Guest blog: Kevin Cavanaugh: Composite applications, xPages

April 28 2009

We have a guest blogger today -- my boss, Kevin Cavanaugh, IBM Vice President, Messaging and Collaboration Products.  Read on:

I was browsing Notes and Domino community posts last Friday when I came across an interesting post from Duffbert on composite applications. It was inspired by a post by Nick Shelness that I had not seen and had an equally interesting set of comments from other folks I recognized and respected.  They got much right about Notes and Composite Applications, but I feel the need to try to clarify a few things.    

  • Composite applications were originally a portal construct that  can also be valuable in an Eclipse-based Notes client. We continue to use it for our own Notes PIM applications and we have seen extensive use of it in portal implementations. This construct was not invented for Notes and is not some passing fad
  • I was surprised that one person's comment thought he had been 'told' that end-users would be building composite apps. My first thought was 'I hope I am not the one who said that in a fit of technical inebriation.' What I remember saying to the Notes and Domino development team was that composite apps were for professional developers. The goal was to share some of the techniques we were using to build PIM apps to construct other professional applications. The examples in the comments do just that. My intention for the first release was to be successful when our most capable partners could do cool things. Focus on mere mortals could come later.
  • Maybe we have not been clear enough. We are NOT trying to push one programming model. We have a great programming model with Domino Designer. xPages is a significant investment to extend that model.
  • Composite Apps is an off-shoot of the portal programming model. It was designed to allow the assembling of sophisticated line of business applications from a variety of backend systems. At least two major international banks are building new teller workstation systems with Composite Apps. These systems are typically not built and deployed in a few days or weeks. The RAD requirements are not the same as for Domino Designer developed apps.
  • Widgets and its wizard are meant for use by end-users, and xPages was designed with the vast majority of Notes applications in mind. Widgets are meant for mere mortals and there is some evidence that mere mortals are using them. xPages are meant for long-time Domino Designer users, and there is very ample evidence that they are gaining traction. Widgets appeared in 8.01 and have been extended in 8.5. xPages appeared in 8.5 and there is more coming. Watch for xPages in the client and on mobile devices.
  • There is a complaint in Nick's original post that we no longer have a symmetrical rich client and browser development model. Did we ever? I would argue that once we get xPages on the client we will have the most symmetrical model we have ever had. There is also a browser/client symmetry in composite apps; portal composites and Notes composites. Widgets in Notes and iNotes complete the symmetry.
  • All this said there were a lot of good points made in the discussion. Enhancements are needed in Composite Apps, xPages and Widgets. We staged the release of these capabilities and have probably never communicated clearly where each fits. However, we have not backed away from any of these areas. It is true that xPages is getting the most development attention at the moment, but that is for a very good reason. Our base is telling us by their actions to focus there. it is a fair point that it is expensive to maintain multiple programming models and that almost unavoidably one will appear to be the favored child at any given point in time. However, we are a big company. We have lots of sister divisions who contribute to our technology. All three of the models, composite apps, xPages, and widgets have synergies with other things IBM is doing and all three are getting help from outside of Lotus.

What really made we want to comment were two assertions by Nick:
  • There is very little (if any) additional Notes functionality being delivered to Notes developers
  • Microsoft has now caught up, and in some areas surpassed Lotus

Did Nick miss xPages? and exactly how has MS caught up? Designer still provides a stronger RAD environment. Decent off-line support only exists in Notes. Notes and Domino customers continue to complain to me that Sharepoint has a very weak workflow model that is incapable of matching the capabilities of Notes and Domino.

Nick then plays the 'legacy' and 'Workplace' cards. Even Microsoft has largely given up on those. I am encouraged that in their most recent propaganda, Microsoft is not declaring Notes is Dead. Instead they are comparing Notes 8.5 released in January 2009 to Exchange 2010. Seems like an admission that their e-mail server is still a year behind our messaging and collaboration products.

Kevin Cavanaugh New York, NY USA Category:  Notes and Domino 8.5  Add/View Comments [18]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Darren Duke http://blog.darrenduke.net | 4/28/2009 11:35:12 AM

    Here, here. I agree on all points and when xpages comes to the client (and the BlackBerry) off we all ride happily ever after ;)

    Now, composite apps will (IMHO) never take hold in the Domino developer realm because of it's Portal heritage, but that should be old news to everyone.

    I particularly like that MS are playing catch-up. Good work by all involved in the product, very good work.

  1. 2  John Head http://www.johndavidhead.com | 4/28/2009 11:36:20 AM

    Kevin - what Bruce heard, as did many of us at the first blogger press conference at Lotusphere 2007, was that the Composite Application Editor (CAE) was being designed so that end-users could build mashups of Composite App components. Developers would build the components and the CAE would make the wiring process of these super simple. End Users could build their own customized business apps and portals. This was said by Doug Wilson, then CIO of Lotus. Mike Rhodin then followed up on the statement.

    I like the Composite App model - but the idea that end users would use the CA Editor was always an IBM dream.

  1. 3  Bruce Elgort http://elguji.com | 4/28/2009 12:04:56 PM

    Ed,

    I didn't say what you quoted me as saying. I think you need to re-read Duffberts blog comments. It was Rob M who said this.

    Bruce

  1. 4  Rob McDonagh http://www.CaptainOblivious.com | 4/28/2009 12:09:55 PM

    "The Composite Application Editor will be part of the Notes kit and the All Client kit. The main reason why the CAE will be part of the Notes kit is so that power users can use it to define composite applications as opposed to developers only."

    { Link }

    And that concept was repeated often by IBMers.

    { Link }

    { Link }

    I'm sure John is right about the blogger press conference as well. There have been a lot of consistent, repeated references to power users building CAs with components designed by traditional developers. Many of us consider that model bizarre, and haven't been shy about saying so.

  1. 5  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/28/2009 12:42:01 PM

    @3 sorry on the mis-quote, I will get that fixed when I am not on planes.

  1. 6  Kevin Cavanaugh  | 4/28/2009 12:54:47 PM

    @4 Thanks for the links. It does look like we let our rhetoric get a bit extreme about Power Users. Maybe someday in some circumstances, but as I said above a professional developer today.

  1. 7  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 4/28/2009 2:38:57 PM

    @6 - This point was reinforced in the SDR a few weeks ago. Email me if you'd like to discuss specifics (since I obviously can't post them on Ed's blog.)

    I didn't join in the dogpile on Tom's blog, but I've been asked by IBM on several occasions why CAs aren't getting more uptake, and the answer is very simple: WSDL. WSDL sucks. You have to write and package WSDL into your Notes applications to CA-enable them. When that requirement goes away (and I know it will) then I would expect a lot more uptake.

    You'll still have tons of problems with UI control in CompApps (I detailed some issues on Bob Balfe's blog last month, but it appears that the comments were lost in his recent site transition,) but lots of corporate users will simply bear the UI pains in order to get to a "single control center"-type screen.

    @2 - <nitpick> Wasn't Doug CTO?

  1. 8  Tripp Black http://www.mindwatering.com | 4/28/2009 2:47:22 PM

    @1 I do work for some large companies. They generally do have Websphere applications. However, it will take time before the apps are component'ized such that easy multi-app integration occurs with the Notes Client. Also, more than half of these shops have the web browser as their app presentation standard, so the tendency will be for Notes content in a Portal app. in the short term.

    ________

    @2 & Kevin. Yes, I heard same exact thing from somebody who heard it from Lotus is that "power users" would have the assembly role and assemble apps. I cannot see this ever an end-user thing either unless the CAE GUI is far simplified beyond what it is now. However it is true that a specific IT "power user" can app. components together created by their developers. It does work well there.

    ________

    As for XPages will grab traction. It's tool too cool and useful to not do so. However, companies are just completng 8.0x deloyments. 8.5x deployments are generally waiting on 8.5.1. Very few want to be the bleeding edge. Most want somebody else to bleed. :-)

    I personally, am just now getting the interest from clients for XPages. XPages will be core for me, as well.

    Overall, I welcome this post. Anytime IBM does a good comprehensive response like this one that is clear and specific is good. Thank you.

  1. 9  Erik Brooks  | 4/28/2009 3:27:21 PM

    Ed, great post. Very direct and comprehensive.

    I agree 100% about the "when have we ever had a cohesive Notes/web dev environment?" XPages *should* end up being the closest thing in this direction in years.

    "Watch for xPages in the client and on mobile devices."

    Pardon me while I drool all over my desk.

  1. 10  John Head http://www.johndavidhead.com | 4/28/2009 3:33:37 PM

    @7 Nathan - yes he was - my bad

  1. 11  Peter Presnell  | 4/28/2009 5:19:36 PM

    Great post....

    As to the question "And exactly how has MS caught up?"...

    One area is programming language support. When Notes 6.0 came out LotusScript was in many ways a better programming language than Visual Basic. Since that time MS have released several iterations of VB.Net and also added C#. Both these programming languages are now a LONG way ahead of LotusScript. Especially in the area of OOP.

    To-date I am not aware of IBM making any statement or commitment towards extending the capabilities of LotusScript to be comparable with VB.Net, C#, or Java. I appreciate that IBM can only tackle so many things at a time and X-Pages (both Web & Notes client) seems a good thing to get out the door next. It would be nice if IBM did at least make public a position paper on its programming language support (@Commands, LotusScript, Java, and JavaScript) and provide some sort of road-map as to the areas it would like to address. No timetable is needed, just knowing the things likely to get attention next (if any) would suffice.

    Note: Without a method for feedback on ideas posted to IdeaJam it is sometimes too easy to assume that many of the great ideas posted have been ignored...

  1. 12  Bruce Elgort http://elguji.com | 4/28/2009 5:29:42 PM

    @11,

    "Note: Without a method for feedback on ideas posted to IdeaJam it is sometimes too easy to assume that many of the great ideas posted have been ignored..."

    Only IBM can answer this question.

  1. 13  Erik Brooks  | 4/28/2009 8:39:32 PM

    Whoops. I just noticed that this wasn't Ed's post, it was Kevin's. Sorry - great post, Kevin! (And great visibility, Ed). That's what I get for posting while dog-tired.

    My response to the question "and exactly how has MS caught up?" Peter @11 touched upon one area: development capabilities.

    XPages *just* brought Domino back into serious web-dev. Yes, it brought it back in a BIG way, even surpassing .Net in some areas. But up until that MS was starting to shred Lotus pretty good.

    Lotusscript is another example. As a language it's just sitting there. Class browser anybody? Yes, I know it's shipping in 8.5.1, but... MS has been there for at least 10 years. And with real type-ahead support. They "caught up" there ages ago.

    I could add "marketing" to the mix (where MS has been slaughtering Lotus since 2002 or so) but that's an area likely beyond Kevin's direct control.

    But it does lead us to yet another area where MS has "caught up": developer uptake and penetration, particularly in SMB.

    For every small Lotus dev shop I know I can name 3 MS shops. For every large firm I know with a "Lotus guy", there's 3 MS guys. Now a project might NEED 3 MS guys to produce what one Lotus guy can, but it definitely has the appearance of making the MS track appear the popular choice.

    And if I had to take a guess at college/university penetration at the developer level... I'm guessing that'd go MS as well.

    Notes was and is the epitome of RAD. But unless constant investments continue to be made in that area, others will gain ground. I'm glad to hear that IBM is ultra-serious about XPages. I hope the commitment continues.

  1. 14  Rishi  | 4/28/2009 9:12:11 PM

    After reading Ferris Research, here are my views

    1- I must say MS has provided great tool to design SharePoint applications , event person with knowledge of just HTML/Javascript can design SharePoint themes and simple workflow application using wizard tool.

    2- However designing/developing custom SharePoint application is real ass pain due to lots of dependency in MOSS server.Even if MS has provided good tools, But due to complexity it's costly solution to design custom SharePoint applications.

    3- On the other side as , as Ferris mentioned LN "shared-nothing redundancy," . It's well said , designing and deploying applications in LN is very simple. However,it can be made more simpler by giving wizard based X-Page designing, building simple web applications(just skeleton)using wizard,giving more power to Lotus script (like, giving LS editor and new classes to integrate symphony,designing Mobile solution etc ). If MS can provide simple RAD tool, why can't IBM?

  1. 15  Rishi  | 4/28/2009 9:19:08 PM

    @14, I forgot to mentioned ,

    * I was talking about SharePoint designer.

    * I still don't know purpose of CAs and how to use in real time projects :(( so no comments about CAs.

  1. 16  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 4/28/2009 9:32:11 PM

    Manual trackback on the topic of end-user tools and IBM's expectations: { Link }

  1. 17  Phil Warner http://www.trailfinders.com | 4/29/2009 6:39:58 AM

    @1 As an SMB customer, we're looking forward to bringing even more speed and quality to our RAD with both Composite Applications and xPages. They represent a major assurance of our investment in Domino down the years. I don't care if CA's have a history in Portal or not. In fact, I can see a time where we'll use CA's by default for client work.