (companies like Philips, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Accenture, Coca Cola). As a customer you now have two vendors that both claim victory for the same clients.

   I still liked the response from IBM.

1. 10  Philip Storry http://www.not-so-rapid.com | 9/23/2009 7:44:43 AM

   Henning @9

   But having customers that are a success for both sides is the point.

   Microsoft are lying when they say that a customer has migrated. Or, at best, they twist the truth by saying that the customer has "begun migration" - which could mean anything from starting planning to having one last site to migrate.

   Some of these customers have been "migrating" for years.

   Some of them are actually multiple companies, and it's not clear which entity is migrating. If I recall correctly, Coca-Cola(?) has different companies for different operations and territories. Some run Domino, some run Exchange. So it can be confusing. And Microsoft rarely states seats when talking about these companies, because they'd rather you assumed it was the whole group worldwide than just one of the component companies.

   When it comes to competitive announcements, Microsoft are all about:

   * announcing decisions as though they're completed projects

   * treating licences sold as seats installed

   * giving the impression messaging is groupware when it suits them (and vice versa)

   * using data and sources that would be regarded as grounds for gross incompetence anywhere else.

   And recently, they pushed that little bit further with their "some countries are Notes-free" claim.

   Which is something they KNOW they can't prove, and is a lie so long as IBM operates in a country.

   Microsoft has spent a decade bending the truth and flat out lying. And only a few voices in IBM did anything about it.

   @Ed - This is great.

   Thank you. I know you - and others - worked very hard to change things so that we could get this kind of reaction. It's appreciated, it really is.

1. 11  Name Withheld  | 9/23/2009 12:34:13 PM

   I work for Countrywide that was bought last year by Bank of America. We are migrating to Exchange using the Outlook client because that's what Bank of America uses. Nine years after Bank of America "migrated" to Exchange for email, they are still using Notes for critical applications. Countrywide has many thousands of applications which will most likely not be converted to another platform. I've had problems with not receiving email messages and calendar invitations. I've had other people forward me the email messages and calendar entries and I was listed as one of the recipients, yet never received the email messages or invitations. Outlook crashes at least once a week. The scheduler in Notes was much better. It takes months longer to create an application in .NET than in Notes. Yet I hear all the time that Notes is dead from the Notes haters. I really feel that Notes is a better platform for many applications than Microsoft solutions and I came from a Microsoft programming environment and just started programming in Notes around 5 years ago.

   I guess we'd be included in the number of companies "migrating" from Lotus Notes to Microsoft Exchange.

   I've withheld my name because of fear of political fallout.

1. 12  Name Withheld  | 9/23/2009 12:36:56 PM

   BTW, I believe that Bank of America has increased in the number of Notes seats because of the consolidation of the home loan divisions into the ex-Countrywide home loan division. Notes is a "sticky" product and hard to get rid of.

1. 13  Henning Heinz  | 9/23/2009 12:40:11 PM

   @10 Philipp

   Is Microsoft really always lying or do some of those companies indeed use Exchange for mail but keep Domino and Notes for applications (which would not make much difference for IBM as the application license includes mail so no revenue is lost)?

   I don't know but if this is true then I am a bit nervous for IBM not enhancing the "old" stuff. It is what would make existing applications even more valuable.

   As for lying. If Microsoft is lying IBM should sue them. If you don't sue them they will probably never stop.

   Of course I don't know all companies mentioned above but some on this list have migrated mail from Notes to Exchange. Maybe they renewed their Notes licenses or bought Connections but just saying that Microsoft lied here sounds a bit simple to me.

   Microsoft might tell nonsense with their Notes-free country stories but I am also skeptical about what IBM counts as a win.

   It would need more facts from both vendors to get the real picture.

1. 14  tom oneil  | 9/23/2009 2:49:13 PM

   @13 I'm not sure exactly what you would sue them for? If they started putting their statements in advertisements or on the product box... you might have a point.

   I think the biggest takeaway is that the only people who actually care are Ed Brill readers. Who cares if Microsoft has more seats or converts more users? If Lotus has the better product (and a competent sales team who'd actually visit a company or two... ) then Lotus will convert all those companies will convert right back to Notes.

   Then, hopefully the Lotus Notes R&D will continue to improve the product (and those "competent sales people" keep visiting a company or two) and we'll crush Microsoft.

   Ending this stupid conversation forever.

1. 15  Mike McP http://www.openntf.org/Projects/pmt.nsf/ProjectLookup/mPortal | 9/23/2009 3:15:39 PM

   @14 Ehh, not so sure about that one. There's a bit of a herd mentality, likely fueled by mild paranoia of being left behind in a constantly changing landscape.

   When decision makers hear ridiculous claims, they're likely to get worried if they're using what they see as the 'losing' product, per the rumor mill. That mindset itself then causes people to switch, and then the lies become somewhat truth. Kinda like if someone starts rumors that a healthy bank is going to go under, and then people start pulling their money out, which in itself causes the bank to go under.

   Moving platforms isn't cheap, so once someone makes the switch, they'll likely put up with a pretty crappy product to help save face.

1. 16  tom oneil  | 9/23/2009 3:40:32 PM

   @15 The people who actually sign off on these decisions are typically being coaxed by their underlings anyway. Microsoft bathes the underlings with gifts. Microsoft does all the "stats gathering" and reports for these lazy underlings.

   Meanwhile, well-dressed IBM sales rep picks up the phone, calls the CIO and asks "Hey Bob? Still an IBM shop? Great... thanks!" and hangs up the phone. Remember the quote from the U.S. Bank story: "I wouldn't be arrogant enough to call U.S. Bank an IBM shop..."

   IBM's problem is that they still use terms like "IBM Shop." I don't blame Microsoft for getting feisty with a statement like that.

1. 17  David Bell  | 9/23/2009 9:35:09 PM

   @13 - "which would not make much difference for IBM as the application license includes mail so no revenue is lost"

   So, should MS be able to claim that they moved 4.7m users "off Notes" if those customers continue to use Notes apps ? Me thinks not.

   The statement from Redmond suggests that they moved customers from Notes to Outlook as a complete migration, yet happily leaves out the fact that they STILL HAVE NO NOTION OF HOW TO DEAL WITH THE APPLICATIONS. We know that in all (probably) of these cases, the customer winds up paying for two infrastructures and the cost of a migration. Lying by omission is still lying.

   The impact is not to IBM revenue, it is to the general perception of the supposed success of these efforts and an attempt to distort reality. In all likelihood, by any objective measure, all of these projects are colossal failures and wastes of money.

   It really makes me wonder whether MS actually asks its customers whether they can disclose details of these supposed transitions.

1. 18  B. Rohde  | 9/24/2009 3:24:43 AM

   Is the problem realy MS that tell lies about converting Notes to Outlook? I think not, for me the real Problem is, that IBM-Salesmen don't stop telling Customers that "Notes is dead".

   What shoud the it-managers think when they hear such a statment from IBM it self? That MS is telling lies and they shoud keep Notes? Nobody will keep a dead product, so they start thinking about switching away from Notes.

1. 19  Henning Heinz  | 9/24/2009 3:40:35 AM

   The statement from Redmond maybe suggests that companies now use Exchange and Outlook for mail and calendaring/scheduling while those companies used Domino and the Notes client in the past. Now as long as those customers renew or even extend their Notes and Domino licenses IBM counts this as a "win". Now for IBM there really is not much difference revenue wise but for me every customer that moves their mail to Exchange is a sad story and in many cases a lost customer(for me, maybe not for IBM). At least I would never come to the conclusion that this is a "win".

   Now if all those companies still use Notes and Domino for applications isn't this a prove that those are really assets that they want to keep and maybe enhance even further? But if this is true I even less understand why IBM just puts its old development model completely on hold. I did not say this is wrong but just that I don't get it.

1. 20  Hal Ninth  | 9/24/2009 4:56:02 AM

   Deleted

1. 21  Kevin Mort http://www.theglobalmind.com | 9/24/2009 1:39:11 PM

   @20 - Hal, I would say there are certainly a number...perhaps large number who are switching or have switched.

   However, I wouldn't say that customers who are on Notes/Domino and choose it over Exchange/Outlook are in any way legacy.

   That's the choice for their business. It isn't a "legacy" platform, despite what some would like you to believe.

1. 22  David Bell  | 9/24/2009 8:58:19 PM

   @20 - "they are so legacy that it's impossible to move them?" - err no, it's just that after 10 (or so) years of empty promises out of Redmond, they STILL have no comparable alternative solution that comes close to providing the value of Notes and Domino.

   That does not make Notes/Domino legacy; that is just a label MS put on it because they have no idea how to deal with it.

1. 23  Charles Robinson http://www.cubert.net | 9/25/2009 10:00:37 AM

   @20 - It has nothing to do with legacy, it's because Notes/Domino is a unique product. To move a Notes application to any other platform requires a complete rewrite. There are ways to mitigate this, including using XPages, but the bottom line is you're going to have to rewrite any traditional Notes client application. Some companies find such a migration worthwhile, others don't. The issue is one of value, which is measured in more than money.

   @22 - Value is subjective. Many customers are obviously finding sufficient value in Notes to keep it, while others are finding more value in the Microsoft offerings. Everyone who disagrees with the yellow bubble's opinion is not an idiot no matter how many times they declare it to be so.

   You keep saying that Microsoft doesn't know how to migrate Notes apps to their platform. You're wrong. Just because Notes to .Net migrations haven't been automated yet (as far as I know) doesn't mean those migrations aren't happening anyway.

   No matter what people say, there are some very smart people working at Microsoft. Some of them also worked at Lotus. It would be wise to recognize the threat of competition instead of denigrating it. The head-in-the-sand mentality and the overzealous chest thumping aren't making the situation go away. I'm thankful that Ed and others are responding to it in a meaningful way.

1. 24  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 9/25/2009 7:22:53 PM
   
   

   To be fair to David, I do some of that chest-thumping too. The problem is the disconnect between all the times we are told that because a customer has switched email systems, they are no longer a Notes user, and the reality that most continue to use their Notes apps for many years to come. That disconnect is propagated out of Redmond.

1. 25  Ian Scott  | 9/26/2009 12:16:37 PM

   legacy noun (legacies) 1 an amount of property or money left in a will. 2 something handed on or left unfinished by a past owner or predecessor • a legacy of mismanagement.

   ETYMOLOGY: 15c: from Latin legare to leave by will.

   By this definition of 'legacy' Notes must:

   1. be of value

   2. have been handed on unfinished to IBM by Iris.

   The first interpretation speaks for itself while the second suggests Notes is an ongoing project (ie Notes is not dead and never has been).

   It seems to me the word 'legacy' is often hopelessly misused.

   We have one .NET application but since we are staffed with Oracle, Java, and Notes people we have no-one who is able to maintain it. It's our .NET application that is legacy!