Collaboration and Content Strategies Blog

KM and Attention Management: Wine and Aspirin?

Blogger: Craig Roth

Hola!  I'm just back from our conference in Barcelona.  It went very well and I got to meet many interesting customers from a broad spectrum of international companies and agencies.   And if that wasn't enough fun, the sangria and architecture walks would have made up for it.

One interaction that sticks in my mind is a question I got during the Q&A after my session on Enterprise Attention Management.  I spoke after two Enterprise 2.0 presentations that talked about wikis, blogs, social software, and personal web pages.

The question I got (which I'll paraphrase a bit) was "First you tell me about all these new mechanisms for content creation with Web 2.0, then talk to me about attention overload?  Do you guys plan these presentations together?"

It does seem a bit contradictory at first: two presentations on how to publish more content through new channels and then a presentation on how we have to deal with so much new content.  It's like selling bad wine on Saturday and aspirin on Sunday - you're creating your own demand!

Well, it's not quite so clear cut.  First, my papers and presentations are on Enterprise Attention Management, not information overload.  Information overload is a driver, but if I was to stop there I'd just be joining a chorus of people complaining about something with no solution.  Enterprise Attention Management is the study of the processes and technologies used by information workers to determine which information and messages will be read, allocated time, and acted upon.  And EAM is what I was really talking about.

I don't believe in muzzling anyone as a way to deal with information overload.  From a creation point of view, anyone should create what they want and exercise constraints due to common courtesy and policy.  Enterprises need to spend more time on giving information workers the tools they need to pull important messages forward and push unimportant messages back.  It is the gold nuggets of information that will be created that are of value, despite the amount of silt that they are in.  To continue the gold prospecting anaology, the proportion of gold nuggets to silt has decreased and will decrease over time.  But with proper discovery techniques, those nuggets can be of great value.  That one time that an engineer decides to blog about a problem they solved may save a huge hassle in a few years, long after they have left the company.  Until it is needed, that information isn't harming anyone if your disk storage costs are reasonably low and discovery and attention shielding capabilities are up to the task.

Getting Things Done and Microsoft Outlook

Blogger: Peter O'Kelly

So... I finally got around to finishing Getting Things Done, after having it on my expansive unread-book shelf for ~6 months (what's the emoticon for self-deprecating irony?...).  I wish I'd thought to explore the Wikipedia entry on GTD before reading the book, as that would have saved me some time; I still think the book is a worthwhile read, however. Wikipedia also has an entry on GTD software -- an impressive list; clearly the GTD approach has resonated with lots of readers (and software developers).

I'll have more perspectives to share on the GTD themes in future posts, but for now I wanted to share a quick note about Microsoft Outlook in this context.  GTD author David Allen notes, on p. 153 (of the paperback version of the book), that:

"Some applications (such as Lotus Notes) allow you to file a copy of an e-mail into one of your folders as you send it (with a 'Send and File' button).  Others (e.g., Outlook) will simultaneously save only into your universal 'Sent Mail' folder.  In the latter case, what seems to work best for many is to copy ('cc' or 'bcc') themselves when they delegate via e-mail, and then to pull that copy into their '@WAITING FOR' folder.  (It's relatively easy to program Outlook to automatically send any e-mail that you 'cc' to yourself in a designated folder, which would replicate the process just described.)"

Here's my information worker time & attention entropy reduction tip for the day: Allen is wrong -- Outlook does support send-and-share, but it's a multi-step action in Outlook, rather than the single-step action in Notes.  How it works in Outlook 2007 (it also works in earlier Outlook releases, but with a few more mouse clicks):

When creating a new message, click the Options tab in the Outlook Ribbon; then click Save Sent Item

 

(Click on the thumbnail to see the image in a larger, pop-up window)

Pretty handy -- Outlook uses a most-recently-used folder list, although it's not ideal, since using subfolders with the same name results in annoyances such as "Misc" and "2007" showing up twice in this example.

Clicking "Other Folder..." presents the following dialog:

Also useful, but it'd be a lot more useful if Outlook's designers made it a re-sizable dialog.

(BTW this feature was in Outlook 2003 in a clunkier user experience, and with a really dumb user experience trick: selecting a folder and specifying that the message should be saved are distinct actions in Outlook 2003, so if you select a folder but don't hit the "Save..." checkbox control [and you've defaulted to not saving messages, which I recommend, assuming you don't want to use your Exchange disk space quota with an overflowing Sent folder of stuff you'll probably never look at again], you've wasted several mouse clicks and failed to save a copy of the message.)

If you're an e-mail-retentive type, and expect to do this a lot in Outlook 2007, you can also create a Quick Access Toolbar shortcut by right-clicking on the "Save Sent Item" button:

Thereafter, the send-and-save option is a single click away, as in this example:

I still like the Notes user experience model better in this context, but at least Outlook users don't have to do the silly cc/bcc-yourself-and-refile-later routine that David Allen suggests.

And now, if you'll excuse me, I have other things I need to get done :)

Reviewing Microsoft's UC Launch Event

Blogger: Mike Gotta, Principal Analyst

Microsoft officially launched its UC platform last week in San Francisco at the Bill Graham Auditorium. A webcast of the keynote is available here. Please note that if you scroll down, there are also links to case studies as well as the launch presentations and demos. I attended the event and posted a series of entries on my Collaborative Thinking blog.

• Microsoft UC Launch Event: Getting Ready
• Microsoft Launch Event: Bill Gates Keynote
• Microsoft UC Launch: Jeff Raikes & Bill Gates
• Microsoft UC Launch: VoIP Quality of Experience
• Microsoft UC Launch: Anywhere Access
• Microsoft UC Launch: Embedding UC In LOB Applications

Was anything new announced?

Much of the media coverage related to the event was pretty lukewarm regarding the "news" coming from the keynote and other sessions. To a great extent, that perspective is valid. What Microsoft has been doing regarding its unified communications strategy has been widely presented over the past year (including VoiceCon Spring and VoiceCon Fall). If you scroll down through my blog entries on the topic of unified communications, you will find several posts related to Microsoft. So from a technology perspective - you had to look beyond the obvious to find some hint of what was coming next - and there were some hints provided in the breakout presentations. I'm not sure why anyone expected any "new" information- this event was more of a signature moment on an effort that has evolved and progressed over the last five years. Additional information:

• Microsoft Launches Next Wave of Business Communications Software
• Bill Gates on the Age of Software-Powered Communications
• Partners Rally Around Microsoft Unified Communications Software

So what were some of the takeaways?

To compete in the UC market, enterprise strategists will be looking for vendors to deliver on the following (covered in this post):

• Platform approach
• Centralized data
• Multi-channel user experience
• Extensibility
• Economics

This does not mean reliance on a single vendor end-to-end, but a cohesive architectural framework with appropriate interfaces for integration (that allows for substitution of a vendor's native capability with that provided by another) and support for interoperability (e.g., via gateways or federation).

Another key point is that the strategic level of competition has shifted from technology to business model. By this, I mean that vendors trying to compete with Microsoft must be able to deliver and differentiate when it comes to channels, partner ecosystem, champions (not just traditional sponsors but new audiences - especially application developers), and third-party support (not only partners but from independent vendors and competitors integrating into the UC platform). This topic was covered in this post.

The next important message: planning is essential for success. Regardless of vendor, unified communications is complicated. Not only do you have all the technologies (instant messaging, audio / video / web conferencing, VoIP/IP Telephony, etc) but also mobile scenarios, room systems, hosted environments, security (perimeter network) and compliance needs that are made that much more intricate when you add in UC-enabled applications and topology influences (multiple data centers). Some of these issues were covered in this post.

What's next?

There were no specific keynote statements from Microsoft on future deliverables, timelines and such other than general statements on how UC technology will evolve and show up within various Microsoft software and platforms. There was a link made between UC and Microsoft's "Surface Computing" effort. There was the standard talk about "click to communicate" from within Office and how UC will end up within Microsoft's Dynamics solution as well as discussion on UC-enabled applications. There are some tactical needs that Microsoft needs to focus on:

• Maturity: OCS is not an refresh/rebrand of LCS - there are new server roles, new components for the perimeter network, completely new functionality in terms of audio/video, and some new twists on communication methods (e.g., running a custom extension to SIP called Centralized Conference Control Protocol, Microsoft's proprietary Live Meeting's Persistent Shared Object Model traffic, and early implementation of a pending IETF standard, Globally Routable User Agent URI). There is also no integration between the Microsoft Intranet Portal (used by some companies to manage their hosted Live Meeting service) and OCS.
• Compliance: While the archival capabilities are improved, if you are a regulated industry I think you will still rely on OCS-friendly products that provide more comprehensive frameworks.
• Federation: Still no support for XMPP federation (and no excuse other than politics).
• Multiple Data Centers: If you have multiple data centers, I'm not convinced OCS is there in terms of distributed topologies (failover across multiple enterprise pools and routing of voice traffic across data centers).
• Application Development: Building applications around OCS remains a work-in-progress - I still believe there needs to be greater consistency and a higher level of abstraction for application developers (as opposed to system developers). This may require some breaking of Communicator to develop a more consistent plug-in model similar to what IBM has achieved with Lotus Expeditor.
• Interoperability: Demonstrable integration with other communication vendors, namely Cisco - is needed to assure customers that they can preserve existing investments.

In terms of breaking new ground, I do believe that will come in the area of application development. One of the last sessions on embedding UC within LOB application (covered in this post) provided some hints of things to come re: a more visual design environment, integration with Windows Workflow - suggesting that we will see some type of UC-centric application server emerge over time.

The other dynamic being put into play from a partner perspective is "OCS as infrastructure" for other vendors. Both Mitel and Ericsson announced that they will build solutions on top of Microsoft's UC platform. These type of synergistic partnerships create additional entry barriers for vendors to compete at a functional level vs. core OCS capabilities that are made broader via such extensions.

What to do?

I expect most organizations to take a pragmatic, long-term view on Microsoft's UC platform. Decision makers will examine all of the components: Exchange, OCS, Exchange Unified Messaging, Round Table, Live Meeting and so on. For those organizations looking to move from LCS or to take their first step, the catch-phrase "get current & get stable" comes to mind. That means deploying OCS as a IM and presence platform to the point where you have stabilized operational and change management procedures. After that - the conservative move would be to turn-on web conferencing. This could also include hooking OCS up to room environments using Round Table. The more aggressive path would being to deploy VoIP/IP Telephony integration with existing PBX systems and opening up the UC platform to external parties. In any case, the intelligent (and obvious) strategy is to avoid the "big bang" approach. On top of the technology complexity, issues related to organizational readiness and governance will also slow down rapid deployment in large enterprise environments.

A more detailed analysis of Microsoft's UC strategy ("Office Communications Server 2007: A Pivotal Enterprise Decision") is available to Burton Group clients.

Reflections On Cisco's UC Analyst Day

Blogger: Mike Gotta, Principal Analyst

The rest of this week will likely be dominated by news coming out of the Microsoft UC launch and Web 2.0 events so I wanted to collect my thoughts from a recent analyst event Cisco hosted earlier this month:

Overall Impression

• Cisco is serious about collaboration and becoming a significant and strategic player in the collaboration market.
• Cisco is focusing on synchronous collaboration and social computing as its point-of-entry into the collaboratipn space (versus trying to establish itself first in more traditional areas associated such as e-mail, calendar/scheduling, discussion forums, etc.).
• Cisco might be underestimating the need for it to have some storyline around content - very little discussion during the session (none that I can actually recall). Convergence of ECM with collaboration parallels the convergence of communications with collaboration.
• WebEx Connect and the WebEx Media Tone Network represent a key platform play that parallels what Microsoft and Google are doing re: SaaS.

Competitive Implications

• IBM gets hits with the loss of a large vendor building on top of Lotus Expeditor. Good news is that plug-ins from Cisco will integrate with Sametime but IBM's hope of establishing a universal UC client (via Lotus Expeditor) remain in the concept stage (see notes below).
• Microsoft needs to plan for the long-term competitive threat of Cisco to Office SharePoint 2007 and its Windows Live Spaces effort. Right now, the Cisco vs. Microsoft battle remains focused on Office Communicator, OCS, Live Meeting, RoundTable and Exchange Unified Messaging but collaboration is the next head-to-head chess match.

For Cisco To Take The Next Step

• Cisco will need to leverage its CXO relationships to bring WebEx into the large enterprise on a greater scale than it is today (although it is the market leader, it is primarily dominant in the SMB market).
• Cisco needs to show different configuration and topology models for WebEx Connect to support a managed solution, pure SaaS, pure on-premises and hybrid models.
• Cisco still needs to define its client strategy as well as its application development framework - the desktop still belongs to Microsoft and IBM - developers for real-time collaborative applications and UC-enabled business processes are not going to view Cisco as a credible solution provider without a rich programming environment.
• Cisco still needs to build out its channel (collaboration is a very different relationship and "sell" than communications software and hardware) as well as a partner ecosystem of independent vendors.
• Note: Zimbra would have been a great acquisition for Cisco. We'll see if Zimbra still gets tapped to play a role somehow...

SESSION NOTES

The Next Phase Of The Internet: UC/Collaboration
Alan Cohen, VP, Enterprise Solutions (Key Points)

• Business in transformation: empowered end users, real-time contextual information, borderless enterprise
• Collaboration is driving business process change: blogging, RSS, social networking, web conferencing, VoIP, podcasting, etc.
• Collaboration demands "open": networks, devices, applications
• Business will consume in different ways: managed solution, traditional on-premises, SaaS; Network key to delivering user experience
• Cisco definition of UC includes: contact center, clients, web conferencing, mobile UC, unified messaging, video/audio conferencing, IP Telephony, call processing (includes aspects of virtualization, importance of presence, policy, etc.

Cisco US Vision: Unified Workspace
Barry O'Sullivan, SVP, Voice Technology Group (Key Points)

• $30B market (Note: Microsoft estimate is higher, around $46B)
• Consolidation across market segments (IM/Web Conferencing, IP Telephony, Video Conferencing, Mobile/Centrex)
• Vision: Human Network, collaborate anytime, anywhere, any device
• Strategy: Network as platform, unify the workspace, transform the business
• Execution: Network-centric solutions, compelling user experience, improve TCO
• Workspace: Devices, applications, networks, operating systems - take your workspace with you - integrate workspace with customers, partners

Architectural Approach To UC
Joe Burton, CTO, Voice Technology Group (Key Points)

• Network-based architecture needed to unify the workspace
• Network as platform
• Collaboration across workgroups, contextually within applications, anywhere, anytime, any device
• Virtualization, network services (presence, location), customization (Web 2.0)
• WebEx key part of architectural vision

Cisco UC Execution
Rick McConnell, VP/GM, UC Business Unit (Key Points)

• Network-centric, User Experience, Improved TCO
• Web services-based framework for UC
• MeetingPlace/WebEx interop (expect on-premises version of WebEx that will eventually supercede the Adobe data conferencing engine)
• Integration with Microsoft and IBM
• Cisco integration with Office Communicator
• Will not build separate client on Lotus Expeditor, instead will deliver plug-ins to Sametime (Note: change from Spring VoiceCon announcement with IBM)

User Experience
Cordell Ratzlaff, Director, User Centered Design

• Much higher focus on user experience, UI
• Emphasis on preserving context across communications (add contact once, appears everywhere, share event history across devices, share preferences across clients, presence is person-centric not device centric, seamless transition across devices and networks, scale applications to fit situation, shared spaces are both synchronous and asynchronous, consistent user experience across platforms)
• Users should be able to use their preferred mode of communication (send does not dictate to receiver what tools to use)

Cisco UC & WebEx: Next Phase Of Business Collaboration
Rick McConnell, VP/GM, UC Business Unit

• Collaboration is a core Cisco initiative
• WebEx is core to Cisco UC strategy
• WebEx integration with UC Manager and MeetingPlace
• WebEx adds value to client and presence strategy
• Synchronous workspace with async capabilities integrated as well
• 3rd party integration
• Common client framework for CUPC and WebEx Connect
• SONA key underpinning

.what? Non-Roman URL Suffix Trial Begins Today

Blogger: Craig Roth

Note: This is a cross-posting from my KnowledgeForward blog.

According to ICANN:

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers will launch an evaluation of Internationalized Domain Names next week that will allow Internet users to test top-level domains in 11 languages. 

“This evaluation represents ICANN’s most important step so far towards the full implementation of Internationalized Domain Names. This will be one of the biggest changes to the Internet since it was created,” said Dr Paul Twomey, ICANN’s President and CEO. “ICANN needs the assistance of users and application developers to make this evaluation a success. When the evaluation pages come online next week, we need everyone to get in there and see how the addresses display and see how links to IDNs work in their programs. In short, we need them to get in and push it to its limits.” 

The evaluation is made possible by today’s insertion into the root of the 11 versions of .test, which means they are alongside other top-level domains like .net, .com, .info, .uk, and .de at the core of the Internet. 

Next Monday, 15 October 2007, Internet users around the globe will be able to access wiki pages with the domain name example.test in 11 test languages — Arabic, Persian, Chinese (simplified and traditional), Russian, Hindi, Greek, Korean, Yiddish, Japanese and Tamil.

While it may seem like knowing just enough English to type ".com" is not a problem, the issue is twofold.  First, writers of languages with non-Roman alphabets may not have an English keyboard that can type ".com".  They could always copy and paste it from other content when needed, but that brings me to the second point: they shouldn't have to.  The content on the Internet is not owned by the U.S. (even if ICANN is) and being able to use addresses in other alphabets has a great deal of symbolic meaning.

I'm currently researching and writing a paper on content globalization due out around January.  You'd have to be living under a rock to not understand the impact that globalization is having on the demographics of Internet usage and, accordingly, the web technologies, processes, and cultural sensitivity needed to support them.  But the recent statistics were still surprising.

The fall of the Iron Curtain (generally considered to be 1989) began a change in market forces that is still being felt in global businesses. For machine translation, SDL reports that Eastern bloc countries account for seven out of the top 10 fastest growing languages for its translation modules in 2007 (Source: http://www.sdl.com/en/events/news-PR/Eastern- Europe-and-China-dominate-2007-translation- trends.asp). Internet World Stats reports that English is by far the most common language on the Internet (with 365 million users versus 184 million for #2 Chinese), but there has been massive growth between 2000 and 2007 for Arabic (+941%), Portuguese (+525%), and Chinese (+470%). The rest of the world’s languages (outside the top 10) still represent 15% of all internet users and had 440% growth from 2000 to 2007. 

In terms of usage, Internet usage outside of North America dwarfs usage within it (see table below), although North America has the highest Internet penetration (69%).  With these trends, IT needs to be more involved than it has been in content globalization efforts.   

Quest acquires Proposion

Blogger: Karen Hobert

Quest Software and Proposion just signed an agreement for Quest to acquire Proposion (details will not be made public). The Proposion products augment Quest's Lotus Notes to Exchange migration tools with SharePoint migration and integration capabilities, making the entire Quest solution set the most complete package in the Notes to Exchange/SharePoint/.NET migration and integration market today. While there are few vendors in this domain, it is a market that is highly competitive and instrumental in Microsoft's compete strategy with IBM Lotus - or what Microsoft calls the "Notes Transition" space.

Immediate plans from Quest include streamlining the suite of Proposion tools into bundles that will offer solution sets for migrating and integrating Notes and SharePoint. Proposion recently updated its Portal Migrator 4.0, which supports the migration of content from IBM Lotus Notes, IBM Lotus QuickPlace, and IBM Lotus Domino.doc into SharePoint, all via server-based utilities that can be accessed by users anywhere on the network. The tools also provide utilities to convert Notes documents into InfoPath forms on-the-fly during migration and will convert/preserve document links to SharePoint and Notes regardless of where the linked-to document resides. The Proposion tools are built on top of the core Proposion N2N Notes to .NET data connectors that support the migration and coexistence of Notes and SharePoint applications.

Quest's acquisition of the Proposion solutions complements other Quest management and support tools, and presents a significant challenge to other vendors in this space, including Microsoft, CASAHL Technology, and BinaryTree. Of course, Microsoft ultimately still benefits, despite offering its own (limited) integration tools, since the broader context is migrating enterprises from IBM Lotus products to the Microsoft product suite.

Still, migrating Notes applications to SharePoint (or other platforms) is very challenging, and a hurdle Microsoft has not completely overcome. The consolidation of Quest and Proposion illustrates that the solution is not a found in a single tool but through a combination of data and application logic utilities that support the intermediate steps required to be successful.

We can expect that IBM will respond, as it is otherwise faced with the prospect of watching intensifying competition for the opportunity to migrate organizations from IBM Lotus products to the Microsoft suite.  The Quest/Proposion deal was relatively small in terms of the deal size, but it will likely have important consequences for the broader superplatform competitive landscape in collaboration and content management.

Comments on: Oracle Letter Proposes to Buy BEA Systems for $17.00 per Share in Cash

Blogger: Peter O'Kelly

From the official Oracle press release (excerpt):

Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ: ORCL) today confirmed that it delivered a letter to the Board of Directors of BEA Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: BEAS) on October 9 in which Oracle proposes to acquire BEA for $17.00 per share in cash. The $17.00 per share offer is a 25% premium over yesterday's closing price of $13.62.

The letter indicates that Oracle is prepared to proceed immediately to a process that leads to a definitive agreement. "We have made a serious proposal including a substantial premium for BEA," said Oracle President Charles Phillips. "We believe our all cash offer provides the best value for BEA's shareholders and the best home for BEA's employees and customers. This proposal is the culmination of repeated conversations with BEA's management over the last several years. We look forward to completing a friendly transaction as soon as possible."

My quick take:

1.  BEA and Oracle will likely do a posturing dance for a while, on price and terms, and then the deal will happen -- in large part because, as Carl Icahn and others have observed, the future doesn't otherwise look so bright ahead for BEA as an independent company.  It's certainly possible IBM will try to trump Oracle's bid, but I suspect Oracle has more leverage -- and also a surprisingly strong track record, during the last few years, for not wrecking acquired companies/teams/products.

2.  Oracle + BEA would be a much more significant competitive threat -- especially to IBM and Microsoft -- than Oracle and BEA were independently (when, among other things, Oracle and BEA were arch rivals).

3.  Oracle + BEA would dominate the "Java platform" infrastructure market -- with stark competitive implications for other Java-centric players, especially IBM and Sun.

Also see my colleague Craig Roth's take on the deal

See you in Miami ...or Phoenix ....or Barcelona

Blogger: Karen Hobert

September has been consumed with planning and preparing for a series of events that I will be presenting at in October. My fall tour schedule unravels as follows:

On Monday October 1st I kick off my tour in Miami at the Advisor Summit. This event will bring together IBM Lotus, Microsoft SharePoint and .NET, and Novell professionals to talk all things communications and collaboration. I will be doing a keynote entitled "Thriving in an E 2.0 World: New Realities in Communication, Collaboration, and Content Management". I'm really looking forward to this talk, I think it's going to be a lot of fun!

On Thursday October 4th I'll be delivering a one day workshop, "SharePoint and Office 2007: New Enterprise Collaboration/Content Opportunities and Risks" at the first Burton Group Institute event in Scottsdale, AZ. I'll be delivering the workshop with Craig Roth, Service Director of Collaboration and Content Strategies services at Burton Group. The day promises to be chock-full of interesting information and discussions on deploying SharePoint in the enterprise.

But wait, there's more...

Catalyst Europe is at the end of October in Barcelona Spain. I'll be repeating my talk on Catalyst North America (June 2007) on IBM Lotus in 2007 and the marketplace. I will also moderate a vendor panel on collaboration and content trends. The panel will include:

Rob Gray, Product Marketing Manager SharePoint Technologies (Microsoft)

• Doug Coombs, ECM Product Marketing (IBM)
• Phil Karren, Product Manager, GroupWise and Collaboration (Novell)
• Javier Cabrerizo, Senior Director, Enterprise Content and Collaboration Services (Oracle EMEA)
• John Robb, VP of Marketing and Product Management (Zimbra)

I am expecting it to be a lively discussion!

So hopefully I'll get a chance to see you at one of these events! I'll be easy to spot in my Burton Group logoed shirt!

Comments on "The Real Outlook Competitor - Forward Thinking by Michael J. Miller"

Blogger: Peter O'Kelly

(Also posted on my personal blog; I'm still working on the blog post triage criteria...)

The Real Outlook Competitor - Forward Thinking by Michael J. Miller

(Via Ed Brill)

Lots of people are talking about what new competitors to Microsoft's Outlook e-mail programs, from desktop applications like Thunderbird to web-based programs like Zimbra or Google Mail. But in fact, there's only one program that really comes close to challenging Outlook today.

That program is Lotus Notes.

See the article (or the many comments in Ed's blog post referencing the article) for more details/discussion/debate...

I think there's more to the story, however: if you consider the Eclipse.org-based foundation in Notes 8, along with the OpenOffice.org-derived Lotus Symphony "productivity editors", the fact that Notes 8 runs on multiple platforms (eventually multiple versions of Windows, Linux, and Mac OS), and the fact that Notes is also a template-driven application development platform (with a tightly-coupled and purpose-built, multi-platform server counterpart), the competitive overlap goes far beyond Outlook. You could argue that aspects of Notes actually compete with Windows, Office (not just Outlook), and even the .NET Framework.

It's also true that Notes is the leading competitor to Outlook, of course, and Outlook's role has expanded quite a bit in Office 2007 -- e.g., for forms-based applications, serving as the primary off-line-able Microsoft solution for SharePoint document libraries and discussions, as Microsoft's primary XML syndication client, and more.

So in many respects it's business as usual, with IBM Lotus and Microsoft competing for the privilege of being the application where information workers spend most of their time each day. Both IBM and Microsoft are hedging their bets, e.g., with IBM promoting Quickr and Connections, especially to customers/prospects who (for whatever reason) don't want Notes, and Microsoft also emphasizing Groove and browser-based SharePoint capabilities, but at the end of the day most information workers close either Notes or Outlook before they head home (often only to re-open the applications after dinner...).

Net Net of the Microsoft Online Announcement

Blogger: Guy Creese, Senior Analyst

As Peter O'Kelly noted in his post below, Microsoft today announced Microsoft Online: hosted versions of SharePoint, Exchange, OCS, and a free Office Live Workspace. This is a huge announcement, with major ramifications in the market:

• For companies with 5,000 users and up, but Microsoft said it will eventually go after mid-size businesses. Are working on both ends of the spectrum: small and large.
• This puts pressure on Cisco, Google, and Salesforce.com, and shuts down IBM.
• Office Live Workspace negates Google announcing that they’ve integrated JotSpot (whenever that happens--now 11 months after acquisition).
• Microsoft is still somewhat lacking on the social software side (weak wiki and blog, Knowledge Network not in GA, other vendors [e.g., Salesforce.com] are going after this).
• Now the SaaS vendors have lost the SaaS pricing advantage (pay as you go, no in-house hardware), and Microsoft gains the familiar UI advantage.

Microsoft is currently being mum on pricing, so it's impossible to tell whether these offerings will undercut, match, or exceed the pricing of Google Apps, Premier Edition, Salesforce.com's recently announced Content Exchange, or other SaaS solutions. If the Microsoft offerings cost the same as or more than the other offerings, then we've just added another vendor for enterprises to look at.

However, if the Microsoft pricing undercuts the competition, it's a whole new ballgame.  Proponents of non-Microsoft SaaS solutions, rather than being perceived as harbingers of the next wave of IT (SaaS) and focused on saving the company money will now have to explain why they want to spend more money for less functionality.

Things at Cisco, Salesforce.com, and Google just got harder. Not impossible, but harder. It will be interesting to watch their reaction.

• For companies with 5,000 users and up, but Microsoft said it will eventually go after mid-size businesses. Are working on both ends of the spectrum: small and large.
• This puts pressure on Cisco, Google, and Salesforce.com, and shuts down IBM.
• Office Live Workspace negates Google announcing that they’ve integrated JotSpot (whenever that happens--now 11 months after acquisition).
• Microsoft is still somewhat lacking on the social software side (weak wiki and blog, Knowledge Network not in GA, other vendors [e.g., Salesforce.com] are going after this).
• Now the SaaS vendors have lost the SaaS pricing advantage (pay as you go, no in-house hardware), and Microsoft gains the familiar UI advantage.

Microsoft is currently being mum on pricing, so it's impossible to tell whether these offerings will undercut, match, or exceed the pricing of Google Apps, Premier Edition, Salesforce.com's recently announced Content Exchange, or other SaaS solutions. If the Microsoft offerings cost the same as or more than the other offerings, then we've just added another vendor for enterprises to look at.

However, if the Microsoft pricing undercuts the competition, it's a whole new ballgame.  Proponents of non-Microsoft SaaS solutions, rather than being perceived as harbingers of the next wave of IT (SaaS) and focused on saving the company money will now have to explain why they want to spend more money for less functionality.

Things at Cisco, Salesforce.com, and Google just got harder. Not impossible, but harder. It will be interesting to watch their reaction.