Ed Brill

Post a Comment

1. 1  Ed Maloney  | 6/9/2007 10:35:42 AM

   If I hear the term "aligning IT with business objectives" one more time... This is certainly the current buzzphrase. If you search cio.com you'll find a few book reviews on the subject. That said, I agree that the Sharepoint hype has reached a new level of hysteria. We need Quickr and Connections ASAP.

1. 2  Al  | 6/9/2007 12:38:23 PM

   I think that with SharePoint (acutally the Office system in general) Microsoft has delivered a bunch of features with which the Microsoft customer community has been typically underserved. By this I mean electronic forms, workflow, document management, collaborative team rooms etc that have been traditionally fairly well served in the Lotus community. Clearly this new found enthusiasm is going to hit the other half of the Microsoft community as well; the ones that live in Lotus houses and want to espouse an MS way.

   That explains the 'hysteria' but I think the technology/business requirements debate is a little unfair. On both sides there are now strong products that can directly assist in resolving business issues or bring about cost effectiveness. In my experience talking to customers they know their issues, have a clear roadmap in mind (strategy ofter being for cost reduction through serving virtual teams/travel reduction and supporting collaborative working). They are comfortable they can be served fairly well by IBM and MS and are therefore making a platform decision; hence the need to compare vendor product sets, not because they're unwilling to examine their requirements.

   We have a great Collaboration showcase where we hold customer sessions on this kind of thing and I would say 60-70% of the time the customer comes carrying their latest strategy presentation and wanting to compare the merits of available technologies. Being confident in the products this is usually coming down to just preference or existing skillsbase.

1. 3  Kevin Pettitt http://www.lotuguru.com | 6/9/2007 2:56:54 PM

   I was approached this week at my current client by the "Sharepoint Developer" who had been asked by a senior manager to find out what it would take to build a planned workflow application in Notes. In this case he had already established how to do this in Sharepoint, but no one on that team had any Notes experience. After our conversation I think we were both surprised to learn that the other product was "good at workflow".

   I learned that Sharepoint has a configurable (and wizard driven) workflow setup capability built into Sharepoint Designer, while Notes requires either Lotus Workflow (which I don't believe is cheap), a third-party or open-source add-on, or a "roll your own" approach. Only because I happen to have put together a prototype workflow application based on OpenNTF's Qenos workflow framework (VERY cool btw) was I able to demonstrate something that might compare to Sharepoint's "out of the box" capabilities.

   So the question I have is this: If "workflow" is what Notes is so good at, why has IBM not included a "workflow.ntf" in the default shipped product? Seems pretty clear to me that Sharepoint is exploiting this glaring oversight, and its time IBM stepped up and either bought out a business partner, redid Lotus Workflow, or put resources behind making the Qenos Open Source workflow tool "out of the box ready" (resources already go toward Linux, so this is not a big stretch). Other business partners with workflow tools will have to adapt by making their products that much better, or shift gears altogether.

1. 4  Peter de Haas http://www.peterdehaas.net | 6/9/2007 5:08:21 PM

   First its good to see that Microsoft's end of the Fiscal Year puts pressure on your client engagement ;-)

   " ... I endeavored to bring the discussion back to business requirements but simply couldn't get there. This, Peter, is why I say that there's a "SharePoint is the solution, what's the problem" phenomenon happening, and even the Wall Street Journal picked that up a few weeks ago (noting, wisely, that this is a problem for IT rather than a solution). ..."

   Ed my point in earlier comments has nothing to do with feature comparisons between the platforms / products.

   Like IBM Microsoft has a dialogue with clients on the business value of collaboration, you can trust us on that one ...

   It is very true however that not all clients are open to this discussion and implement first and think second. This is again true for both IBM's and Microsoft's platform. You make it sound a little as if clients implement SharePoint for all the wrong reasons.

   I do believe however the enormous uptake of SharePoint has inspired IBM to morph Quickplace into Quickr because the way Microsoft positions SharePoint is different and most of all very succesful ;-)

1. 5  Nick Hortovanyi http://blogs.toasttechnology.com.au/roller/hortovanyi | 6/9/2007 6:03:07 PM

   This phenomenon of Microsoft SharePoint has been occurring for a while now. As observed by others, I believe the comparison should be between WebSphere Portal Express and Sharepoint. The Lotus Notes/Domino discussion should be against Microsoft Exchange.

   The fact that this debate over the last week has been between Notes/Domino vs Sharepoint highlights potentially some of the confusion being experienced by some organisations with IBM.

   IBM in a number of cases has multiple solutions for a business problem. This issue is now more confusing with the inclusion of FileNet in the Information Management brand.

   I have been told in the past by CIOs that the Microsoft story has been solid with a clear set of non-competing products and strategies. When engaging with IBM, they have not been able to gain the same clarity.

   Just the other week, I was having a discussion with an organisation that stated the decision to move forward with Microsoft Sharepoint, for their new intranet and for improved collaboration was based on simplification of infrastructure and perceived ease of integration with existing systems. When questioning these decisions in more detail there was not that much substance to them. But his justification had been sufficient to gain budget to proceed with the Microsoft Sharepoint path. However, what concerned me was that IBM WebSphere Portal Express was not evaluated as he was not aware of the product.

   Microsoft appears to be an IT Strategy, in these smaller accounts <1000 seats, where comparison with other products may be done for probity purposes.

1. 6  Scot  | 6/9/2007 6:31:19 PM

   It seems to me that Microsoft is great at marketing whereas IBM has faultered in that area. Our company is in the process of moving over to Microsoft (both Exchange and Sharepoint). Why? Not really sure but I keep hearing the "ease of integration". From what I have seen so far, Domino is the way to go. I think management will be in for quite a shock once we are fully migrated over. The one stunning fact to me is the Sharepoint development environment. In order to be able to create custom web part for Sharepoint, you have to develop ON a Sharepoint server. This is a royal pain and you do not see that advertised as it is quite costly (we all need more robust development machines in order to support a virtual pc running Windows 2003 Server, Visual Studio 2005, Sharepoint, etc). Also, it just is not as cohesive as Domino and other Lotus products. Microsoft was able to persuade our management team over to their product suite. Although I am not really happy with the decision, I have to live with it.

1. 7  Ben Poole http://benpoole.com | 6/9/2007 6:45:44 PM

   @3 excellent post: couldn't agree more. Most people seem to associate "workflow" with Notes mails containing doclinks. Urgh. I've coded some workflow stuff in the past, and it takes work, no question. A proper framework would be very useful (must check out Qenos)

1. 8  Keith Brooks http://kbmsg.blogspot.com | 6/9/2007 8:37:25 PM

   No book comes to mind, but if you read cio magazine or their website cio.com there are many articles and postings about it.

   IT should be a partner, but so should your IT vendor. The latter seems to be a problem in some cases, but lately has been better addressed as noted in your blog and in some other places.

   Seemless integration to Office seems ot be the biggest thing going for sharepoint. Yes, you CAN do the same exact functions with .Doc or Domino in general but internal evangelism training is still the issue.

   What, if anything, do IBM sales reps/SEs do to encourage accounts to have a lunch and learn with staff or IT? For that matter when was the last time you did it in your own company(not you Ed, but everyone else) I admit it's hard to do but if you aim for 1 lunch time a month (or more often if you have the staff) it would help quite a bit.

   I did this at my previous place to encourage younger staffers to use Notes and Domino to a more full potential.

   Sounds simple, silly or a huge effort/waste of time, but evangelism grows from within, not from without, especially when you are behind the 8 ball usually.

   Plant a seed and watch it grow.

   Every organization's IT people/admins/developers with Domio that has Sharepoint installed should be ashamed of themselves for not promoting more functions or enabling it for the masses.

1. 9  Kevin Pettitt http://www.lotuguru.com | 6/9/2007 10:35:05 PM

   @8 - Keith, couldn't agree more about both having IBM reps sponsor lunch & learn sessions and 2) the whole plant a seed & watch it grow thing. But you also touch on the problem that seems to prevent these things in many cases, which is that some managers view staff development of this kind as a non-productive waste of time. Sure, that's short-sighted, but it's not common knowledge that it is short-sighted, and so everyone goes along with it, things sort of still get done, the company stays in business, and who's to say things aren't going just great, even if you KNOW they could have been so much better?

   Then of course you have situations where Domino is hanging on for mail and some apps but the big push is toward .NET/Sharepoint, with all the political pitfalls that entails for anyone trying to push the other way.

   Reminds me of an earlier rant: { Link }

1. 10  Tony  | 6/10/2007 12:18:34 AM

   as a Microsoft guy selling collaboration - which really means selling a collection of tools depending on the customer requirements, the question is less about the technology and more about the customer's ability to consume it. In a meeting we had this week, I told the customer to fix their business problem requires about 10% technology and 90% implementation (the cultural obstacles, the training requirements and the overall business change required) There's less discussion about the technology. The larger decision is should they implement a collaboration technology at all and if they do - what's the best way to extract and measure the value from it.

1. 11  Henning Heinz  | 6/10/2007 3:06:55 AM

   From my opinion, if a customer is evaluating Sharepoint then Websphere Portal (Express) is not the best product to compete with. I doubt that many customers are willing to convert Microsoft specialists into J2EE engineers and there seem to be little people that manage both areas.

   I also have seen many companies that have Sharepoint running but do their custom development just with SQL Server and ASP.net (or some other .Net flavour).

   While I do not think this is a compelling concept, Quickplace (not Quickr) was not much different. Hard to extend and customize, no interaction with the Notes client and besides single sign-on little integration points with other (Domino) web applications.

   I see customers that are not yet running SAP evaluating Microsoft Dynamics (I only have limited SMB experience in Germany). Dynamics surprisingly works best with Microsoft but I have no idea why Microsoft was allowed to take over Navision anyway.

   I think IBM is going much too slow, it just takes too long to get the products forward feature wise and technology alliances are often only made with huge vendors like Cisco systems.

   While there is an assumption that IBM is way ahead of the competition from my opinion it is IBM that has to close a gap in some areas, especially for SMB.

   From time to time this discussion remembers me of Novell that always complained that Netware is a much better product than Active Directory and that it is the customer that is doing all wrong.

1. 12  Karen Demerly  | 6/10/2007 10:56:39 AM

   I agree that CIO.com (and no doubt the magazine) are good reads for anyone interested in the move to IT as strategic partner. We are living that "dream" in our company, for the first time in over 20 years. Our CIO came in and forced the turn-around. It wasn't pretty, but the outcome is pretty remarkable. We put out way fewer fires, and we sit at the table when a business need is expressed, not after the business unit has purchased software and needs us to support it.

   I found this, which might draw the picture for anyone who hasn't already heard about or experienced the change in paradigm - { Link }

1. 13  Paul S.  | 6/10/2007 12:37:13 PM

   Ed, I think you will enjoy the following extremely well reviewed book:

   Managing IT as a Business: A Survival Guide for CEOs

   { Link }

1. 14  Duffbert http://www.twduff.com | 6/10/2007 3:26:20 PM

   You know you read too many books when Ed calls you out on a post and everyone pings you about it. :)

   I went back through the last two years of reviewing, and I didn't find anything that quite fits in this category. I'd personally go with Paul's recommendation (post #13).

1. 15  Peter de Haas http://www.peterdehaas.net | 6/10/2007 4:34:46 PM

   obiviously biased but not less valuable :

   { Link }

   I'm sure IBM has some good insights too ;-)

1. 16  Peter Wilson  | 6/10/2007 7:53:45 PM

   "aligning IT with business objectives" Yeah, reality is THE business wants Sharepoint...so IT is aligned to the business. IBM is simply not doing a good enough job to market their own products to executives.

   Pete

1. 17  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 6/10/2007 8:10:15 PM

   @16 ok, so maybe the thought is different -- the business wants sharepoint, but to what end? What is it that IT wasn't doing before, especially in a Notes environment?

1. 18  Chuck Hauble  | 6/10/2007 9:23:46 PM

   @17 From what I have seen with Sharepoint, it is because the business unit has the ownership and control. They can apply or not apply security the way they want, they can put things where they want , call them what they want and they don't need to come through "Central IT" to get something done that works for their small piece of the business. It's point and click to them and they see business value from this versus the process of doing a development project. Like @1 the Quickr the Bettr

1. 19  Axel Janssen  | 6/11/2007 12:18:11 AM

   IT vendors sometimes create interesting products. Unfortunatedly mankind is not well equiped to foresee the risks and costs involved with change from complex system A to complex system B. As I am no Sharepoint expert I don't know. Lotus developers/admins/consultants often have a clear understanding of workflow solutions and the forces involved even from a business/organizational standpoint. We just have implemented so many systems in that area.

   Other platforms have targeted a lot of effort too in the workflow domain. This year we integrated SAP workflow with Webservice from a Domino/Tomcat app and I've found that the SAP workflow guys have been very quick in making their stuff ready for production. On the Java side you have OSWorkflow, jBPL, etc which I find usefull too. BPEL on SOA does make progress, especially in IBM and Oracle. And Microsoft does make serious efforts in this area for some time.

   What is workflow? Tom Bayens, the jBPL guy, has described workflow technically as a state maschine with

   a) 1 startpoint and 1 endpoint.

   b) a sequnential business process between start- and endpoint, which can fork out into and from many paralell processes along the way if needed.

   Workflow is clearly a field too big for one vendor to claim as "his" domain. Neither Microsoft nor Lotus nor IBM nor Microsoft nor openSource.

   The other point with Sharepoint is that it can bring Excel in a collaborative environment on the server. A lot of business specialists like Excel a lot. In the Java space there are maybe hundreds of small companies which over solutions to run Excel on a server. Most of them does not work very well with more complex Excel files. And probably none of them do their job perfectly. This is a good indicator for

   a) there is business interest

   b) its complex

   If complex Excel files are maintainable enough in hindsight of changing business rules is a different though interesting question.

1. 20  Axel Janssen  | 6/11/2007 12:55:44 AM

   Chuck,

   a graphical which may be used by non-IT stuff isn't truely something new. I've used the very same thing with Domino Workflow and jBPL. And there are more. In the real world, though, these tools are not enough to develop workflows. You have to integrate backend systems and to orchestrate them, you need a clear understanding about how they work.

   And I've experienced that non-IT-departments often do not have a clear enough understanding about keeping authorization simple with eficient roles, groups or the much more complex authentification/ authorization/ usability aspects that come with integration. Even from a pure business perspcetive they often miss issues or make them too complex. In not few cases workflow design serves as good starting point for conflicts within the group.

   The graphical tools are very usefull for documentation and small changes, though.

1. 21  Gerco Wolfswinkel http://www.domino-weblog.nl | 6/11/2007 4:34:56 AM

   @18 - Chuck, QuickPlace has been able to do that for a long time. Create places, be manager of your own place, give or revoke access - all without IT having to interfere.

   QuickPlace had some other problems, which I hope Quickr will solve, but that's another thing.

1. 22  Curt Stone http://www.curtsisland.com | 6/11/2007 7:22:48 AM

   @3

   I agree with Kevin. Workflow is bread and butter for Notes and I can't understand the lack of a blue washed template with some teeth to it. I recently created a new workflow application and I was able to do it quickly using a sample database from the sandbox(and customizing). At the very least, it would be great if one of our guru's can tackle this subject at Lotusphere next year. "Build a workflow application in Domino" would draw a large crowd.

1. 23  Christopher Byrne http://www.controlscaddy.com/ | 6/11/2007 9:38:08 AM

   Ed,

   There are a number of books on the topic, almost too many in some areas. Some that I have reviewed and that I would recommend are:

   Beyond Governance: Creating Corporate Value through Performance, Conformance and Responsibility

   { Link }

   The New CIO Leader

   { Link }

   The Joy of SOX: Why Sarbanes-Oxley and Service-Oriented Architecture May Be the Best Thing That Ever Happened to You

   { Link }

   Note that while this last title has a SarBox title, the discussions of the book are more geared to SOA discussions and agile organizations, with the importance of IT being a partner in an agile environment.

1. 24  Maria Helm http://www.mariahelm.com | 6/11/2007 9:43:44 AM

   RE: (18)"...the business unit has the ownership and control. They can apply or not apply security the way they want, they can put things where they want , call them what they want and they don't need to come through "Central IT" to get something done that works for their small piece of the business. It's point and click to them"

   If our Notes environment isn't meeting these requirements, we need to look at why...

   1. They can apply or not apply security

   > Notes apps can be developed with readers/editors fields and give end users the ability to say who those people are, and even to set up defaults.

   2. put things where they want , call them what they want

   > Foldering, categories, document storage apps, etc. (Anywhere/anyname may mean that nobody else can find it, though. I would train users that constraints can be USEFUL.)

   3. and they don't need to come through "Central IT" to get something done

   > And because they didn't go through IT:

   1. They wasted business resources recreating capability that already exists.

   2. Every department has a different way of handling the same thing, because they each were able to develop it on their own.

   3. 50% doesn't work, 50% isn't backed up, and 100% is blamed on IT.

   4. People who have important non-IT jobs to do, are now spending their time in application development.

   > We need to make "going through Central IT" is as quick and painless as possible. Sometimes this means a restructuring of resources.

   In our company, things were handled via excel and email, when they should have been a collaborative Notes app, because it was there and users knew how to use it. I can't blame them. They need training/orientation to know what is available and how to use it. Unfortunately, our company is too focused on the short term "keep them rolling" aspect of things.

1. 25  David Bell  | 6/11/2007 12:47:41 PM

   @3 - this somewhat goes to my point in the other thread about why MS is not enterprise class.

   If everything you do is "wizard" driven, then you are entirely limited to what the creator of the wizard thought you would need. So while it might be friendly for the novice user, it is no good for the advanced user.

   Can you imagine how many permutations of workflow scenarios might exist in an enterprise ? Would you want to shoe-horn all of those into the ones the "wizard" defines are those that you need ?

   No, you want the platform to give you the tools to create exactly what you need.

   There are samples of workflow in the templates that ship with Domino. Workflow is not an application itself, it is a capability within an application. So a workflow.ntf would at best be sample code and the amount/types provided would be based on assumptions by the developers, not much different than building a wizard.

1. 26  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 6/11/2007 1:03:31 PM

   @25 - You make an important distinction here. With Notes you can use Lotus Workflow (or is it Domino Workflow?), Quenos, or any other workflow solution. These let you build workflow modules that you call as needed. This is extremely powerful for a power user and lets them be more self-sufficient. However you do have the ability to custom code purpose-specific workflow for an application if you have programming skills.

   Microsoft offers Windows Workflow Foundation (WF). With WF you have to build all the workflow up front, code all the actions, then use it in your application. If the workflow changes, you're changing it in WF and updating your application. Furthermore, workflow notifications are batched rather than immediate. @MailSend runs right now. A notification in WF is delayed by at least 5 minutes. In some of my applications that could be a problem. Coding workflows from scratch in a MS environment is simply suicidal. The number of moving parts and the amount of code required will drive you absolutely insane.

   My problem with any workflow engine is it's a layer of simplification that's not really any simpler. I know Kevin has been working on a concept to allow end users to create their own template-driven applications, and in that context a workflow engine makes a lot of sense. I do agree that having something like this out of the box would do a lot to increase Notes' mindshare among knowledge workers. However I don't think it's the be-all or end-all to solving the perceived Lotus vs. Microsoft collaboration solution gap.

1. 27  irv s  | 6/11/2007 2:11:07 PM

   Besides the differences in the way these compare feature for feature, there is a whole bunch of other items that need be addressed, such as what other products (or licensing costs for that matter) become mandatory when you need to things such as clustering, open file backup, and real-time Antivirus. Its amazing how many companies make a decision to go with one vendor without fully reviewing the 'big' picture.

1. 28  Rob Novak http://www.LotusRockStar.com | 6/11/2007 4:59:58 PM

   @18 - I've seen presentations on Sharepoint security...before the most recent release, Sharepoint would show links to areas and documents you couldn't access and things you couldn't do...including creating a document, and upon submit you were prevented. Nice - things we've taken for granted with Domino and QuickPlace and Portal for years on end were blatant in Sharepoint.

   The best parts of this story are that a) hiding these actions was touted as a great new feature and b) it was called "security clipping". Clipping. Like, in order to make it more secure they had to "cut out" inappropriate items from your view, instead of applying a true security model to the underlying data that would prevent you from ever seeing it...

   On the security end, Sharepoint is scratching the surface while IBM has been doing it right all along.

   On workflow - there will be an extensible and user-manageable workflow model delivered in the Quickr templates...that can (surprise) be modified and easily used in Domino applications. Not its focus, but it'll work.

1. 29  Mike Robinson http://www.invcs.com | 6/11/2007 7:59:07 PM

   While the decision is rarely ever made by the people who actually do the day to day technology maintenance (developer) and administration (the domino admin), the CIO is always seems to be at least 1 level removed from the impact of any technology and simply tells the subordinates to make it work. I've way to many "commissioned" studies by the CFO and CIOs executive office done in secret only to be found out months later by the IT staff.

   Honestly it sounds like Ed had a couple engagements in which he was "setup" and the decision was made prior to even making the flight reservations (I had similar scenarios while at Iris on the handful of instances when a propsect would come in and talk to dev.). I don't know what to do about those other than to just leave them with as much trembling fear about the pro-MS decision they've committed to.

   Anyway I've always been able to knock down most sharepoint talks early on with 2 points, one which has been mentioned on this blog several times. The first being what makes you think an organization that can't successfully migrate b/w Exchange versions successfully posses the ability to manage 4+ distinct products no matter how tightly integrated. Okay I'll admit that one is old but it still works. My favorite of all time is there's no sophisticated scheduled and background processing engine in the MS collaborative suite- so MS says use Windows Services. Even .NET service developers cringe at the prospect of even attempting to simulate the trigger functionality found in Dom Agents let alone managing a billion services that can't replicate and be centrally managed.

1. 30  Brian Vincent http://www.capgroup.com | 6/15/2007 8:46:16 PM

   @3 - You sunk my battle ship. You're right. Notes has long been sold as a primo workflow tool. The caveat being you need a great developer with some expensive add on tools for a great result with only a few hours development.

   Now sharepoint and other products are doing this out of the box with wizards. Any goober thats proficient enough walk through a few screens can set up forms with workflow in an afternoon. Oh and they do it in a sexy interface to boot.

   Workflow.ntf isnt a bad idea, as long as it comes with a UI that any goober could run.

1. 31  Brian Vincent  | 6/15/2007 9:27:39 PM

   @24

   "> We need to make "going through Central IT" is as quick and painless as possible. Sometimes this means a restructuring of resources."

   In my organization one has to go through their manager(s), then through a committee, then through a systems control group, then through an IT manager, just to make a dorky change to a discussion database. Then comes the formalized 10 step auditor compliant code migration procedure to get said change into production...

   The deal is all of those middle men are there to "control costs", "increase quality" and drive expensive BMWs. :) Unfortunately the only thing going fast are their BMWs.

1. 32  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 6/16/2007 1:23:47 PM

   @30 - You don't need a great developer or expensive add-on tools to do Notes workflow in a few hours. You need a moderately competent developer and Domino Designer. With Sharepoint the end user may be able to be clueless, but you need a a few very skilled admins and a raft of servers to implement and support the backend infrastructure before the users can even get started.

   Oh, and the Teamroom template has shipped with Domino since at least R5, so it's been available for nearly 10 years.

1. 33  Kevin Pettitt http://www.lotuguru.com | 6/16/2007 1:41:51 PM

   @7, @22, @25, @26, @28, @30, @32 - Seems I've struck a nerve on this one :-). Too much to say so I posted it on my blog here: { Link }

   To Charles' last point @32, he's right of course but as I say in my blog post, it's the inexperienced developers who need better tools to get started. Lotus has coasted along without a workflow.ntf up to now because Microsoft didn't have anything to offer this group. That has changed, and IBM needs to change with it.

   Can't wait to see what Rob @28 has up his sleeve with respect a workflow template in Quickr that could be used in Notes.

1. 34  Jason Ames  | 4/17/2008 7:53:58 AM

   I've worked a great deal in both platforms, many years in Notes and a little over a year in SP...particularly MOSS 2007. I'm not biased on either side. However, MOSS 2007, although relatively immature as a new product (like Notes was around the R3 days), it really offers a ton of awesome functionality right out of the box. For organisations that rely on Exchange, have a solid active directory and are going to use Office 2007 (and who won't?), MOSS totally rocks. I think Ozzie has strategically pushed MOSS at a time when IBM is trying to pull Notes out of the muck that they themselves caused by ignoring it for so long, opting instead to push WebSphere family of products. Web parts, Infopath forms, various workflow options, the business data catalog and full support for web services and XML...I mean, wow! Most of the negative comments about SP above are clearly from people who have either not worked with it or have little experience. Workflows are restricted to "wizards". There's out of the box workflows, there's the option of using SP Designer and then for the complex workflows, you have the option of a full and robust WF platform in Visual Studio (which is the best IDE ever, period). Notes is great if your company is on the Notes client and uses Notes email exclusively, but for web content management in the enterprise, make way for MOSS 2007. It's like the R4 days of Notes all over again! It's a huge wave and Microsoft will surely not leave it hanging like IBM did with Notes. Instead of bashing it, I'd recommend LEARNING it and adding it to your portfolio of skills.

1. 35  Jason Ames   | 4/17/2008 7:55:47 AM

   Sorry, I meant to say "Workflows are NOT restricted to wizards".