eWeek: Microsoft Zeros in on Lotus

January 19 2004

I know some of you will see this article today, and wonder what my take on it is.  To be honest, almost anything I can say about it will sound like a personal attack,  so I think I need to take the high road.
One place I'll comment:

"It's hard to understand Java without a computer science background. But Notes developers come from business departments, not computer science or IS departments"
I think some of the announcements at Lotusphere next week will show that IBM recognizes the need to provide tools across a variety of development backgrounds.  Many of the technologies being announced or previewed have come about very recently, so anyone who is "ex-Lotus" wouldn't necessarily know about them.
Link: eWeek: Microsoft Zeros in on Lotus >

Ed Brill | Highland Park, IL USA Category:  In the news  Add/View Comments [25]

Post a Comment

  1. 1    | 1/19/2004 10:53:54 AM

    it is a shame that he has to continue with his story that he was 'fired' instead of the fact he had 30 days to find another job inside IBM and didnt make the effort to.

  1. 2  David www.magecraft.net | 1/19/2004 10:58:42 AM

    I think personal attacks are highly underrated. :-)

  1. 3  Russell Loewen  | 1/19/2004 11:07:09 AM

    I have seen more than one quote like this in recent days. There seems to be a perception that Domino developers just do this as a hobby to some other 'real' work.

    I have been a developer on many large projects in more than one organization which in no way could be accomplished by anything less than a well trained professional. Is my experience really that different?

    Are there really that many applications being put together by everyday business people?

  1. 4  Sean Burgess http://www.phigsaidwhat.com | 1/19/2004 11:33:11 AM

    Aside from the inaccuracies of the comments from our dear departed brothers-in-arms regarding IBM's efforts, I take offense at the comment about Notes developers all coming from the business community. In my almost 10 years of working with Notes/Domino, I have NEVER met a true developer that came from the business side of the house. Sure, occasionally you meet someone who put together an application because IT either didn't have the time, manpower, or desire to do what they wanted. But most of these applications are basically forms and views with no LotusScript or advanced development.

    I mean, give me a break, do you really expect a group of people who freak out every time the colors change in an application to be able to build said applications? Anyone who has ever done end user support should be able to answer that question. Once they stop laughing and pick themselves up off the floor, that is. The theory that business people, who still respond to chain letters and send out blanket emails on virus hoaxes they think are real, are going to be able to build real applications are giving those business users way too much credit.

    Sean---

  1. 5  Ben Poole http://www.benpoole.com | 1/19/2004 11:45:13 AM

    I fail to see how any of us can comment on Gary's exit from IBM. We weren't there. I would point out that whatever one might think of him, at least Gary stands by his words, and doesn't hide behind anonymous web comments.

    Getting back on-topic, I don't read Gary's comments in the context of this piece as "whining" either.

  1. 6  Chris King http://www.chrisandraquel.com | 1/19/2004 11:51:02 AM

    All of our ND development was taken over by IT after it was determined that it was cheaper for us to develop the apps than to answer all of the questions and fix problems caused by business developers. That was back in the Early R4 days. Since that time, all of our developers come from an IT background.

    Also, maybe I'm missing something, but is .net and web services aimed at the business person? Formula Language it ain't.

  1. 7  Stan Rogers  | 1/19/2004 11:53:13 AM

    ... and that is that the tools that Microsoft has provided for development are "best of breed". Contrary to his assertion, VB.NET (if done "right") has little in common with LotusScript (the commonality results mostly from backwards-compatibility features aimed at VB6 developers, none of which are considered "best practices" in the new language). That, however, doesn't matter a whole lot because of the amount of help the IDE gives a new developer. Add a reference to a web service or a third-party assembly, and you get autocompletion, data type hints, and anything else you may need to incorporate the "foreign matter" into your project. That's not just kewl -- it should be mandatory these days.

    Java isn't incomprehensible -- it is no more or less difficult than any other language. (No, I don't have a computer science background -- or any formal programmer training at all, for that matter.) Whether application building remains in-house RAD (something an accidental developer like myself can come to grips with) depends largely on the tool set we are given. Believe me, I'd like to see something as comprehensively developer-friendly as VS.NET coming down the pipe. We'll wait and see.

  1. 8  Ben Poole http://www.benpoole.com | 1/19/2004 11:55:21 AM

    .. given that Java was designed to be a "simpler" language than some of its forebears.

  1. 9  John Head http://www.johndavidhead.com | 1/19/2004 11:58:00 AM

    Ben - first of all, I think the 'whining" refers to Gary's blog, which to be frank, is some of the impression I have gotten from reading his comments about IBM and his new job. Also, what 'anon' said about Gary and his circumstances with leaving IBM isnt new, I heard that from many legitimate sources 6 months ago. But I think the #1 point that Ed makes is that Gary hasnt been in the IBM fold for 6+ months, and is no longer a good source for what the future of IBM products is.

  1. 10  Ben Poole http://www.benpoole.com | 1/19/2004 12:01:21 PM

    Gary's moved on to pastures new, and good for him. If you're really happy about things, you don't harp on about perceived bad things in the past do you? ;-)

  1. 11  John http://www.johndavidhead.com | 1/19/2004 12:53:32 PM

    doing it on your blog is one thing, saying it to a reporter is another :D

  1. 12  Adam Osborne  | 1/19/2004 2:03:12 PM

    Well, well, bring it on. Let's see the tools !!

    Gary was a driving force behind LotusScript at IBM, and they did tell him the role was no longer required.

    As for the quote on Java and computer science .... don't forget it is eweek.. who knows what he said.

    Anyway, it sounds like we have some innovation coming... which is a very good thing.

  1. 13  Curt Carlson  | 1/19/2004 2:27:17 PM

    SELECT * FROM business_developers WHERE clue > 0

    0 rows returned

  1. 14  Stan Rogers  | 1/19/2004 2:43:44 PM

    ... or more, if one is willing to concede that Doug Finner (see LDD) has at least one clue as well. The fact of the matter is that Notes/Domino has acquired more than its fair share of "accidental" developers along the way, and that many of them either possess several clues or know of and can use public clue repositories. That is not to say that just anyone can throw together a client-agnostic, tight and efficient application with no experience or training, but it isn't that hard for someone willing to put in a bit of time and effort to start down the path towards good app dev on Notes.

  1. 15  Ben Poole http://www.benpoole.com | 1/19/2004 4:41:47 PM

    ... and I'm an "accidental programmer." I won't apologise for it, nor do I think it's done me any harm. Some of us bandits take this coding stuff seriously, and appreciate the education we get along the way from others... But I digress ;-)

  1. 16  Stan Rogers  | 1/19/2004 5:54:39 PM

  1. 17  Philip Storry  | 1/19/2004 6:42:28 PM

    Waaaay back - well, five or six years ago - when CompuServe was relevant and still a good place to go for information, half the [LOTUSC] forum staff were "accidental" programmers and administrators. Possibly more than half.

    I've known a lot of people get involved in careers with Lotus Notes accidentally - I think it's partly because it's an easy product to start digging around in, and partly because it's broad enough (and unique enough) to keep people's interests for longer than a week or two.

    LotusScript is easy enough to learn, but it's tied to the Notes/Domino - if you take it away from Notes/Domino, you lose the classes - and therefore lose all the functionality anyone would want. All you'll end up with is an object-oriented BASIC that can manipulate files. Hardly the most useful thing in the world.

    That's why adding Notes/Domino classes to Java is a good idea - it means that code can run in a servlet, in a Notes client, or in many other places (Lotus Workplace?). If IBM/Lotus wanted to rename DOLS "Domino Compact Framework", they could probably ship a Java system with it that would make applets work there as well. Maybe they already do - it's been a while since I last looked closely at DOLS! ;-)

    If IBM starts to feel the pinch from .NET, here's my suggestion - switch to just one Notes licence. One licence allows you to install any client - or all of them. That means that companies might be a little more willing to keep investing in their existing Domino/Notes systems. A lot of the apps by "accidental programmers" came about in the R3 and early R4 days, before there was a distinction between the client and the designer client. They were created out of necessity within a department, and some of those departmental programs would spread throughout companies until they became complex enough to need a professional programmer to maintain them.

    Sometimes, I'm sure that the requirement for a seperate license to design apps is actually harmful to Domino. Set the (potential) designers free! ;-)

  1. 18  Yury Kats  | 1/19/2004 7:58:35 PM

    And I especially liked the notion that "nearly all members of the former Domino.Workflow team are employed by Microsoft". Being one of those "former Domino.Worklow team members" I know exactly where my former co-workers are. And "nearly all" of them are still with IBM.

  1. 19  jonvon http://jonvon.net/ | 1/19/2004 8:51:21 PM

    i like it! yeah, that's me all the way. i still wonder why i'm doing it. but then i remember how much i like it.

    go figure... :-)

  1. 20  jonvon  | 1/19/2004 8:58:16 PM

    in case anyone hasn't noticed, i LOVE java. love it love it. to me its just way more interesting than anything i've ever done, including the lotus stuff. although i'm still fascinated (in a sort of theoretical or abstract way) with the unstructured data store.

    it *has* taken me several years to get there, but its been very worth it. i'm moving farther away from being an accidental programmer, and i owe a lot of that to java.

  1. 21  Ben Poole http://www.benpoole.com | 1/20/2004 2:40:40 AM

    And Stan, you flatter me :-D

    But seriously, I think Notes is unique in this respect: OK, so you got the odd VB dabbler from tweaking spreadsheets and stuff, but I know of apps still used that started out as "rogue development". It's interesting that this came about, but I think the time has now passed: people want far more sophistication than can typically be provided by casual coder, and if you're serious this programming lark, you have to take a step back and "learn your craft."

    But I digress. Again.

  1. 22  Paul Pentony  | 1/20/2004 6:00:45 AM

    While Lotus does keep exposing more objects to LS it seems to me that very little has happened to the language - it looks like VB did about 10 years ago - with some notable exceptions like support for lists and for constructors with arguements that were there from the beginning. Support for file system objects, stuctured error handling and interfaces are some of the things that are noticably missing. And while Notes can act as a Com (as distinct from OLE) server it can't act as a Com client (unless this has happened in version 6)

    I like Java too - and I particularly like the amount of open source that is available for it. But Java support within the Notes IDE is not good.

    I guess I'm an accidental programmer, having got there from a Maths background and my initial introduction to notes was as a manager. The great thing about Notes for me as a manager with a bit of technical expertise was that it was very easy to put together simple applications to do simple things that substantially helped me in my job. I doubt that I would have had the same experience with .Net.

  1. 23  jonvon  | 1/20/2004 9:45:56 AM

    "But Java support within the Notes IDE is not good" - true, but when notes 8 comes out on eclipse (assuming it does), everything will be programmable via java in terms of the client interface. interesting times to be a notes dude. i can't wait to see it...

  1. 24     | 1/20/2004 3:20:26 PM

    Of course, some become "accidental programmers" when they have to fill the hole left by someone fleeing Notes.. ;-)

  1. 25  Ben Poole http://www.benpoole.com | 1/20/2004 4:00:58 PM

    A bit like all those guitarists who became bass players in the '60s out of necessity.

    Mind you, Paul McCartney turned into a fairly decent bass player as I recall ;-)