Notes 8 standard and basic configurations

April 24 2007

At Lotusphere Comes to You in Toronto today, Joe Canadian (a.k.a. Ken Porter) asked, "there are two downloads of the Notes 8 client available in beta, a 'standard' and a 'basic'.  Why two and what's the difference?"

I've been intending to write about this for a few days, on the back of the SMB discussion from last week.  Thanks for popping it to the top of the stack, Ken :-)

There is only one Notes 8 client release, but there are multiple ways of configuring it.  The "standard" configuration is the star of the show, built atop the open eclipse.org Java environment, utilizing Lotus Expeditor for foundational capabilities, incorporating productivity editors, delivering composite applications, sporting a substantially-improved user interface, and doing everything that Notes does today for mail/calendar/NSF-based applications.  The "basic" configuration strips that down, running only the existing NLNotes.exe engine, without all of those other components.  As a by-product of the core work done on the Notes engine and  the mail and personal address book templates, the basic configuration delivers some new Notes 8 features such as in-line spell checking and individual selection of users in free time search.

Why two?  The basic configuration allows for ongoing support for lower-end hardware environments.  The standard configuration requires more RAM and more horsepower than Notes 6 or 7, and IBM recognizes that not all desktops will be ready to take advantage of this immediately.  Notes customers will have the option of a current Notes 8 configuration, supported as part of the "8" codestream, of continuing to run Notes in the same footprint as it runs in today.  But this is an accommodation, not a strategic direction.  

Ken had to ask the question today because the basic configuration isn't discussed in presentations or web content on Notes 8.  The standard configuration represents the strategic direction of Notes, which expands the definition of what "Lotus Notes" is.  90%+ of IBM's efforts are around making the standard Notes 8 successful.  This is critical to the future of the product.  Why?  Because end-users will not tolerate another n years of the existing Notes UI, IT departments will not tolerate another n years of running a proprietary client, and the very definition of what collaboration in a rich client environment represents needs to move forward.

A few have asked why IBM hasn't put more effort into updating the basic Notes 8 experience.  The answer is that the objectives stated for Notes 8 from the outset have been to build the future of Notes.  That future builds upon a very rich and successful seventeen years, with millions of Notes applications and more being built every day.  But we have to move forward.  

Notes 8 is going to be a current offering in market for several years, as part of the standard support cycle for a Notes release.  In that lifecycle, machines capable of running the standard Notes 8 will become the norm, as they are already for new desktop purchases.  We want all users to benefit from all that Notes 8 has to offer.  There is nothing wrong with using the basic configuration, but it's not going to stop the "we want [something easier to use]" conversations, it's not going to help move documents into open standards, and it's not  going to take the proprietary label off Notes.  This release is a big bet on the future of Notes -- and the vast majority of customers and partners we've talked to over the 22 months since announcement agree that it is the right one.

And to be a little bit provocative -- Mike VandeVelde's last comment in the SMB thread said, "Eclipse is by no means a barrier Ed. IBM just has to understand that not all clients *need* it. "  No, and not everyone needed Windows, DOS was doing just fine.  Not everyone needed cell phones with cameras and GPS and browsers and organizers.  I would assert that your -users- do need Notes 8, for any one of a number of reasons.  We did thousands of hours of usability design and testing of this release for them.  They're going to know the new release is out there -- Alistair Rennie (VP of development for Lotus) said this morning at LCTY that people have been asking him about Notes 8 when they see him using it on airplanes, and asking when they can get it.  This is a good thing for the Notes market.  As such, hopefully it makes sense that IBM is betting on the standard Notes 8 to carry it forward.

Ed Brill | AA1371, YYZ-ORD, Seat 6B Category: Add/View Comments [54]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Volker Weber http://vowe.net/about | 4/24/2007 6:30:58 PM

    Ed, IBM chose to redesign "standard". It would have been perfectly possible to make "basic" look good. It goes without saying that I understand why IBM pushes Eclipse though.

  1. 2  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 4/24/2007 6:33:20 PM

    You're probably going to give me a hard time about this Ed, but I often refer to Notes 8 Basic as "Notes 7.5" ;-) It just gets the point across faster. Then no one is surprised that there are features in one configuration that aren't in another.

    But your Windows/DOS analogy my supplant that.

    "What's the difference between Notes 8 Standard and Basic?"

    "Did you ever run Windows NT?"

    "Of course"

    "Did you use it exclusively in CLI mode?"

    "Rarely, when we didn't have much video horsepower on the server. But we liked having a GUI."

    "Standard is NT in GUI mode. Basic is NT in CLI mode. You can use CLI when you don't have the juice for the neat stuff, but everyone would rather have the neat stuff."

    That being said, like Windows/DOS, Notes 8 Standard compels an upgrade training cycle that many people got away with ignoring in prior upgrades to the Notes product line. Did anyone train users on the move from 6 to 6.5 to 7? Probably not. Would they train on 8 basic? Probably not. But you'd better be ready to train on 8 standard, because "UI overhaul" translates to "you don't know where everything is anymore."

    But it's a good thing.

    Then again, I like the Ribbon UI. ;-)

  1. 3  Keith Brooks http://www.keithbrooks.com | 4/24/2007 6:45:18 PM

    @nathan, too damn funny.

    Elfin magic? Is that like the magic server dust from the IBM commercials a few years back?

    I don't like the ribbon UI and I disagree with you on training. It will be needed.

    True, as most will argue, there will be no training on Office or Notes 8. A shame really because how else would a company get the benefits of their software.

    Evidently we could all just keep using 123 and wordperfect and all would be well, or so organizations believe.

    Training, like marketing, is always the first to get dropped due to budget money.

  1. 4  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 4/24/2007 7:02:29 PM

    @Keith - maybe I'm too obtuse. I think training WILL be needed for the Notes 8 Standard client. No question. Will people get it? I sure hope so.

  1. 5  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/24/2007 7:35:05 PM

    "It would have been perfectly possible to make 'basic' look good."

    At what cost to time, money, and backward compatibility?

  1. 6  Carl Tyler http://www.iminstant.com | 4/24/2007 7:54:03 PM

    @2 I like the ribbon too, but then I liked the concept behind the infobox too.

  1. 7  Rob McDonagh http://www.CaptainOblivious.com | 4/24/2007 7:58:49 PM

    @5 Ed, I have a bit of trouble with the idea that improving the UI required moving to Eclipse myself. Given the number of software companies that manage to make gorgeous UIs outside of Eclipse, there appears to be a logic gap here. I'm not saying it's not true, but it isn't *obviously* true, by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure there is a case to be made that supports the premise ("improved UI requires Eclipse"), but so far I haven't seen anyone make it. Maybe to internal eyes it really IS obvious?

    @3 Nathan, that's a funny line, but the argument isn't terribly effective. The Mac client is *still* a version behind in the Eclipse model. And even that might need to be taken with a grain of salt, unless you've actually seen an alpha of 8.01 on OS X. We're told that post 8.01 the Mac will have version parity, but we've heard that about other versions in the past. Maybe it's true this time.

    I really like the 7.5 comment, though I'm sure Ed doesn't. I was talking to a colleague just today who was wishing there was a 7.5 before 8. I think I'll point him to the non-Eclipse version and tell him to think of it as 7.5.

  1. 8  John Head http://www.johndavidhead.com | 4/24/2007 8:54:33 PM

    @7 Rob - I think Ed means something along the lines of "we could not do a 'as much as possible' cross platform client on windows, mac, and linux and do the work with the UI and Productivity Editors without going the Eclipse.org route." I am not sure how many people have seen the Notes 8 Beta 2 running on SLED 10 .. but it is freaking impressive.

    Eclipse.org makes the cross-platform pieces easier and the extensions to the client easier. Could IBM have done all this without going with the Eclipse.org route? Of course .. but this was the route they felt was best. It got the Notes 8 client to the point it is at now in the way IBM was most confident at achieving success. Beta 2 shows a few rough spots, but that is what betas are for.

    At this point, the decision is made. It will make the Notes client better in the long run with a short term performance hit for those with hardware that has not been updated in the past 18 months or so. For those that want another release before going the Eclipse.org client route, IBM is giving them an option. Sounds like IBM thinking of the customer to me.

    I think there is much better things we can focus on, like making sure the final release is as good as possible. Throwing stones doesn't help anyone here. And those who will never use it are just people throwing stones in glass houses ... get out from under the glass and then ignore them.

  1. 9  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 4/24/2007 8:56:19 PM

    @7 - Improved UI didn't require Eclipse. Improved UI on 3 different client platforms DID require Eclipse. The new cool UI stuff had to be pulled out of ActiveX controls and moved to the Java platform. That's it.

  1. 10  Bill McCuistion  | 4/24/2007 9:17:17 PM

    Ed, et al,

    Notes in Eclipse is strategic.

    Notes as Native Windows App is tactical.

    Both are required from a practical stand-point.

    My question is: "Why hasn't IBM put any resources into putting the Domino Designer into Eclipse?"

    Domiclipse is a step in the right direction, but it didn't come from IBM, and only for Java developers.

    It would seem to me that it would very much be in IBM's interest to PROMOTE a fresh developer experience IN ADDITION TO promoting a new USER experience.

    DEVELOPERS are USERS too!

  1. 11  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/24/2007 9:20:59 PM

    @10 Bill, IBM has put significant resources into putting Designer in Eclipse. It's just not coming in 8.0.

    You might want to read up on Maureen Leland's weblog, these entries: { Link }

    It was discussed and shown at Lotusphere (Not LCTY).

  1. 12  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 4/24/2007 9:23:53 PM

    "I am not sure how many people have seen the Notes 8 Beta 2 running on SLED 10 .. but it is freaking impressive."

    Now you have no excuses: { Link }

  1. 13  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/24/2007 9:30:59 PM

    @All, I deleted a comment here, but I renumbered most of the references in the subsequent comments.

    Let's try to keep this civil please, kthx :-)

  1. 14  John Head http://www.johndavidhead.com | 4/24/2007 9:34:41 PM

    @11 - as Ed said, IBM is working on it. Go here to see some early pictures of what is going on with Designer { Link }

  1. 15  Bill McCuistion  | 4/24/2007 9:48:36 PM

    @13 - Nathan / That's very useful.

    @12 - Ed / That not useful.

    Not useful, at all.

    Maybe IBM has put significant (development) resources into Designer in Eclipse, but where is the (marketing) resource for this?

    It should be obvious to IBM, and others, that to expand the "ND-Universe", you have to attract (and retain) developers, and make it *obvious* to them why this is "stratic" to them.

    Way back when, the Notes client included the ability to create applications, power-users could create departmental-level solutions. (OK, sometimes workgroup-level solutions.) Today, those same power-users will grab "MS-Access" or "MS-Excel" and *attempt* to create a solution. Sometimes, they'll grab LAMP and do a "point-solution".

    How about getting back to some "basics", like empowering users to create basic solutions, and at the same-time allowing enterprise applications to be deployed?

    What's the deal? Seems like IBM is so-tunnel-vison on the Notes/Outlook issue that it has forgotten (forsaken) the basic premise.

  1. 16  david racicot  | 4/24/2007 9:51:09 PM

    For those worried about performance and hardward requires please remember the law of accelerating returns. "The Singularity is Near". Ray Kurzweil

  1. 17  Bill McCuistion  | 4/24/2007 10:20:14 PM

    @13-Ed & @14-John / OK, so I see Maureen has a skunks-works operation to put "Designer in Eclipse". She should be promoted and given a bigger-sailboat.

    I too am a coder-architect-sailor.

    My primary issue with this whole "Designer 8" roll-out is that the message is scattered all-over the "Web 2.0", and I'm interested in the subject.

    Imagine the confusion (or lack of stimulus for excitement) for ordinary "USERS" (including architects and developers) who are not "pluged-into" the IBM/Lotus "Inner-circle".

  1. 18  Rock http://www.lotusgeek.com | 4/24/2007 10:38:53 PM

    @17 (Bill) - Domino Designer on Eclipse isn't being marketed yet because they (IBM management) have not determined what release will contain DD on Eclipse. Once the management figures out when they will release it, I bet you'll be sick of how much it is talked about - everywhere - including here, my blog, press, analysts, etc.

    I know it is hard to do, but I think patience is key....

    --Rock

  1. 19  Rock http://www.lotusgeek.com | 4/24/2007 10:41:22 PM

    @17 (Bill) - Oh, and one more thing - Maureen's efforts on this are not "skunkworks", which implies that it is being done on the side without official support. That is not the case with Designer on Eclipse - it has official IBM support and Maureen has IBM resources, etc. available to her to make it happen.

    Just thought I'd clarify that point.

    --Rock

  1. 20  Bill McCuistion  | 4/24/2007 11:25:09 PM

    @18 / @19 - Rocky - Your "ND6 Bible" sits on my coffee table (for years) and I keep reading/rereading it in hope to find some hidden clue as to how to make sense of the IBM/Lotus ND strategy for developers.

    My reference to "skunk-works" was not to imply that IBM (development) did not support the project, but to alude to the apparent lack of "marketing-support" for the project (as was required for the "Manhatten Project" and for the "B1/B2/F117" projects.

    Domiclipse was the single factor that brought me back to IBM/Domino as the platform for development of my ISV (small-mid-market solution). The key to that decision was the basic architecture of the Domino NSF model, but the key to implementing the solution in Java (as opposed to LS) was the *GIANT* base of Java-tools and the Eclipse-based support for them. Once inside the Java/Eclipse environment, it became aparent that Java had *many* compelling features as compared to ".net", and had virtially unlimited scalability.

    Ultimately, Domiclipse posed limits into the complexity of the Java code-set that I could coordinate with Domino, so I extended the Eclipse framework to include ANT, JUNIT and similar "JAVA" tools, all the while providing code-logic into the Domino/Notes environment.

    Perhaps, if I were to explore DXL further, I'd not need the Domino Designer for application design, but the advantages of visual designer, coupled with a world-class IDE ("Eclipse") are compelling.

    Rocky, perhaps we should talk directly. My email is above.

  1. 21  Gary Sweeting http://garysweeting.blogspot.com | 4/24/2007 11:46:13 PM

    Hi Ed, not to be too provocative but I have a problem with the following statement as we'd be accepting the premise that (1) Notes 8 will no longer be proprietary and that (2) proprietary is evil.

    <em>"Because end-users will not tolerate another n years of the existing Notes UI, IT departments will not tolerate another n years of running a proprietary client"</em>

    (1) AFAIK the source code of Lotus Notes ( Standard or Basic ) will not be open source, and the NSF is not an open standard - therefore in my view Notes 8 is still proprietary ({ Link } ).

    (2) I like playing with Open Source, I’m a believer in Open Standards & Open APIs but I’m not convinced that Proprietary == Bad. At IBM I never met a customer that asked for the code for Lotus Notes 4/5/6/7 to modify - I don’t think this was the issue – I think even if they had, it would have affected their support contract.

    BlackBerry, Apple Mac, Apple iTunes, Google Search, Google Earth, Google Talk and Skype are proprietary & popular - some of them even in the enterprise. ISVs of Lotus/IBM also are not in the habit of releasing their source code I believe – and I don’t think they should feel any shame in that.

  1. 22  Bill McCuistion  | 4/25/2007 12:08:43 AM

    Hi Ed,

    As an side, the biggest UI improvement for ND8 is with the "Mail Template", which is not part of the ND-Core, but provided as a "template".

    In my experience, the ND8-Mail template provides a much improved UI-experience, but does not require an upgrade to the ND8 server or client platform.

    In essence, significant advantages in the "Outlook/Notes" discussion can be achieved by the simple upgrade of the "Notes mail template".

    I am an evangelist of the "Notes Rich Client Experience", and understand the difference of email and collaboration, at the molecular level, but need a compelling "marketing" argument to differentiate the "basic" vs "standard" Notes-8 client value proposition.

    Something beyond the "trust-me" argument.

    @21 - I agree that providing support for "open standards" is not the same as being "open source", or even "open".

    I have been impressed, for a long time, at the "open-ness" of the Lotus Notes/Domino API, but that is a long way from being an "open-source-API".

    I'm not going to go so far as to suggest that IBM/Lotus open-source the Notes/Domino source, but I will advocate that IBM/Lotus open the internals so that serious "open-source" applications can access those internals to grow the infrastructure - ecosystem that supports the ND paradigm for the next 20-or-so years.

  1. 23  Steve Castledine http://www.stevecastledine.com | 4/25/2007 4:34:35 AM

    @Bill - whilst a lot of UI changes have occured in the mail template and are visible within Notes basic and standard. The majority of the "pretty" view stuff etc requires the standard (read java) client to display. So a client change is required - not just template.

  1. 24  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/25/2007 4:43:34 AM

    @21 the use of "proprietary client" in this context means that the Notes 8 client (standard config) can surface applications from other back-ends besides Domino, through web services. These composite applications extend the reach of what was formerly a proprietary client that could only connect to Domino.

    I don't believe I said "open source" (which Notes 8 is not, though the Eclipse client underneath is). My only references to "open" were Eclipse and the Open Document Format used by the productivity editors. This is a much more open client than any prior release of Notes.

  1. 25  Gary Sweeting http://garysweeting.blogspot.com | 4/25/2007 5:48:07 AM

    @24 I think there may be some confusion about what is meant by proprietary software, as I don't believe that we can have degrees of 'proprietary-ness'? Referring to the wiki definition { Link }

    "Proprietary software is software with restrictions on using, copying and modifying as enforced by the proprietor. Restrictions on use, modification and copying is achieved by either legal or technical means and sometimes both. Technical means include releasing machine-readable binaries to users and withholding the human-readable source code. Legal means can involve software licensing, copyright, and patent law."

    As I understand it, Notes 8 (basic and standard) will have legal & technical restrictions and IBM will not be releasing the source code for the entire Notes 8 stack. Technically, therefore, it should be labelled proprietary - irrespective of what percentage of Open Source is used.

  1. 26  Henning Heinz  | 4/25/2007 6:41:51 AM

    I remain a bit sad that both Microsoft and IBM do believe in "Survival of the fattest".

    I also would prefer a more subtile positioning of IBM against Microsoft. I really believe that the integration message Lotus had in the past was a strong one while I am still not sure if the message for replace is ready for primetime. There is a risk that companies feel that they have to decide between two platforms. It sounds strange but my opinion would differ if IBM would just buy SAP.

    Whatever will happen, the next five years seem to become exiting (for every large software vendor).

  1. 27  Stuart McIntyre http://quickrblog.com | 4/25/2007 7:07:53 AM

    Personally I love the Notes8Standard client look and feel, and from discussions with customers I think the new functionality that comes with the Eclipse framework will prove to be big driver towards innovation in providing collaborative applications to user communities.

    However, there is a bit of a dichotomy in that many of our customers in the UK already have moved towards a thin client/Citrix/VMWare VDI approach or else are seriously looking to do so in the near future. I therefore have concerns as to whether Notes8Standard + Sametime7.5 + Quickr8 will all be too heavy for that kind of environment.

    As an aside, thus far there is little public domain information on how Notes8 runs under Citrix etc., does anyone know whether this will be forthcoming prior to release?

  1. 28  Sean Jennings  | 4/25/2007 7:08:19 AM

    Great article by Ed on IBM's very, very, smart strategy for the future of Notes.

    Delivery now is the key. Sharepoint 2007 is a threat to Notes now, though thankfully the close-association of the Office System with Vista means that its uptake is also stalling.

    However the Google Apps for Business is emerging as perhaps a greater threat, particulalry in the SMB market (see { Link } )

    Delay for Mac's is a shame, as is Designer for Eclipse.

    Would be interesting to see Notes extend to distros of Linux such as Ubuntu, especially if companies like Dell make this an option on pc's.

  1. 29  Craig Aitkin  | 4/25/2007 7:12:36 AM

    Agreed Stuart. I'm not sure if Notes 8 Standard client (with it's eclipse) even works on a multi-user environment such as WTS/Citrix. I suspect Notes 8 basic will as its similar to past clients.

    Craig

  1. 30  Matt White http://www.11tmr.com | 4/25/2007 7:33:04 AM

    @28 - Unfortunately got to agree with the Google Apps comment. Just for my own small company, the switch to Google Apps has made email management etc so much simpler for me. I still run a Domino server (of course) but that's for apps and I guess I'm into a fairly specialist area at that point.

    I must admit to recommending Google Apps to a couple of small businesses over the last few weeks.

    Matt

  1. 31  Craig Wiseman http://www.wiseman.la/cpw | 4/25/2007 7:46:22 AM

    @29 - My understanding is that the Standard client will not work in WTS/Citrix, as the underlying Eclipse foundation will not work properly in that setting.

  1. 32  Stuart McIntyre http://quickrblog.com | 4/25/2007 8:16:40 AM

    @31 - if confirmed, that could have a major impact on a number of customers, and mean that the Basic version may need to continue beyond the 8.0 release...

  1. 33  Craig Wiseman http://www.wiseman.la/cpw | 4/25/2007 8:18:42 AM

    @32 - Yep.

  1. 34  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/25/2007 8:30:33 AM

    It's too soon to comment on whether/what can be done for Notes support under Citrix after the 8.0 release. What I can say is that the Notes 8 (8.0+) basic configuration will be supported in Citrix, and that we are still looking at the testing/configuration for the standard configuration. That won't get done for 8.0.0.

    Gary, you seem to hold Wikipedia as authoritative, when most dictionaries allow for multiple definitions of a term. I like this one a bit better in the context I'm using the word "proprietary": { Link }

    It's proprietary in the sense that it's connected to one server only.

  1. 35  Gary Sweeting http://garysweeting.blogspot.com | 4/25/2007 9:12:23 AM

    @35 Thanks for the link Ed, interesting site - though I must confess that I find that limited interpretation to be rather convenient. The example it gave was for hardware; there was a link to "Proprietary Software" http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/p/propsoft.htm which I think we can agree is more appropriate, given the nature of Lotus Notes... or we could try http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Proprietary+Software&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title , http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html , http://www.netrino.com/Articles/OpenSource/index.php , or http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/proprietary

    So the question becomes, if it meets one of the definitions, but not the other nine - does it qualify as being non-proprietary http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nonproprietary ?

  1. 36  Rock http://www.lotusgeek.com | 4/25/2007 9:21:08 AM

    Just a small interjection/clarification, if I may...

    There is a difference between "Open Standards" and "Open Source".

    "Open Source" implies that the source code of a particular product is available for perusal (at a minimum), and even for modification/extension based on whatever licensing restrictions have been placed on the product.

    "Open Standards" implies a set of standards that are agreed upon by some governing body. In most cases these standards are set forth to allow interoperability and connectivity between disparate applications, platforms, and systems. There are a plethora of these, with more coming out daily. Examples include LDAP, SMTP, HTTP, CSS, JNI, XML, WSDL, ICAL, and so on.

    Notes/Domino (and the rest of The Lotus/IBM stack) has been moving more and more towards full support of many popular "Open Standards", to allow for maximum interconnectivity between the platforms and applications you use to run your business.

    Does it matter if the product itself is open source if you can get to the contents, features, etc through a set of published open standards?

    Well, that's my take on it. I could be wrong.

    --Rock

  1. 37  Gary Sweeting http://garysweeting.blogspot.com | 4/25/2007 10:10:00 AM

    @36 "Does it matter if the product itself is open source if you can get to the contents, features, etc through a set of published open standards?"

    That's a huge question, and I'm not going to jump into that pit - however, if you take the Open Source part out of the equation it makes it simpler. One of the arguments levelled against Office formats prior to 2007 was that because they were proprietary formats, then they would require Office N to open them 5 years, 10 years, 100 years down the line. Now, remember that you could open these documents in Mac as well, so the proprietary label was to do with the binary format – not the platform support.

    The same goes for the data stored in NSF - it is not accessible unless you have Notes/Domino installed. Granted, there are a multitude of ways to extract the data from Notes/Domino but there is a dependency on having proprietary products installed to extract data from a proprietary format. So companies that store content in Notes/Domino today will need a Notes or Domino installation to extract this data 5, 10 or 100 years from now. If NSF was an open standard then other vendors could create tools to access the data.

    Note – I’m not making any judgements here, I’m simply attempting to explain the situation.

  1. 38  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/25/2007 10:11:14 AM

    @37 search for the word "basic" in the release notes.

    For example:

    03 Known limitations, problems, and workarounds

    02 Client issues

    Lotus Notes

    Features not available in "basic" configuration of Notes 8

  1. 39  Arthur Fontaine  | 4/25/2007 10:20:34 AM

    Not to play marketing boy here but I want to emphasize Ed's points about what's being gained with the introduction of the Eclipse foundation, not just what's being fixed.

    As noted, the cross-OS stuff is good (and yes Mac has some catching up to do) and the Java UI layer adds the "curb appeal" that Outlook users carp about, when the conversation is just e-mail anyway. The big deal, to me, is that all Notes apps now get to play really well with non-Notes apps in the composite application (or "business mash-up") model. This isn't just on-the-glass integration, as developers can wire these things together in intelligent solutions, using open APIs. Essentially it's client-side middleware or a desktop portal.

    That raises the value of all existing and future Notes assets because it gets them off the Notes island. Notes is so powerful because it allows people to solve specific problems -- "situational applications" is the term we've used for a while now. Eclipse is a very natural extension because it creates even more opportunity to attack the problems that partners and ISVs are paid to solve.

    Many solutions already integrate external apps and data into Notes through APIs and connectors; that's one of the key capabilities that folks have built businesses on. This is a leap further in that direction, with "leap" carrying both the negative connotations (incremental skills needed, higher resources required) and the positive ones (greater opportunity for solutions, higher ROI for customers). But I think this is a very natural evolution -- certainly not out of line with others that our industry has seen -- and especially since, as always, we sustain backward compatibility and enable customers to do things at the pace that makes sense for their businesses. In this instance the solutions will likely drive much of the uptake, although mail improvements will be a big factor too.

    Just as a personal opinion.... Having used Notes 8 for a year now on both Windows and Linux, on a T41 with 1 GB RAM, I don't think the Eclipse resource/skills hit will be a big barrier relative to the benefits gained.

  1. 40  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 4/25/2007 10:29:46 AM

    @29/31 - Eclipse in a multi-user environment is supported, and there is documentation for setting that up. { Link } Notes 8 Standard is an odd duck, since it has an Eclipse framework that launches and then somehow extends the Notes 8 Basic client. Not having Notes 8 Standard supported on Windows Terminal Services is yet another reason I can't use it.

    @34 - You're talking about proprietary software, and the definition of that from your source fits closely with Wikipedia's. You're treading in a realm where "proprietary" and "open" have extremely specific meanings. You can't spin it and if you try you're going to be called out.

    @36 - I get what you're saying and I agree that IBM is aggressively moving toward open standards with regards to interconnectivity of systems. Even so, saying Notes 8 Standard is not proprietary is not accurate no matter how you look at the open source vs. open standards issue. Notes 8 Standard is using a modified version of Eclipse and a modified version of OpenOffice.org. That's pretty proprietary.

    @37 - "90%+ of IBM's efforts are around making the standard Notes 8 successful." The 10% of effort around making Notes 8 Basic hasn't started yet.

  1. 41  Jeff Picco  | 4/25/2007 11:04:24 AM

    Admittedly I have not read all of the posts so far, but due to lack of time I wanted to comment on Notes 8 and the direction / choice of client side Java.

    The company I work for has many directional statements for technology use. Two such statements are around using thinner clients (both software and possibly hardware) and no Java on the desktop.

    This presents a problem considering we are trying to get off of the five email systems we currently use and on to Notes by the end of this year. DWA is an option, but we have a few hundred apps that run in the Notes client and no initiative to webify them. Since we are supposed to be removing Java from the desktop, how can I possibly deploy Notes 8 standard?

    On the Java side of things - I am not a fan of Java. The idea of 'write once, run anywhere' bothers me because I don't really care if the life of a developer is hard if I have 200,000 end users complaining about performance on their Duo Core 2.6 Ghz, 2 GB RAM beefcake PC sitting in front of them. I much prefer to keep the compiler away from the end user and the term "Just In Time" as it pertains to the compiler is inappropriately named, in my opinion.

    Sun has made a statement that Java 6 (1.6.x) will be backwards compatible all the way back to version 2 (1.2.x), so that will solve some of our issues with Java.

    Thin client direction - well, I haven't actually sized the Notes 8 Standard install, but I'm assuming that Notes 8 basic will be slightly larger than Notes 7.x and then add on Eclipse and the Productivity Editors. So, I'm sure that's beefy.

    In our early testing with Sametime 7.5 GA, I had users complain about performance and remove the client from their machine opting for the connect client from 3.1 or 6.5. Keep in mind, these weren't laptops running 512 MB RAM. They were the guys using the two CPU or Duo Core machines about 2.6 Ghz with a minimum of 2 GB RAM. All XP Pro SP2. We haven't tried any of the Eclipse based stuff on Vista yet, but that will happen shortly.

    Server side Java I'm all for. Client side Java I will back once the garbage collection, memory leaks and performance issues have been solved or at least mitigated. Web based Java (applets) needs to go away.

    So, I do believe the work Lotus is doing is very good stuff, I'm just not sure we are going to be supporting it as it goes deeper down the client side Java rabbit hole. I have to file a waiver in order to deploy Sametime 7.5 MRC because it uses Java Applets. I hope it gets approved.

  1. 42  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 4/25/2007 11:04:29 AM

    doh... I meant the 10% around making Notes 8 Basic *a success* hasn't started yet.

  1. 43  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/25/2007 11:17:17 AM

    @42, Jeff, just curious, do you have a similar policy for the .NET framework or ActiveX?

  1. 44  Alan Lepofsky http://www.alanlepofsky.net | 4/25/2007 11:53:11 AM

    To further Art's point that the decision to surface Notes 8 in Eclipse is about much more than better looking email/calendar/pim, please read this article:

    { Link } on extending the IBM Lotus Notes V8 sidebar and toolbar

    To me this ability to extend and customize Notes is going to be one of the most important things going forward.

  1. 45  Timothy Briley  | 4/25/2007 12:19:09 PM

    Ed,

    When people ask you what hardware it takes to run Notes 8 Standard well, what do you tell them?

  1. 46  Jeff Picco  | 4/25/2007 12:40:45 PM

    @44 - Very good question Ed. I asked those exact questions. The conf call became a little quiet and then I was told that we realize that there are security issues around those technologies, but we don't have end user support issues with them.

    So, the big push is around supportability and cost of such. A lot of our partner companies call us all the time with issues where they can't run Sametime meetings (keep in mind we are still running 2.5 in production... yea, I know). This has caused our userbase to use WebEx, MS Live Communication Server, Qwest, etc, in addtion to Sametime. So our upgrade to 7.5 project has marketing planned around it to get people to come back to Sametime.

  1. 47  Rob Ingram http://www.dominoblog.com | 4/25/2007 4:14:29 PM

    @37 for info on whats in Notes 8 "basic configuration" check out Appendix A of the Notes and Domino 8 Reviewer's guide - a good bedtime read for anyone wanting to get really inside the new release.

    Link here { Link }

  1. 48  Mike VandeVelde  | 4/25/2007 6:58:56 PM

    Well how about that, quoted on the front page of Mr. Ed Brill's blog! Thank you sir!

    It seems to me that a bit of the snear that comes with talking about Notes 8 Basic is fading. But we're still stuck with it being compared to DOS of all things, and camera-less cell phones (the horror!). I still really think IBM should be more careful than that when talking about Basic. I don't seem to be a member of a very big crowd here though, so I won't push the point much more, but:

    Standard doesn't seem to expand what Lotus Notes is, it seems to leave it what it is but make it a piece of a bigger puzzle. A prettier piece sure, and I'm not belittling that - I know how much work it is to put something together that frustrates the smallest amount of people ;-) And the puzzle is very nice, I'm sure it meets the needs of the people who want it. But Notes and Domino are still there, and there is nothing that is a part of Domino that I'm prevented from doing by using Basic to access it. Is there? Is there something (that doesn't require Websphere or DB2 or whatnot) that I can't do with Basic?

    And if the Notes of the past was a proprietary client, I don't see how the Notes of the future is so much less proprietary. Notes 5 could access any web server. Notes 7 could access DB2 servers. Notes version whatever could use ODBC or DECS or whatnot to access pretty much any data. Now Notes 8 can access activities and web services. It seems to me more like a gradual increase in options, not a 180 on the proprietary axis.

    And what has changed with Domino? Any web browser can access Domino. Even Outlook can access Domino. RSS readers. Now Domino can publish web services. If the Notes of the past was proprietary, then what about Domino - which hasn't gotten an Eclipse style facelift? Does it now get a bad rep by association? Maybe that's part of bringing out so many new things based on Websphere and/or DB2?

    I find it hard to believe that in an attempt to quell talk of Basic as a reasonable choice for a client platform that anyone would stoop to attacking a decade and more of Notes history like that. Things are being said that the competition has always said about Notes! Bad! Bad!

    This is all just my opinion. And my main point remains that Notes 8 Basic is a great piece of software, regardless of how much better Standard is. And that IBM could market it instead of being embarrassed about it. And now add to that - if you're not going to market Basic, if you're even going to be embarrassed about it for some reason, at least don't insult Notes-up-to-now as some sort of closed proprietary inferior platform, even indirectly - especially to the people who believe the opposite. In your quest to show people how wonderful Standard is, be very careful of alienating your 100 million+ existing customers who happily bought into Notes the way it was, you may end up eating your own tail. Don't give an inch! Standard improves a lot of things, but that doesn't require you to admit anything about the Notes of the past with words like proprietary or closed (or !DOS!).

    I love seeing Standard promoted to the world. I won't try and talk any user out of choosing it. I'm sure I'll end up using it, and it won't be begrudgingly. Right now I'm just not feeling the draw, actually right now it's more like a repulsion from the reaction to my suggestion that Notes 8 Basic might be a good choice for anyone besides the people stuck with lame hardware.

    Even though I Got Quoted On Mr. Ed Brill's Front Page!, I'm still just me, and now I feel bad about even speaking up seeing the kind of reaction it's gotten, the things that have been said. I'll just sit in my corner happily using Basic to create top notch Domino applications then :-)

  1. 49  Keith Brooks http://www.keithbrooks.com | 4/25/2007 7:09:50 PM

    My Apologies to Nathan, Nah your not obtuse, trapezoidal maybe.:-)

    I meant to say training on the Ribbon+Notes8 would be needed.

    Having said that my wife wanted R8 installed on her pc as she saw it and liked it, so maybe training is not so needed.

    But your right to get full benefit out of its usage/functionalities training would be greatly helpful.

  1. 50  Axel Janssen  | 4/26/2007 12:33:13 AM

    I wish I could understand people who allege that it would have been easier to make the old "look better". Design decisions are made on the basis of current constraints imposed by the hardware and software the system is build for. Those constraints change over time. Yesterdays great design decision can be a big stumbling block for tommorows needs. Often workarounds are invented and more often then not those create further stumbling blocks for the day after tommorow.

    Those stumbling blocks pile up over the time. And so there is a point where its cheaper to replace a whole subsystem than eternally filing and planching the old system.

    Replacing subsystem is very common even in entersprise systems of customers. Of course those changes are much smaller in scale and scope than the eclipsefication of Notes, but they happen all the time. The happiest moments of my career as a software developer where when I suddenly realized that a exchange of a subsystem made sense, got budget and realized the change. Of course this involves some risk for all participants, but it also gives high returns.

    The phenomen I am talking about is called software entropy. { Link } . Its well known.

  1. 51  Gerald Mengisen  | 4/26/2007 2:39:58 PM

    A Notes admin of a client of ours was delighted to find out that there is a 'Basic' client, because that's what they intend to roll out to their 1500 users without the need to re-train. They want to spread the 'Standard' client more via word of mouth or if needed by an application. I imagine they would also install it on PCs that get replaced.

    So seen in a positive way: the basic client buys companies some time while still benefiting some of the enhancements of Notes 8.

  1. 52  Mike Brown  | 4/27/2007 10:34:27 PM

    Just to clarify, the "Basic" client is a Windows-only option, yes? There is no NLNotes to run on the Linux version, which has only ever been useable via Eclipse (going back to the Notes 7 client on Linux).

    How about the Mac client though? Will that come in Basic and Standard versions too?

    Cheers,

    - Mike

  1. 53  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/28/2007 8:04:56 AM

    You're right about the Linux client. Not sure about the Mac, I'll try to find out.