Lotus Redbooks

September 23 2007

I've been debating over breakfast whether to say anything about the burgeoning "Lotus Redbooks are dead" buzz in the Lotus blogging community.  I've read the postings by Carl Tyler, Christopher Byrne, Stuart McIntyre, vowe, Tom Duff, and Ben Poole.  When something is that prominent in the community, I try to share what I know.  Sometimes, though, that can backfire, as I am not often the decision-maker on this stuff and sometimes (as in this case) not even involved in whatever has transpired.  

For example, vowe links back to a comment I made two years ago when what appeared externally to be similar circumstances transpired...that link somehow implies that what is happening now is a repeat of what happened then.  It's not.  Neither time has IBM said that there will never be another Lotus Redbook.  There are Lotus Redbooks in the process of being published right now, such as the Notes/Domino 8 deployment guide.

But things are changing.  Tom Duff correctly identifies that the entire industry is going through changes in how technology books are published.  Cost and cycle time are both factors in considering how to best disseminate information.  New tools are available.  

For example, the Lotus Connections team has set up a deployment wiki on IBM developerWorks:
Image:Lotus Redbooks
It's early days, but you can see the approach being taken, and the opportunity for both IBM and the community to share, update...collaborate on public information.

A number of the comments say that IBM should wait to see if the new approach succeeds before discontinuing the old one.  I think that's a fair criticism, but one that rests up against corporate realities of resource allocation.  In other words, sometimes you have to cause a change in approach, not wait to see if one can happen.  All of you who blog, or participate in developerWorks forums, or have written your own articles or books, can contribute to wiki-based or other online documentation, without taking five weeks out of your life to go to a physical location to write.  This community has already demonstrated the ability to do this, through Show-n-Tell Thursdays, self-published books, and blog articles.  I hope to see you participate in this evolution as well.

I appreciate all the feedback already shared via the links above.  I can tell you from what I've seen internally that the decision to go with this new approach is a done deal.  However, I also know we've done some 2008 budget planning that would include Lotus-related Redbooks.  We will have to see how/what/if that comes to fruition.  I can't comment further on the how/what/if, since, again, this isn't my area at all.  I just wanted to share what I do know, since that's what a community is all about.

Ed Brill Highland Park, IL USA Category:  Lotus  Add/View Comments [26]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  marco foellmer http://www.ebf.de | 9/23/2007 9:48:52 AM

    I am really upset about this because Tom Duff is not seeing the full picture!

    Redbooks stands for:

    - Community

    - Excellent Knowledge Sharing

    - Best practices of all Lotus products

    with IBM, customers and Business Partners!

    I do not see the tools, which are able to manage this.

  1. 2  Duffbert http://www.twduff.com | 9/23/2007 10:01:05 AM

    @1: I appreciate that you have a differing opinion. I expect many in the Lotus community will disagree with me on what I said. But it's not a matter of me not seeing the "full picture" as you state. It's a matter of me choosing to focus on a particular aspect of this whole situation over the one you choose to focus on.

    Yes, Redbooks can stand for all of that. But to play devil's advocate here. When I download a redbook, I'm not thinking "community", I'm thinking "I need to know something". Yes, they are excellent stores of knowledge. So are books, wikis, blogs, etc. Personally, I'd prefer the book route, but it's not the only way. Best practices are also covered in redbooks, but again I'd counter that blogs and wikis do the same. And with the publish on demand concept, there's no reason why the same people who write a redbook couldn't write the same content for the community (and get a financial return, in addition).

    I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I'd prefer, in a perfect world, for everything to stay the way it was. But rather than lament the situation, I choose to look at potential alternatives.

  1. 3  David Gursky  | 9/23/2007 10:42:24 AM

    We were considering Sametime 7.5 for our site. To that end I downloaded the (then draft) 7.5 Best Practices Redbook.

    Guys, it's a flipping BOAT ANCHOR!

    It is ABOUT 800 pages.

    Now if I were still working at a beltway bandit filled with engineers rejected from school like MIT, that might mean something, but for use folks out in the real world, 800 pages is simply a cure for insomnia, and a waste of a nice shade tree.

  1. 4  Rob McDonagh http://www.CaptainOblivious.com | 9/23/2007 11:08:44 AM

    I'm leaning towards Duffbert on this one. This is a change, and the change CAN be interpreted in both positive and negative ways. The negative is easy and obvious, and I think everyone agrees that it's real and significant. But the positive could also be significant.

    I have a pebble that I'd like to toss onto the virtual scales: participation in this sort of documentation could greatly expand under a new model. Redbooks have always been a great resource, but there IS one downside to them. The only people who can participate are people who are allowed to take a 5 week paid vacation from work (and probably more accurately, have work consider those weeks an investment and not a vacation at all). So in spite of my interest over the years, I've never even been able to *think* about becoming a Redbook author.

    Personally, traditional wiki-style documentation isn't my first choice. I'd rather see something that wound up looking more like a book. Something that you could replicate and get changes. Something with a community-appointed group of editors to accept changes and merge them into the structure of the larger 'book.' You could do all of these things within a wiki, of course, so I'm not saying wikis couldn't be the solution. But I'd want a wikiBook, personally.

  1. 5  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 9/23/2007 1:00:47 PM

    Ed, this whole idea just needs ONE thing to go with it.

    Karma.

    Why did anyone sign up to write a Redbook before? It was 6 weeks of expenses-only work, who's only benefit was that you got to hang around with other geeks for a while, and then proclaim "I WROTE A REDBOOK!"

    You point to the Connection Wiki. If you guys want that to work (and I for one certainly do) you need to have some kind of explicit "giveback" model. There has to be a positive consequence for contributors.

    Why would I write something in your Wiki instead of publishing it on my own blog and making myself the fountain of knowledge? I'm not strictly generous about everything, y'know. Many of the best community resources are ASWs, and that MUST be reflected in this strategy.

    Wikis are great. Authenticated Wikis are better. Authenticated Wikis with attribution are better still. Authenticated Wikis with attribution via trackbacks and subsequent elevation of contribution are even better still.

    Those in the blogging community understand the fringe benefits of blogging for the most part. Speaking engagements, design partnerships and real business being driven from these mechanisms is key. If a public resource steps up to say "I'll take ownership of this X piece of content" then that should be explicitly reflected and should come into play in everything from Lotusphere abstract considerations to ISSL references.

    People share knowledge for two reasons: fortune and glory. If you aren't going to pay them a fortune, you have to make sure the glory comes.

    You need that MVP program, guys. :-)

  1. 6  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 9/23/2007 1:02:06 PM

    That should be "elevation of FUTURE contribution."

  1. 7  John Head http://www.johndavidhead.com | 9/23/2007 2:14:13 PM

    I agree with Duffbert as well ... not every change is worthy of "the sky is falling" reaction. I think what IBM can do short term is to get the other product wikis (Notes/Domino, ST, Quickr, Symphony, etc) up and running ASAP.

    Sorry Marco, but there are lots of ways to do community, Expert Knowledge Sharing, and best practices. This is not exclusive to the Redbooks. Sometimes, change is good.

  1. 8  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 9/23/2007 3:26:44 PM

    I'm not sure what I think of this yet, I'll have to see what rises up as an alternative.

    @5 - "People share knowledge for two reasons: fortune and glory." That may be true for you, but it's by no means universal. Some people choose to share knowledge specifically because it was difficult to come by. They sincerely hope their blood, sweat and tears can spare someone else the same misery. Their reward is the personal satisfaction of helping others.

    If sharing what I know gets my name up in lights I'll accept that with gratitude and humility, but it is definitely not what I am striving for. I think the majority of the people who contribute via blogs, OpenNTF and other sources feel the same way. The ones who want glory or fortune are the exception, thankfully.

  1. 9  Ben Poole http://benpoole.com | 9/23/2007 5:05:35 PM

    I haven't written a red book, but I certainly get a lot out of them, so I dispute Nathan's in #5.

    As for reverting to wikis and the like, great.

    But I contend that you won't get the depth of knowledge teased out in red books, no way. A typical red book team works solely on their materal for 5 - 6 weeks, expenses paid. That means dedicating plenty of time and effort. With the best will in the world, you're going to have to go it some to duplicate that level of effort in a community wiki.

  1. 10  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 9/23/2007 5:06:13 PM

    @8 - Then IBM will not need to do anything to secure your participation except make the knowledge hard to come by in the first place.

    That should make a successful replacement for Redbooks easy.

    We can disagree about other people's motives, but I would remark that since there is but a single OpenNTF project published under a pseudonym, and I can't think of a single successful Community blogger who doesn't publish under their own name, I'll stick by my assessment. :-)

  1. 11  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 9/23/2007 5:13:03 PM

    @9 - What do you dispute in my remarks?

    Maybe something wasn't clear. Many people, including me, got an enormous amount out of READING Redbooks. I'm talking about what people got out of writing them. They got nothing except their expenses covered living in Boston for the duration of the project. Redbooks didn't even pay minimum wage.

    Every single Redbook author did it because they either got to spend 6 weeks with a bunch of Lotus-freaks, or because they wanted their name printed on some official IBM guide. There was no reason to do it otherwise.

    If you're just purely altruistic, nothing whatsoever stops you from just writing and publishing information right now. I would think the people commenting here know better than anyone that if they want to anonymously self-publish technical content, it's a NO BRAINER to get it done.

    Where are all the anonymously authored technical guides to Lotus products?

    But yes, Ben, the results of the program were great. Never as great, IMO, as the results of either OpenNTF.org or the blogosphere in general, though.

  1. 12  Lucas Williamson http://www.advancedclp.com | 9/23/2007 5:18:12 PM

    Redbooks are a critical resource to both developers and admins and I hope whatever they are replaced with are just as good. Personally I'd be very sad to see them go.

    I don't really care too much how the info is authored and published, so long as it continues to be done and the quality and depth is the same.

    Despite the fact that I like the Help doco for ND, it is a little too pure and theoretical sometimes. Redbooks encapsulate knowledged gathered from those who've tried and failed with installations and configurations, and leared lessons along the way. In short, they save me mountains of time despite the fact that they are very big books. They put things into order and sequence in a way the Help doco can't (or doesn't).

    I've always been critical of IBM's efforts in the user interface space for server software, and I haven't seen much improvement over time. This makes Redbooks absolutely vital for anyone trying to do installations. Have you ever tried installing TAM or WAS Portal along with Domino/Sametime without a Redbook. It is damn near impossible to get everything in the right sequenence and patch level for it to actually work.

  1. 13  Keith Brooks http://lotustech.blogspot.com | 9/23/2007 8:16:10 PM

    I think it is an excellent idea, having never authored a Redbook(no lack of trying)but using them for the last 15 years or so I realized in the recent weeks that a wiki or a multiuser blog would be much more practical.

    Doing a Sametime, Quickplace ND7 with SSl, LDAp and tunneling plus just left me worn out from reading the multitudes of redbooks on each subject(and product).

    A better way is needed and one which is multireferenced so when I need to do this again I do not need to go to 4 books or sites but one with a storing of thought for my topic of issue.

    There are still areas where a redbook would be useful I am sure but going forward this sounds like a better choice.

  1. 14  Craig Davies  | 9/23/2007 10:19:21 PM

    I love Redbooks, many projects have been possible with the information we can get from them. I really like the wiki idea so they can be updated as better ideas come out.

    One issue here though, why doesn't the Developerworks site use an IBM/Lotus technology (rather than a competitor) for their Wiki? Are they saying Lotus products don't cut it? This doesn't help us out here trying to get people onto QuickR and such like.

  1. 15  Stuart McIntyre http://www.collaborationmatters.com | 9/23/2007 11:38:23 PM

    Interesting points folks, glad to see that this issue has raised some hackles around the community.

    As you will see from my blog entry on the matter { Link } and the petition I have started { Link } this is a decision I feel pretty strongly about.

    Redbooks have always offered something very different from the average product manual, "Lotus XXX for Dummies", "How to learn Lotus XXX in 7 days" or just general whitepapers and HowTo docs. However, it is hard to put that "something different" into words... Whatever it is, it has been valuable to many thousands of individuals over the years, the download numbers clearly support that.

    Whilst the wiki is a step forward, I cannot see a day where it will offer the in-depth level of information that a Redbook would do. In particular, my concern is we will be back to having admins and consultants searching endless different sites (wikis, forums, support sites, InfoCenters, blog posts etc) to try to find the nugget of information they need to help install one of the ever-more-complex Lotus products whilst in so many cases, the 500-page Redbook on the subject would have been all they needed.

    Lastly, as far as I am aware, the Redbook process of producing documentation has been a unique for IBM, and one that has been hugely appreciated by partners and customers alike. Appreciation like that is hard to come by and should not be discarded lightly.

  1. 16  Axel  | 9/24/2007 2:43:54 AM

    First of all I never have written a book and I imagine its very hard. Probably 90% of all vision statement, design exposés and documentations I've written over the years could have been much better.

    BUT: I found the most redbooks I've read not a very pleasent experience. In contrast I am quite a fan of some (sorry) "real" books for Lotus / IBM products. (for example Brian Benz/Rocky Oliver book, Barcia about websphere deployment or Lynn, Bernal, Blinstrubas targeting programming Portlets for Lotus Websphere Portal).

    Whats my problem with redbooks?

    I think the "real" books are much better focussed. Take "Building Composite Applications" ({ Link })

    I hoped its about programmer getting started with the new tools, but it starts with a very high level architectural overview about SOA in general. Nothing against that, I am interested in that topic, it doesn't fit in the book. Often redbooks try to be tutorial and reference manual at the same time. This is really hard to archieve as both goals are somehow ortogonal.

    I guess that the process for writing "real books" for (examples) Manning or IBM Press undergo a more elaborate project management process and due to the increased complexities of market demand that process makes sense from a readers standpoint.

    Of course books are not everything and I am all for wikis, good and constantly updated product documentation as reference materials for all the details. This works very well with a lot of the Eclipse plug-ins and some openSource project like spring or hibernate.

    Also little movies and podcasts are usefull for catching interest in topics.

  1. 17  Axel  | 9/24/2007 2:59:28 AM

    Also I imagine with more opportunities for easily integrating non-IBM openSource projects in Domino Applications especially with Expeditor, it might make a lot of sense to invite commiters of those libraries to write for notes.net aka developerworks/lotus.

    Developerworks/Websphere does that all the time. I've heard that the authors receive a fair amount of money and more often than not those articles are a very pleasent reading experience.

    Example would be a little series about Eclipse BIRT project with some focus on how to use this stuff in notes applications with Expeditor.

  1. 18  Lars Olufsen http://www.olufsphere.com | 9/24/2007 8:20:42 AM

    I'll ad my dime's worth ...

    I'm all FOR Wikis, Blogs etc.

    Sure, looking at the current portfolio of Lotus products, IBM should naturally move towards implementing business value using such tools. What better demonstration?

    One problem though ... are those tools really right for this kind of information?

    A redbook is much like a manual, often almost following a step-by-step formula. It needs to be well structured and with a lot of coherence between topic.

    Blogs are more of a "what's on my mind today" source, and Wikis are feeding of cross-referencing massively UNstructured information.

    Both tools fulfill their purpose and would be great assets on developerworks (or notes.net as some of us still refer to it as), but I can't possibly see it as a replacement for the structured manuals that are vital for admins and developers.

    Will IBM consider dropping the "Yellowbooks" as well? Downloadable software containing no other documentation but a link to the "official Notes-wiki"? I don't think so.

    I think it was Volker that wrote elsewhere that a "redbook is a structured collection of FAQs" (probably not an exact quote), and that is pretty much spot on. While a yellowbook is very "You can do it like this ...", a redbook is "WE DID IT like this ..." - very much more of a "guide".

    When using a Wiki, you often target very specific topics and thus get very specific answers which might help you in your current quest but does very little to add to you actually UNDERSTANDING the issues you face and their solutions.

    Redbooks are very much about things being "in context" - Wikis are the exact opposite.

    Both add value, but aren't interchangable - they add DIFFERENT value.

    @5 - Nathan, I think you're hitting the nail on the head. There must be some kind of incentive in order to produce documentation of that level of quality. It takes time - and strict methodology - to complete.

    Wikis will easily be "half done" information that nobody really assumes ownership of.

    @15 - Stuart. *Signed*

    Please keep the redbooks!

  1. 19  T. Williamson  | 9/24/2007 9:10:13 AM

    I think a easy way around the issue, is for lotus to take the pdf's off te website, ad offer wiki's

    BUT.....

    Offer the books at charge for thoose customer's that want to go that route, at least they'll make some money off of it.

    ALSO ...PLease still continue to develop the Redbooks, and not let them go...

  1. 20  Kevin Mort  | 9/24/2007 9:46:27 AM

    There used to be a time when I would rush to the Redbooks table at LS or at COMMON to pick up as many as I could.

    ITSO used to publish all of the System i Handbook & System Builders in hard copy and we'd order a BUNCH of them. However, those things seem to be in permanent "draft" mode due to the frequency of changes to the platform in the last few years. We've gone to the point of not bothering to really order hard copies much anymore.

    The issue is getting the information out there, not so much whether or not the pub is available in hardcopy. As a general rule I find value in Redbooks, and softcopy is my preferred method today.

    We've seen the proliferation and betterment of the Information Center websites, and so more of that information can be placed there. I think wikis & blogs could be a good option as well. I get information from a variety of sources, as do most of us.

    Information can benefit from a variety of delivery methods and I wouldn't necessarily rule anything out.

  1. 21  Bill Malchisky  | 9/26/2007 4:49:27 PM

    @9, @15, and @18 are spot-on.

    Whereas, @11 is a bit off in his binary rationale for authorship:

    "Every single Redbook author did it because they either got to spend 6 weeks with a bunch of Lotus-freaks, or because they wanted their name printed on some official IBM guide. There was no reason to do it otherwise."

    There are other reasons to author a Redbook, and besides you never asked me. I wrote two.

    The depth of knowledge in a Redbook is extremely difficult to replicate through other mediums. Wikis and blogs tend to be more casual in writing, than a formal publication. The quality of hardware in the labs at IBM used for many of the Redbooks is difficult to recreate in one's basement or company (as the development domains I have witnessed---if they exist---are on an older machine or two; hardly robust).

    Additionally, I know of no blogs that are listed in the Library of Congress, impress a client, or that carry the same weight on a resume as published prose, through a reputable publishing house. Additionally, the focused research and collaborative real-time brainstorming with private internal documents separates this medium from all others, IMHO. In other words, Redbooks are superior in quality.

    As for the comment on the ST 7.5 book being a "boat anchor". Very few people read a Redbook or other reference material cover-to-cover. You search for the chapter(s) or section(s) that meet your needs. Now, in case of launching/upgrading, you'll tend to read more, than once a product is installed.

    The ST book is longer in length due to the number of changes in that product release, along with the platform permutations. If you are only concerned with pSeries, then you can ignore the prose for Windows and iSeries for example--which will significantly cut-down the amount of material to read. Very few wiki's or blogs will provide the same cross-platform capability as a Redbook.

    As a business owner and a program architect, I want my team to get things done, rather than paying them to search through multiple sites to acquire the material necessary to resolve the problem. Having a solid foundation from a Redbook cuts-down on this issue. Beyond what they might find in the technical sites, blogs and wikis are very valuable for error message insight or detailed discussion on a topic. This is a niche that I feel they serve.

    So, blogs and wikis compliment rather than replace, Redbooks quite well.

  1. 22  Mary-Anne Wolf  | 9/27/2007 9:45:45 AM

    I understand why, from the perspective of an author writing the material, information might more comfortably end up in a Wiki, or a personal Blog, or a Redbook. No debate there.

    However, from the perspective of a reader, trying to solve a problem whose answer is a combination of knowledge originating from multiple people's brains, scattering the knowledge across multiple sources arguably makes using what is written much harder than it would be if everything were brought together somehow.

    A good search engine will bring together the related pieces only to the extent that they can all be found by searching for the same string(s). Searching by containing string(s) does not help a reader with showing the relationship between the pieces as understood by someone more expert.

    If it is the case that knowledge contributed without large payment only works with other motivation, what is the appropriate motivation to cause authors to organize the information so that readers can easily find all the parts originating from multiple authors?

    Or is it the case that the pieces of information which readers want are almost always so self-contained that the scattering of knowledge is not really a problem?

    Mary-Anne

  1. 23  Jennifer Heins  | 10/8/2007 3:00:43 PM

    @4 mentions the idea of a wiki book. Many wikis allow you to create a PDF of the pages on the wiki. The Lotus Connections wiki mentioned above has instructions about how to create a PDF of pages on the wiki: { Link }

  1. 24  Simon Mottram  | 10/14/2007 9:03:57 PM

    Will they get a bunch of folks together in a hideaway to produce a Wiki of the same quality?

    Nope

    There will be no manuals as such, just unrelated, unstructured articles about whatever the author was thinking of that week. All well and good but the wiki/blogs won't TEACH you. They will fill out gaps, add interesting tidbits.

    Much as an amateur cannot teach a class of kids properly as a qualified teach would, with a defined, planned sylabus, Wiki's will not fill the function of targetted manuals.

    IBM Redbooks is a huge resource of high quality information that has saved my arse on countless occasions. One of the greatest things IBM ever did that it genuinely created itself.

    S

  1. 25  Stuart McIntyre http://collaborationmatters.com | 11/13/2007 5:01:05 AM

    Ed, just as an update, the petition now has 159 signatures, and there is still no news regarding any Redbook resources for either Quickr or Connections. In fact the recently published ND8 Deployment Redbook fails to mention either product either.

    As far as I can tell, despite the discourse on this blog and many others, there has still been no formal comment or statement from those at the ITSO or within the Lotus brand management hierarchy. Would you be able to elicit such a response or even an update on the current thinking on this matter?

    Thanks, Stuart

  1. 26  Ian Scott  | 1/22/2008 3:51:57 AM

    While you're having a blast at Lotusphere I've been having a blast with the new WIKI's for Domino, Composite Apps, and SameTime and from what I've seen I'm quite pleased and, I have to say, somewhat relieved.

    Although not yet working (and I know it will in time) the ability to export selected pages to PDF settles the one issue I feared I'd have. I should have known 8-)

    Looking forward to seeing them fill with content.

    Now, two of them are NSF's which begs the question: will the template be shipped with Notes in due course?