eWeek has a good summary today of the state of the cloud-based messaging and collaboration market...
Google finds itself in a daunting position on Feb. 22, the third birthday of Google Apps Premier Edition. The company is trying to dislodge legacy on-premises installations from Microsoft and IBM while fighting off SAAS solutions from those same companies. It also has to compete with new cloud offerings from Cisco Systems, as well as from a slew of startups such as Zoho, Mindtouch and others. But Google, Microsoft and IBM will be the main protagonists in the battle for pre-eminence in the market for cloud, or Web-based, collaboration software.
There's some interesting posturing from my competitors...
Markezich claimed Microsoft has an advantage over Google because customers who choose to migrate to Google Apps from Microsoft or IBM still can't get the migration "spend out."Translation -- our software is too expensive, but we can buy the business this way.
Moreover, Markezich claimed three-quarters of Microsoft's cloud customers are coming from Lotus Notes, including pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, McDonald's and Pitney Bowes, he added: "The reason they are coming from Notes is they've always wanted to get off of Notes onto Microsoft, but they didn't want to invest in the hardware and skills in that transition. Microsoft Online gives them an easier, faster path to get to a higher caliber communications and collaboration platform."
Google, too, seems to have a weird view:
eWEEK asked Google's [Enterprise President Dave] Girouard how the company can compete with Microsoft and IBM, the incumbents in the enterprise collaboration market.It's an interesting story but I would turn it around and say, what innovation has Google demonstrated in this space at all? We are focused on the future where email isn't the center of the universe, instant messages are a tool and not a wave, and bringing true business value to collaboration -- as we have for the entire history of this market. Girouard's view won't help him sort out what's important in his inbox (I'm quite sure of this based on a single past attempted interaction), what is needed to make decisions, and to do more than drive commodity pressure in the market.
Girouard pointed to history for incumbents giving way to newfangled approaches in computing. Just as the evolution from mainframes to the client/server model gave birth to Microsoft, the client/server era is giving way to Google and its cloud, Girouard believes. ...
Girouard argued that all collaboration apps will move to the cloud in the next five years. He said: "Where are the new apps being built? What app that is not a cloud app has been launched in the last five years? There are none. The best non-cloud app I can think of is probably [Apple's] iTunes."
I'm spending a lot more time on LotusLive, specifically LotusLive Notes conversations with customers, but the conversation starter is often the siren song of cloud/SaaS or commodity price pressure. This article sums up how IBM offers a more comprehensive total solution to customers--on-premises, cloud, or hybrid--with the only real offerings focused on a complete collaboration solution.
Link: eWeek: Google Apps Turns 3 as It Fends Off Microsoft, IBM in the Cloud >
Post a Comment
- 2
Gavin Bollard http://dominogavin.blogspot.com | 2/23/2010 3:06:33 PM
Ed,
I think that Innovation is exactly the point that you should steer clear away from in terms of Google. Their strengths are in their UI and their Innovation. You couldn't say that Wave and Buzz weren't attempts to innovate. They may not have necessarily taken off but it's obvious that Google is trying new and exciting things.
Google's strengths are also their greatest weakness. They innovate by changing the codebase without warning and introducing new features. It's a great way to move things forward in leaps and bounds - and a technique that I sometimes use at work.
Of course, whenever I do this, I also get major detractors. Most non-technical people don't like change, they don't like sudden and unexpected innovation. They like stability. They want things to look, feel and operate the same as they always have. They want demonstrated "uptime", not tinkering.
That's the big advantage that IBM has. It's the reason why although Google is clearly the best solution for home users, IBM is the best for business.
- 3
David - the Notes guy in Seattle | 2/23/2010 6:05:33 PM
Deja Vu.
@1 Yes, once again, it seems the decision-makers did not seek the advice of their own technical experts, favoring the anecdotal opinion of their peers.
As technical experts, I think there is a message here for us. In order to influence these decisions, you need to arm yourself with an understanding of how they are made. With CxO's, the rules are different. Their peers are not technical experts. (envision your parents in this role) At one point it frustrated me so much I decided to research the topic. In my research I came across this book "Influence: the Psychology of Persuasion". It is good enough to be required reading for an MBA at University of Washington. I found it to be enlightening in understanding this subject.
I have mentioned this a few times, but have yet to hear from anyone who followed up on the idea, (perhaps because it's a book, not a website?). That is disconcerting, considering the impact it could have on your career. Choosing to neglect to understand how CxO's make these decisions is ironically, the same flaw CxO's exhibit when they neglect to understand the technical issues of technology migrations. If they won't step into your world, then you had better step into theirs if you want to bridge this gap and influence their decisions. Check it out.
- 4
Kevin | 2/24/2010 8:17:48 AM
"...higher caliber communications and collaboration platform."
That and "...they've always wanted to get off of Notes onto Microsoft..."
An article on GOOG and they throw those things in there. Classic MS spin.
I'd say "higher caliber" is in the eye of the beholder.
@3 - You're right there's a differing methodology for the exec office in making a decision than perhaps we are used to in tech. However, this is of course assuming it isn't just a "I want" decision vs a "my peers" discussion. Sometimes we're going up against an IT director with an axe to grind or political move to make who pushes a migration. Here's where our knowing how to influence would be beneficial. To counter the "everyone's doing it" argument which doesn't add business value.
K.
- 5
Chris Reckling http://www-10.lotus.com/ldd/insidelotusblog.nsf/ | 2/24/2010 9:47:18 PM
1. If iTunes is the best example he can come up with, then credibility is shot (iTunes has some UX problems in my opinion).
2. Really? iTunes?
3. Hello - Lotus Connections is a new app. Oh wait, it's on premise AND cloud. Guess Google doesn't do that, so it must not be good.
4. I'm trying to follow the MS logic - migrating FROM MS or IBM to Google, you "can't get the spend out"? I think that means it doesn't pay to migrate, right? (Is that English or execu-speak?)But it's supposedly cheaper to go to MS online. At least eweek said, "he claimed" this or that. Maybe they should look into that.
Chris
- 6
Morpheus "Take the red pill" | 2/25/2010 2:40:18 PM
@5 You can't apply your rules of logic to conclusions made using a different style of logic. That's my whole point @3. There are many forms of logic.
Does it make sense that a store could double the price of a product that they couldn't sell and suddenly everyone is eager to buy it?
Does it make sense why so many people would be eager to die in the Jonestown massacre?
Once the logic of these is understood, then the logic applied in Markezich's statement above (very successfully, I will add) will make more sense.
BTW, both of these examples are explained in the book I referenced.
- 7
Charles Robinson http://www.cubert.net | 2/26/2010 7:10:05 AM
@6 - You're assuming there is logic. Sometimes people aren't that intellectual about the things they say or do.
- 8
Morpheus "Take the red pill" | 2/26/2010 3:12:08 PM
@7 Really? Then would you also say there was no logic in the behavior of the people of Jonestown (this may be before your time)? Just because you don't see the logic doesn't mean there is none.
Take a look at this image { Link }
and tell us what you see. Do you see a lovely, young woman or do you see an old lady? Once you have decided, take a look at this page and scroll down to see one image at a time: { Link } Perhaps it's just a matter of perspective?
You can certainly accept the premise that all of these executives in decision-making positions are following no logic in their decisions and watch in bewilderment as you see them repeatedly happen. Or you can explore the idea that there may be other logic being applied here that isn't so obvious. But until you do, how will you ever see it much less understand it?
"Do you want the red pill or the blue pill? The choice is yours. I am simply opening the door. You have to walk through it."
IBM offers a more comprehensive total solution to customers--on-premises, cloud, or hybrid--with the only real offerings focused on a complete collaboration solution.
Very true. :-)
As for one of the three examples sited, it had little to do with a better product or business case for a product/platform. As what happens too often, it was a we wantthis, how can we get there situation. They sacrificed 100s of customized hacks in their R4 mail template to convert to MS live w/no plan how they were going to re-deliver some of the important ones after their conversion.