Optimizing Communication and Collaboration with Microsoft Technologies: A wolf in sheep´s clothing

March 28 2005

As I mentioned last week, Paul Robichaux from Microsoft partner 3Sharp attended IBM's "Exchange Alternatives" seminar in New York.  You can read Paul's review here.  I was happy to have Paul there, as we have nothing to hide, and after all, he has invited me to Microsoft's "Optimizing Communication and Collaboration" seminar.  I haven't registered for it as of yet -- there isn't even an e-mail address for registration, you have to use (yuck) the telephone.  Anyway, I assume they won't kick me out, since I know all the presenters, and unlike the last one of these, this one is truly free....

The presentations from Microsoft's seminar have been posted to the event website.  Here's the description of the seminar (emphasis mine):

Microsoft has developed a unique and comprehensive set of platforms, tools, applications, and solutions for today's communication and collaboration needs.  The Microsoft Collaboration platform, including the Microsoft(r) Office System, SharePoint(r) Portal Server 2003, Exchange and the .NET Framework, can deliver tremendous Information Worker solutions that improve the way your organization collaborates.

You can reap the benefits of these technologies even while you maintain your existing investments in Notes infrastructure and developer talent. Find out what is possible by attending this FREE EVENT, specially designed for Notes customers.
Having reviewed the presentations, especially the wrapup/summary deck, I find the bolded text above somewhat disingenuous.  Why?  Here are some of the "optimization opportunities" outlined:
  • "Retire unused and duplicate applications"
  • "Consolidate into company standard business applications"
  • "Re-engineer applications to use your company's DBMS standard"
  • "Re-host these documents in your company standard document management system"
  • "Transition to portal solutions"
  • "Use these products [Windows Sharepoint, Microsoft EA] where appropriate"

Consolidate, re-engineer, re-host, transition, and use [new] products -- none of these verbs sound like "maintain" to me.  The broader question is, why would a Notes customer take advice from Microsoft on how to "optimize" their Notes environment?  Seems like a wolf in sheep's clothing to me.

Ed Brill Highland Park, IL USA Category:  Microsoft  Add/View Comments [18]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Duffbert http://www.twduff.com | 3/28/2005 2:33:12 PM

    And this is the *exact* reason I don't trust these seminars (nor Microsoft's stated "new leaf" position) to be a means to show people how to live together productively. Those points are very close to the type of logic that was used in the "Notes to .Net" white paper that Microsoft published/pulled from their site, and that I dissected in an e-Pro article... { Link }

    There was no "co-existance" theme in that document. It was how to shut down your Notes environment and convert it all to Microsoft.

  1. 2  Libby  | 3/28/2005 3:11:24 PM

    Paul R. contacted me as well -- haven't decided yet whether to attend the Houston event, although it could certainly provide ammunition. ;-)

  1. 3  Duffbert http://www.twduff.com | 3/28/2005 3:54:34 PM

    Glad to see I wasn't the only targeted invite, Libby. :-)

    At least I could turn down the invite because there's not one even remotely close... Not even in Seattle!

  1. 4  Vincent Grant  | 3/28/2005 4:46:19 PM

    @1 - Yeah, absolutely agree with the sentiments expressed there. Let's all recognise this for what it is: this is a wolf in wolf's clothing all right. Any right minded individual can see through the spin screen to see what this 'seminar' will be about: in short, ditch your Notes/Domino environment, fire or retrain your Notes developers, migrate all your Notes apps (oh, it's EVER so easy & quick to do this says the MS salesmen - besides there's only a few thousand of those databases & you don't really use all of them, do you?), & go with the highly secure & scalable MS solutionS (note plural case). I love it when it recommends what to do & 'move to portal solution'. Hmm. I wonder what these will be?

    'Don't pay twice' it says. Okay. Domino handles email & is used for many applications, document management being one. Is this the same for Exchange?

    Yeah, let's forget Java. Forget web compatibility & open standards. Did I read on page 3 that a benefit is 'compliance implementation'? Well, there's another joke.

    Yeah, compliant with the security black hole of Calcuta that is IE.

    Hey, we can retrain your Notes admins, your Notes developers. Use .Net. Won't take your existing Notes developers that long to retrain.

    But really what I think is the most deplorable aspect of this document comes on page 13 when it says 'Identify candidates for replacement or re-engineering'.

    Is that saying sack your Notes staff?

    Who are they kidding?

    Actually reading that pdf put a smile on my face when it mentioned on page 22 that Microsoft has "Deep Notes understanding".

    Infact, just about the whole document put a smile on my face.

    I do distrust these types of things because they're so spin city.

    Any savvy right-minded IS manager should base their decisions on INDEPENDENT reviews not this type of garbled sales nonsense.

  1. 5  Ed Maloney  | 3/28/2005 7:39:54 PM

    I deleted the message, but none other than the local NUG head sent me a "special" invitation to a Notes to .net seminar.

    I've seen this movie before with Netware, so I hope that IBM isn't ignoring this.

  1. 6  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 3/28/2005 7:51:32 PM

    Ed, I blog it specifically to let you know that IBM is NOT ignoring this. Lots of activity...

  1. 7  Tony Ollivier  | 3/28/2005 11:59:26 PM

    so.. what part of capitalism don't you understand :)

    the wrapup seemed pretty factual - lots of companies have a viral infrastructure with lots of Notes apps/discussion databases etc that aren't easily managed. IBM at least has a facility that a database can be created and managed appropriately - ( as long as it's a teamroom) but I suspect most customers can't.

    I know you are shocked that a Microsoft seminar actually tries to tell you that you should buy something from Microsoft - of course, IBM does the same.

    But in the wrap up ( I didn't view the rest) I thought generally was pretty factual.

    And before you nail my ass to the cross - I spent 10 years at IBM selling and supporting Notes and Domino.

  1. 8  Paul Robichaux http://www.e2ksecurity.com | 3/29/2005 7:01:33 AM

    While I'm glad to see that some of you are reading the slides, I think y'all may have missed the point(s). (And Ed, there is online registration-- contact me offline for details. Julian Robichaux actually found it, not me).

    @3: I invited lots of Notes bloggers; y'all weren't the only three! Tom, I'm sorry to hear that you won't be able to make any of our events. I'm working on getting one in Seattle, but (as I'm sure you can understand) there aren't that many Notes customers there.

    @4: no one's getting fired on my account. The "candidates" are applications, not people. Every Notes shop will have applications that could benefit from re-engineering, revision, or rationalization. If your corporate standard DB is DB2, or Oracle, or SQL Server, or whatever, is it not likely that you'd get some business benefit from modifying your db-intensive applications to use that instead? That's certainly what IBM seems to be saying with the advent of DB2 support.

    The truth of the matter is simple, and easy to prove: Microsoft is encouraging Notes customers to *add* functionality and *add* business value by *adding* MS products to existing Notes infrastructures. If you don't believe me, come to the seminar and see what we say in person. Make your own decision.

  1. 9  Axel Janssen  | 3/29/2005 7:07:58 AM

    To me reuse can mean a lot of things.

    Including: Just take the business logic from old app and build a complete new one throwing away all the old code.

    The old code does include a lot of knowledge about how the users work with their domain.

    Often this is cheaper than to keep the old code running in your environment. This is the case: if you have apps with poorly documented code written with the latest notes 4.53 guru tricks from 1997.

    It can be very expensive for an organization if they had lost understanding for an app and old developer is not available.

    So for me is ok what Mr. Robinchaux is saying.

  1. 10  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 3/29/2005 7:17:59 AM

    @8 - possibly worthy of a new blog entry... yes, I've noticed how many "Domino bloggers" have been invited personally to this seminar, and how my name has been dropped in the e-mails to them -- as if my attendance at the Chicago seminar adds some level of cred to this event. In part, this blog entry is to make sure that those you have contacted are clear on what my perspective is.

    @7 Tony, yes it's factual. All of these "optimizations" could occur in any IT environment -- Domino shops, Exchange shops, even PROFS users (LOL). That doesn't mean that the "factual" presentation makes for good advice.

    And I note that neither of you really quarreled with my main point, which is that "maintain your existing investments" is a disingenuous hook. When IBM talks to MS customers about Move2Lotus, we're at least clear that we're offering an alternative and an upgrade, not maintainence.

    @9 (and @8) - yes, all Notes environments have old stuff to clean up. For 2+ years, I did a "how to reduce the TCO of your Notes/Domino environment" presentation on the conference circuit. This was just one element. There are partners out there that offer tools to help with that optimization -- partners who aren't then also trying to suggest a migration away from Notes.

  1. 11  Vincent Grant  | 3/29/2005 8:51:28 AM

    @7 - Hi there Tony

    How does it feel to have been assimilated :)

    & so... what part of monopolism don't you understand ;)

    Here's the dictionary definition to help you out...

    "Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: “Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals” (Milton Friedman).

    Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.

    A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.

    A commodity or service so controlled.

    Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.

    Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly"

    :)

    What I think the issue Ed has with this is the fact that it's being promoted as a tool to increase productivity in a Notes environment (quote: "You can reap the benefits of these technologies even while you maintain your existing investments in Notes infrastructure and developer talent.") but when you look at the 'wrapup/summary deck' pdf, its recommendations are clear: scrap Notes, retrain your Notes staff, use MS. It's a rather underhanded way of inviting Notes houses along to an event & then trying to convert them.

    Hey, wait a minute, is this not false advertising? Is that legal to do that? How Microsoft can consistently break the law & get away with it is beyond me.

    As I said I do dislike/distrust these types of seminars (whether Microsoft or IBM or whoever), & when you repeatedly describe the findings as 'pretty factual' (according to a Microsoft salesman that is), the only statistics I saw were those from the case studies. If you're looking for qualitative & quantitative statistical analysis I really don't think you'll find it there. This is evidence (if any more were needed) that Microsoft does not 'peacefully co-exist'.

    @8 - Well Paul, some folks may get your point from reading your 'wrapup/summary deck' which I have to say I take great exception to. It's a veritable tour de spin.

    When you say "no one's getting fired on my account. The "candidates" are applications, not people." Then, why not call them that? Poor choice of English indeed. You use the term "applications" immediately above this too, & the particular section I quote from is entitled 'cleaning house'. Yeah, lots of Notes collaboration there. More like, rip & replace.

    To reinforce the point I made, also on page 12... "Existing developers are highest-cost item". Unbelievable. So, you're not saying sack your existing Notes developers then? & how much is a .Net developer?

    Also when you say "Every Notes shop will have applications that could benefit from re-engineering, revision, or rationalization." GREAT STUFF. Would not argue with you there. As indeed every Microsoft house would benefit from those things as well. But show me where this is referred to in your 'wrapup/summary deck'.

    Yeah, the truth of the matter is simple. You just have to look at the terminology you deploy in your 'wrapup/summary deck': 're-engineer applications', 'identify (erm) candidates for replacement', 'easier to customise than Domino' etc.

    Would go to the seminar to listen to how you explain those slides away only I live in Ireland :(

  1. 12  Chris Reckling www.lotus.com | 3/29/2005 9:49:49 AM

    You guys forgot to add this to your optimizations list.

    "Evaluate Operating System"

    Common Situation

    o Many customers are finding that they are paying maintenance fees (to MS) for no reason. A steady stream of 'security' patches raises the cost of ownership.

    What to do

    o Dump Windows for Linux, iSeries, Mac, or some Unix flavor

    Benefits

    o Stability, security, efficiency, productivity

    Chris

  1. 13  Paul Robichaux http://www.e2ksecurity.com | 3/29/2005 10:48:46 AM

    @8: Ed, don't take offense where none's intended. I mentioned your name merely to indicate that you had been invited, and that you'd probably be blogging your impressions.

    @10: Some customers who introduce MS technologies into their environments choose to migrate completely away from Notes. Not all do, as you know, nor is that always the best choice-- thus the bit about investment maintenance. I'm sorry you feel we're being disingenuous.

    @12: oh puhleeze. I'm sure Ed would prefer that we not start an OS war on his blog, esp. when there are so many other places to do so.

  1. 14  tonyo  | 3/29/2005 10:50:14 PM

    @11 - By Ed's data - Exchange and Notes seem to be neck and neck... that itself doesn't seem to be a monopoly for a variety of reasons. but capitalism seems to say - grow is better than shrink

  1. 15  Vincent Grant  | 3/30/2005 6:15:26 AM

    Did I particularly refer to Exchange and Notes when I jibed about monopolist practices? Uh, NO.

    Have a read here->

    { Link }

    (Sorry bout the email address - couldn't resist it lol!)

  1. 16  tonyo  | 3/30/2005 2:26:35 PM

    @15 - I wasn't sure.. but I got the sense the person at the link you posted wasn't really Microsoft friendly..:)

  1. 17  Vincent Grant  | 3/30/2005 3:11:04 PM

    @16 - Hmm, that's funny. Mais, non. How could you tell? lol

  1. 18  Vincent Grant  | 3/31/2005 8:09:24 AM

    @16 But I suppose the real issue is WHY does he not feel so MS :) ?