Enterprise Windows | J. Peter Bruzzese | TAG: Business Applications

MORE ENTRIES

TAG: Business Applications

June 19, 2008 | Comments: (0)

TechEd 2008 Product Highlight: K2

There were a few booths at the recent TechEd 2008 held in Orlando Florida that caught my attention. One that stopped me in my tracks (thanks to a really cool robot standing out front) was a company called K2.

I had a chance to chat a bit online after the show and ask Patricia Farrar, K2s Marketing Coordinator, a little bit about the features of their two main products, K2 blackpearl and the K2 blackpoint.

Here is what she said regarding the products:
"K2 and its two main products — K2 blackpearl and K2 blackpoint -- are changing the way people use software.

K2 blackpearl is a full platform for building process-driven applications that increase business efficiency, save money and reduce risk. K2 applications can be set up to automate and manage business processes — such as document approval or inventory tracking — or pull together business processes, people, services, information and systems into a single application that helps drive business. Then, what’s been built can be used like building blocks to assemble new applications.
With K2 blackpearl, the complexity of traditional software development is eliminated and replaced with easy-to-use, visual tools. These tools enable business people and technical people to collaborate and assemble process-driven applications.

Everything is visual. Everything is declarative. Everything is reusable. Everything is intuitive.

The concept behind K2 blackpoint is a simple one. It is a subset of K2 blackpearl tools that:

1. Fills a widespread need: It’s powerful workflow for SharePoint users; it is simple to use (Office-style designer, no code) and has loads of features.

2. Doesn’t cost an arm and a leg: K2 blackpoint is priced on a per-server model — $5,000 (U.S.) for up to 200 users, $10,000 for up to 500 users and $15,000 for unlimited users (and you can always try it free).

A free beta version of K2 blackpoint will be available this month and more info can be found at http://blackpoint.k2.com."

TED_Dev booth.jpg

Stay tuned for future TechEd Product Highlights in between the usual Enterprise Windows deep dive tech posts.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on June 19, 2008 01:53 PM

May 14, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Hopes for the future of Office 2007 collaboration

The new Office servers I've discussed in recent weeks are diverse, opening up a wealth of opportunities: online forms, anywhere/anytime collaboration, advanced presence detection and VoIP technology, project management solutions, business intelligence with digital dashboards, and high-caliber search abilities. Microsoft has certainly granted users several computing capabilities through the Office suite.

There are, however, missing pieces and unfinished parts to these servers, though it's possible that the next releases will include more of what we need. On the collaboration side, let's take a look at three: Forms, Groove, and Communications.

Forms Server, if you recall, is a slice of functionality from SharePoint Server 2007. Only marginally less expensive than a full MOSS, it lacks functionality, such as workflow, single sign-on, and data connection libraries, that MOSS provides for forms solutions.

Onto to InfoPath, the Office application for designing forms. With the 2003 version of InfoPath, you could design and view forms only if you had the app installed on your system. With InfoPath 2007, however, you can design forms for use within a browser (thanks to Forms Server).

However, there are some advanced form-designing features that will not function through a browser. Notably, there is a Compatibility Checker included with InfoPath that lets a developer clearly see what features won't work in a browser, giving him or her the chance to seek an alternative solution before posting it up to the server.

However, it would be nice to see all features work in the future through a browser with the forms you develop with InfoPath. Christian Stark, the senior product manager for InfoPath Forms Services within Office, says "It is unlikely that we will support all InfoPath controls in the browser. With the browser, we try to reach more users with the most common forms. (85 to 90 percent of all forms today can be built for the browser.)" We will have to wait and see if the demand changes his mind.

Groove Server, purchased by Microsoft along with Ray Ozzie, is an excellent product for collaboration anywhere, anytime, and with anyone. However, it lacks the connection with Active Directory that many enterprise administrators would like to see. Having Groove clients come under Active Directory and Group Policy within an organization would make it a more acceptable tool to administrators; it would allow them greater control through more familiar tools and a more familiar interface as opposed to having to learn an entirely new structure (which is currently the case through the Groove Manager and Relay Web interfaces).

Another great feature would be the ability for you to use Groove through a Web interface. We see this with Outlook Web Access (OWA) and Project Web Access (PWA). Why not develop a Groove Web Access (GWA)?

Communications Server 2007 (combined with Communicator 2007) is filled with possibilities on both the software and hardware fronts. New hardware is being developed to allow for better videoconferencing, such as Microsoft Office Roundtable 2007. Some features include 360-degree views and the ability to record conferences. What I would like to see here is less of an emphasis from Microsoft on presence awareness (which seems to be a key focus in Communicator and was a feature that was repeatedly discussed at TechEd 2007 in the sessions revolving around Communicator) and more on persistent conversations.

Presence awareness indicates if a person is available, busy, out of the office, and so forth. It's based upon the natural happenings on your computer (for example, if you haven't moved your mouse or typed for a while, the system assumes you are "away"), but it's easy for a person to manipulate. When the icon tells us the person is not at his or her desk, is that true? Or is the person simply avoiding calls? If we call the person or check in with his or her assistant or walk over to his or her desk, will we discover the truth? Thus, tracking down individuals becomes a different game. We need to admit that this software feature isn't accurate or honest enough and stop trying to keep track of people in this manner.

Persistent conversation refers to interactions carried out using chat, instant messaging, text messaging, e-mail, blogs, wikis, mailing lists, newsgroups, textual and graphical virtual worlds, and so on. The persistence of such conversations gives them the potential to be searched, browsed, replayed, annotated, visualized, restructured, and recontextualized, thus opening the door to a variety of new uses and practices. We definitely need to see more of this in Microsoft's collaboration offerings.

How will this help? Bob Serr, CTO of Parlano, writes the following in his blog: "While it is interesting to be people-centric and presence-based, these two components alone are not enough. Specifically, sometimes you don't even know who to contact, let alone whether or not they are available. In this case, you are better off looking for a topic. You don't need to know who you need to know; instead, you are only interested in what you need to know."

He continues, "This concept is only possible if you organize people naturally around groups which are organized around the topics of your business. While presence and IM are a good start, it is topic-based group messaging that will be the primary launch-pad for other, higher-fidelity modes of communication. This launch-pad will be a major contributor in making Unified Communications successful."

As much as I appreciate the direction that Microsoft is taking collaboration, there's room for constructive criticism. In harmony with the spirit of collaboration, wherein people work toward a common goal, I hope the folks at Microsoft consider some of my ideas before releasing the next version. Perhaps they'll read your comments as well. Of you have additional changes you'd like to see, by all means, let's hear them.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on May 14, 2008 03:00 AM

May 07, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Microsoft's Enterprise Project suite isn't just for the enterprise

Keeping track of a project -- any project -- can be an overwhelming task, especially if you're dealing with multiple teams, various funding expenditures, and the ever-popular string of setbacks and delays that haunt projects.

Microsoft has continued to roll out products to help take control of projects. In addition to unleashing the latest project flavor last year, Redmond ripped Project Server in two, creating Project Server 2007 and Project Portfolio Server 2007. Each offers complementary and useful features to help users organize and control the flow of a project.

Both servers (with their client counterparts) are part of what Microsoft calls the Microsoft Office Enterprise Project Management (EPM) solution, which has been designed to help "you gain visibility, insight, and control across your project, program, and application portfolios."

Project Server 2007 allows you to access and manage a project through different methods: Among them, there's Project Professional, the client application sold separately or as part of Office 2007, as well as Project Web Access, which allows users to connect to Project Server from a Web browser.

With Project Server, users can track project planning through the approval process. The activity plan can show users where a project stands at any given moment. Through the Resource Center, you can get quick reports as to where resources are allocated. Moreover, you can analyze timesheet management, as well as cross-project dependencies, on a project-by-project basis, allowing for more efficient use of time and money. In terms of security, admins can establish permission settings for users, allowing them access only to the resources they need to see and work with.

Project Portfolio Server 2007 lets you go one step further in creating an entire portfolio of projects or sub-projects. The server analyzes work flows and displays them graphically so you can see ways to optimize the project plan and execution. Through the Dashboard Module, you can see and track multiple portfolio scorecards for managing and tracking active portfolios. You can use the Optimizer Module to put your project portfolios through various what-if scenarios; you can also build out informational charts about your portfolio as it currently exists.

But this really becomes interesting when you compare Microsoft's EPM solutions to the project management products on the market -- and there are plenty of out there. On the upscale side, we have Oracle Fusion, and IBM Rational as well as Niku from Computer Associates.

But Microsoft is also seeing competition for the smaller project management market from companies such as Clarizen and LiquidPlanner.

How can Microsoft respond in the mini-market of project management when its offerings of Project Professional, Project Server, and Project Portfolio Server all seem so gi-normous to the average user?

The project servers allow for Project Web Access and therefore also allow for hosted solutions through a cornucopia of different vendors. So, the high-end features of an EPM solution don't necessarily require in-house servers or the administrative skill necessary to handle the dedicated hardware and software that come with such high-end project management solutions.

Does this mean Microsoft Project is for everyone? Not quite. Many will argue that aside from the cost for infrastructure (which would be removed somewhat by the hosted solution path), there is still a valid reason to consider other solutions due to the unnecessary complexity of Project and concerns that it actually doesn't handle projections reasonably.

What solutions are you currently working with to handle project management?

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on May 7, 2008 03:00 AM

May 05, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Microsoft and Yahoo: Stop the insanity!

The on-again, off-again purchase of Yahoo seems to have collapsed over the weekend with Microsoft walking away from the table and abandoning the deal. On February 1, in a dramatic announcement, Microsoft "made a proposal to the Yahoo board of directors to acquire Yahoo for $31 per share in cash and stock, representing a total equity value of approximately $44.6 billion (based on share prices as of January 31, 2008)." This represented initially a 62 percent premium above Yahoo's closing stock price on January 31.

You can read Microsoft's official statement on the matter, as well as Steve Ballmer's letter to Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang here.

To weigh in on this, my first thoughts are toward Yahoo, whose shares took a tumble Monday morning in light of the recent news (although it can thank Microsoft for the merger publicity that helped its shares rise during the past 3 months). I find the refusal to make this work out a bit difficult to comprehend on the part of Yahoo. Emotion aside, this is the wisest financial move it could make if we look at the numbers, look at Google's strong stance in the market, and so forth. Aside from either greed ('we can get more from the Microsoft giant') or pride ('we built this from the ground up and will rage against the Microsoft buying machine'). there is no logic whatsoever to refusing to be assimilated. Resistance wasn't futile mind you. Microsoft is walking away. It has survived the day but simply to continue to flounder in the future until some lesser company walks in and offers peanuts when they are at their lowest ebb.

But then my thoughts lean toward Microsoft. What were they thinking there in Redmond? Does it really seem like two has-beens can combat the Google giant? And by has-beens I am referring to Yahoo (as a portal and e-mail hosting provider) combined with Microsoft's MSN, Hotmail, Live cocktail that cannot seem to win over the Google-ites. How will putting these two worlds together create the successful 1-2 punch against Google? I didn't think it would and apparently neither did Microsoft stock holders because shares have decreased until this week, after the announcement that the deal was off. Finally shareholders saw an end to the insanity.

My third thought pulled in Google. I recently heard Matthew Glotzbach,
product management director for Google, speak at the IT360 Conference in Canada. He started off by showing one of the original Google screens from 10 years ago (you can catch a glimpse of that here) and what it looks like today. Not much has changed. A winning solution that continues to succeed. It will be interesting to see how this will all play out ... and if the insanity is really over.

Well, I have some research to do on Microsoft Live Mesh. Guess I'll Google it.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on May 5, 2008 09:44 AM

April 16, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Will the real SharePoint please stand up?

Many admins don't know it, but SharePoint has two distinct faces: one quite costly, the other free. The pricey version is Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007, or MOSS for short. The free one is called Windows SharePoint Services (WSS), currently at Version 3.0.

I was somewhat in the dark regarding the differences between the two and just assumed that the free version would be lame in comparison with MOSS (which is built on WSS). However, I was schooled last week at the IT360 Conference in Toronto by C.A. Callahan, respected tech speaker and author of the book "Mastering Windows SharePoint Services 3.0."

WSS provides a Web interface that allows users to collaborate on documents and other Office files, as well as build shared calendaring, discussion forums, wikis, blogs, and more. Out of the box, there are professional-looking site themes to choose from (which are easily customizable using SharePoint Designer) so that the workspace can fit within your business smoothly.

You can also quickly add or remove navigation tools, features, Web parts, and solutions. The document library support has a common repository, advancing collaboration in WSS a step beyond file sharing; users can take advantage of versioning, required checkout, and content approval.

WSS has been on my mind lately, perhaps for two reasons. The first is that public folders have been de-emphasized in Exchange 2007. Now, keep in mind, they will be included in the next release of Exchange and will be supported until 2016 (supposedly). But the Outlook 2007 clients no longer need public folders like previous versions did -- and Microsoft is pushing people toward SharePoint. Thus, my curiosity was piqued as to whether my company wants WSS or MOSS. (I'll talk about the differences in a future post. In the meantime, you can read InfoWorld Test Center's review of MOSS from last year.)

The second reason for my interest relates to the release of seven new Office 2007 Servers (Forms, PerformancePoint, Project Portfolio, and so forth), many of which rely on WSS to function.

Contrary to my original belief, WSS is not a lame, free offering from Microsoft. It's pretty impressive -- once you and your users get used to it. One admin I spoke to at the conference recently implemented WSS in his organization and said he imagined getting users to start playing with it would be slow going. He was wrong -- he says it has taken over his office of 200. "Everyone is setting up their workspace sites (I think they were setting up blog sites, a popular site template in WSS...) and loving it!"

According to Callahan, "Microsoft has about 40 WSS application templates -- literally site templates, with nifty, custom Web parts, lists, and libraries -- that are both examples of and extend the functionality of WSS for those new people who want it to do things like time management, help desk, resource reservation tracking, and more."

Have you implemented WSS in your organization? I would love to hear about your experience with it.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on April 16, 2008 03:00 AM

April 09, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Getting into the Groove, Part 2: Taking Groove in house

Enlisting an outside service to host your Groove 2007 server certainly has merit, as I discussed previously. But companies with the in-house expertise can reap benefits by running the server themselves. First, you gain greater control over managing the servers, controlling service levels, and handling security. Add to that the flexibility of how you set up your Groove servers, such as deploying them all in one datacenter or spreading them out. Finally, you can optimize your machines for behaviors on the network that only in-house experts know to expect.

Essentially, there are three main components in the Groove Server hierarchy that you might install at your organization: Manager, Relay, and Data Bridge. Each has its own functionality and set of requirements that come together to help build out your Groove environment. Let's examine each.

Groove Manager: The Manager contains the Web-based interface that manages all user accounts, policy settings, reports, and so forth. The Manager integrates with your Active Directory (or any other LDAP solution) so that you can add users when you add members to your domain.

Groove Manager grants admins various levels of control, such as the ability to determine which tools are available to specific users. For example, you can ensure your users are all on Groove 2007 Workspace and that everyone is working with the latest implementation of the Files tool. You can also restrict the file types that can be shared within the workspace -- either by using the default list or customizing your own. Further, you have control over security levels, such as the length of passwords and expiration intervals.

Typically, you aren't able to view the data that is passed between members of a workspace. The way Groove is designed, the encryption operates between users of a group. However, you can use an integrated Groove Audit service that allows you to audit your selected workspaces, if necessary. For example, it may be necessary to audit the communications of the team involved in a merger or acquisition.

Groove Relay: Relay ensures communication and collaboration between members of a workspace when several issues impede the process. One of those issues is a network firewall. If two users are members of a workspace within the same subnet (no firewall between), you don't need a server relay. Odds are, however, that users working that close to each other can find other ways to collaborate.

The purpose of Groove being "anywhere" collaboration almost heralds the need for a relay: Users will almost certainly have to go through firewalls to collaborate, or deal with users on different subnets. A relay also keeps offline users in sync by shooting lasting changes to their client when they come online.

One of the benefits to handling your own Relay servers is that you can design your layout to assign specific servers to certain users (based upon location and network bandwidth). You can also structure multirelay servers per user to allow for fail-over in the design of your deployments.

Groove Data Bridge: A Data Bridge is used to connect your Groove clients with enterprise databases (a back-end SQL server, perhaps) and applications. For example, a Data Bridge can help to connect your Groove clients with some of your other servers that might handle files or forms, such as a SharePoint Server. This server is completely optional and one that we didn't see in the Enterprise Services offered by Microsoft.

Groove Data Bridge can be used to maintain central copies of workspaces. Usually this is for two types of scenarios: to centrally manage workspace creation and invitation, or as a backup. As an example of the first scenario, you might set up the automatic creation of workspaces in response to specific activities or events in a departmental server-based system. Custom development, using the Groove Web Services API, is required to do this.

For backup, the Data Bridge server can automatically archive workspaces. This gives you a centralized alternative to having individual workspace members make archives from their PCs. But this cannot back up all workspaces -- only those in which the Data Bridge server is a member. That means that users will need to invite the Data Bridge server into their workspaces -- unless the workspaces were created centrally by a custom application associated with the server.

"It is possible to deploy Groove Data Bridge on-site, while still using Groove Enterprise Services for the Manager and Relay components," says Abbott Lowell, senior product manager on the Office Groove Team at Microsoft. "For example, an organization using Groove Enterprise Services might opt to deploy the Data Bridge in-house for its Archive Service (to create workspace archives)."

So that is your Groove Server lineup. If you need more assistance with Groove, check out the Groove Advisor blog, as well as the Groove Server TechCenter.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on April 9, 2008 03:00 AM

March 26, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Getting into the Groove, Part 1: Outsource or in-house?

In many companies, users are clamoring for a collaborative solution that goes beyond e-mail or instant messaging. You may have missed it, but the Enterprise and Ultimate versions of Office 2007 come with a perfectly sound collaboration solution: Groove 2007.

Groove Networks, founded by Ray Ozzie (the creator of Lotus Notes), was purchased by Microsoft in 2005. Last year, the company released Groove Server and Client 2007. Collaboration anywhere, anytime, and with anyone: That's what Groove is all about.

The Groove client (available for a free trial download) comes included in the Enterprise and Ultimate editions of Office 2007. With the client, users can create and manager their own collaborative workspaces, serving as a forum among the creator and invitees for discussion, file sharing -- even a game of chess.

On the back end is Groove Server, which you can either install in-house or subscribe to, via hosted Groove services. Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks. I'll talk about some of the hosted approaches this week.

For small groups, consider Microsoft Office Live Groove. Essentially, this is the client software with a subscription for the hosted relay infrastructure. The benefit to this approach is that you have no infrastructure concerns to deal with, but you reap all the benefits of the application. No internal servers are required; you just need to renew your subscription every year, and you get upgrades to new releases as part of the subscription. The drawback to this approach is that all users are "unmanaged"; there's no Groove Manager support for backing up or restoring accounts, or for creating and modifying user and security policies.

If you need more control over your Groove environment or have a large user base, yet don't want the administrative overhead and infrastructure concerns of managing a Groove Server in-house, consider Microsoft Office Groove Enterprise Services. Buy the client, and in addition to the hosted relay, you get a hosted Groove Manager. This enables you to have a Groove Domain, though which IT admins can manage employees' identities, plus tailor policies to control how employees use Groove. Configuration takes place via a Web-based tool with which admins can create, configure, and manage user accounts (including backup).

One included feature that can be a real benefit to your organization is the Enterprise Services Relay. Handled through Microsoft, the tool ensures that users' collaboration sessions are in sync when direct client-to-client connectivity isn't possible. Essentially, the relay is necessary when users are not on the same network, behind firewalls, or working offline.

For on-site control and infrastructure, there is Groove Server 2007, which comes in three flavors: Relay, Manager, and DataBridge. Each Groove Server is deployed separately, with the cost depending on the number of users and the system architecture. Supporting your own Groove environment does increase your personal administrative overhead for hardware and software. On the positive side, it provides you the ability to utilize a DataBridge server for connectivity to customized in-house solutions you may be supporting, such as an internal SQL database or SharePoint Library. Generally, if you don't need such a customized solution, the hosted approach through Enterprise Services may be more cost effective.

Interested in understanding the finer details of the three Groove Server flavors, Relay, Manager, and DataBridge? Stay tuned for more next week. And if you are an administrator of a Groove environment already, I'd like to hear about your experience.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on March 26, 2008 03:00 AM

February 22, 2008 | Comments: (0)

5 cool -- and helpful -- companies

As a journalist, I run across a variety of opinions and ideas. People say "Try This!!!" or "Use Our Product!" and it is hard to know everything and work with everything. There are times when companies bend over backward to get their product known... or promote their company and this is an homage to those folks. This is a quick Top 5 list of companies that have been extremely helpful to me as a journalist trying to stay on top of the learning curve.

1. Apple: Yep, surprising to find this one in the list? When I contacted the folks at Apple saying people in the InfoWorld Enterprise Windows Blog were yelling for me to use Leopard and asking for more information they asked "Well... have you ever used a Mac?" Not since my childhood with a Lisa. They said "No problem... we will send you one. Not the air book... but a very substantial laptop for you to try for however long you need." Check back here for my article "Leopard vs. Vista"

2. Alienware: I speak at conferences all over the world. Nothing impresses the audience more (at least at the start) then lifting up the cover on my Alienware Area 51 and showing off the cool glowing head that shines across the room. The power of these systems just blows you away. I just purchased an Area 51 9750 from them and it is incredible. But Alienware, in an effort to assist us journalists and tech speakers, has given me a new laptop to play with every six months. What a huge perk in my world. So... I love them! Best laptops on the planet I might add.

3. Excito is a company based in Sweden (www.excito.com). I've been getting comments from some readers that say "Use Linux!" and sure that sounds great... but which flavor?... who will support me?, that is my question back. I've been working on a story about mini appliances that you can just plug in and walk away for small businesses and the Bubba was sent to me by Excito to play with. In the language of the young texters of today OMG! (still getting used to that... my BBF says it will take time). This mini server is noiseless. No fan! Has tons of gigs of room. Runs off Linux (so you Linux lovers can rest assured that I am getting my dose of command line) AND is a web server, bittorrent server, ftp server, mail server... everything a Linux Server should be. I plugged it in... and had it up and running in minutes. Wow. Check back for two postings on this... "Mini Appliances... the wave of the future for the Enterprise" and "Linux for Dummies"

4. UTIPU based out of Boca Raton Florida. The owners emailed me and said "hey Pete, have you checked out our site... www.utipu.com". I hadn't and so I gave it a look. At first I thought it was interesting. You download a free screencasting tool that allows you to save your clip as an FLV and upload it to their site. I watched a few clips, even made a few of my own... (look for JPeterB if you visit). But after talking with the owners... I missed the entire purpose. Enterprise! Imagine a company that has one of these servers IN HOUSE. There are always little issues like how to fill out the form for vacation... how to log on to the VPN... etc.. Now, anyone in the company can make a quick tip... post it... and others in the company can stop asking again and again how to do something. Check back in the future for a post on In-House Training for the Enterprise.

5. Rackspace (www.rackspace.com). Already a powerhouse for hosting all sorts of services... they recently acquired Webmail.us and now they are a power to be reckoned with. They host web servers, application servers, virtualization, email solutions, database services, security services or storage and backup. They can manage and support all of them for you or just some of them. Most impressive is the offerings they have for messaging solutions. It seems like hosting is the wave of the future for many enterprises. Check back for a future post on "Should I Use Hosted Email?"

Well... that is all for this time. 5 Cool Companies you may, or may not have already known about.

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on February 22, 2008 12:39 PM

February 06, 2008 | Comments: (0)

MS + Yahoo = Antitrust bait?

The Microsoft monopoly alarm is being raised, but few will listen given Google's position in the marketplace

What is a monopoly? Wikipedia states, "In Economics, monopoly (also 'pure monopoly') is a persistent situation where there is only one provider of a product or service in a particular market. Monopolies are characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods. Alternatively (a modern and less common usage), it may be used as a verb or adjective to refer to the process (see Monopolism) by which a firm gains persistently greater market share than what is expected under perfect competition. The latter usage of the term is invoked in the theory of monopolistic competition."

Is Microsoft engaging in a monopolistic practice by being allowed (if the U.S. Congress Judiciary Committee agrees on February 8) to purchase Yahoo? Not if you consider the "one seller" aspect that Google and others offer the competition. So even if Microsoft buys Yahoo, it isn't a monopoly if there is some form of competition out there, and Google is certainly competition. But that doesn't mean Microsoft faces "fair" competition -- after all, it has the ability to spend and spend to trump the existing competitors. (Then again, the Yankees have been accused of this too -- spending more money to get the best players. And yet, although they have a great winning streak -- winning 26 World Series championships -- they don't win every year, and haven't won since 2000.)

Is Google happy about this move? Not quite. Using the word "troubling," it wants regulators to scrutinize the deal. Google is concerned that Microsoft can "unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors' email and instant messaging services." That is a reasonable concern, although Microsoft knows that it is constantly under the microscope and probably will tread lightly in this regard.

In terms of at least one portion of the market (search, which represents the bulk of Google's revenue), Steve Ballmer said it best: "Google's clearly got a dominant position. They've got about 75 percent of paid search worldwide." So in actuality, it is Google that is holding the monopoly position in that particular market. If anyone else jumped in to be the No. 2 competitor, it would be seen as fair, but somehow when Microsoft does it, it's viewed as a monopoly.

However, David Drummond, Google's senior vice president, says it is more than a business issue: "It's about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation." It's commendable that anyone is worried about the "underlying principles" of the Internet (if that is his real concern). He forgot to mention, however, a few of the other cornerstones of the Internet: military (see DARPA), commercialism, pornography ...

Although I am a Microsoft evangelist the majority of the time, I don't believe this acquisition should have Google worrying at all.

True, fourth-quarter 2007 profits were not what everyone hoped for Google. But compared to where Yahoo has been going (down the tubes), the move comes as Yahoo's business continues to decline. Jeffrey Schwartz wrote in RedmondMag.com: "The company earlier this week reported pullbacks in its business and plans to lay off 1,000 employees. Archrival Google, meanwhile, announced last night fourth quarter revenues of $4.83 billion, an increase of 51 percent year over year."

Personally, I use Google every day. I use a Gmail account; I use Google search in favor of all the other search engines (including Yahoo and Microsoft Live), and I use Google documents all the time. I love how easy it is to use the tools Google has provided, and I feel comfortable with what I know works for me. I think, currently, it has the better product. And I also have a Yahoo account and have tried all the other types of services available. But I come back to Google. So I have no problem with Microsoft spending some money to buy Yahoo. I don't think it will affect my use of Google tools whatsoever. Unless the Microsoft/Google combo comes up with a better product. And isn't that the point? A little healthy competition (or unhealthy competition) never hurt anyone.

What's your opinion? Do you think the proposed acquisition will stimulate competition or build a monopoly?

Posted by J. Peter Bruzzese on February 6, 2008 03:00 AM

December 12, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Office Live Workspaces: Catching Up with Google Docs?

Microsoft's Office Live services are, for the most part, targeted at the smallest of enterprises. But Microsoft has unveiled the beta of Workspaces, a collaboration tool within Office Live, that may become the focus of its battle to beat Google at the SaaS (software as a service) game.

Office Live Workspaces will allow users to keep more than 1,000 Microsoft Office files in one place and invite others to access, tracking, and merge them. And it connects directly into the desktop Office experience -- like SharePoint for the masses.

Or at least it could be. Of course, the masses might not be ready for SharePoint-style file sharing.

With the addition of Workspaces, Office Live starts to look a bit more like Google Apps. Both provide a way to build a business Web presence, with e-mail and collaboration. The main difference between the two -- aside from the current absence of the capabilities of Google Docs, which will be coming with Workspaces -- is the integration of Office Live into Windows and Office itself.

Office Live already has a downloadable Outlook Connector for integrating e-mail and calendaring into the desktop experience. Office Live Workspaces will extend that, allowing users to save documents from directly within Windows. SharedView, an extension to Office available separately, will allow users to share screens within Office documents remotely and work together. That's a significantly different approach from Google Docs, which allows for the creation of documents within the Web tool and joint editing via browsers. It's also to be expected, since Microsoft's desktop is its position of strength.

For users who feel safe within the confines of the desktop, all this is a nice, comfortable baby step toward SaaS. And it's perhaps a sign of how Microsoft plans to use Office as the camel's nose under the enterprise tent for other such services targeted higher. It's not earth-shattering, and it won't exactly win the vote of many early adopters such as the ones who've embraced Google Apps. But that's exactly the way Microsoft probably wants it.

Posted by Sean Gallagher on December 12, 2007 03:00 AM

December 05, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Titan or Titanic?

Microsoft vs. Salesforce.com Microsoft is preparing the release this month of Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4.0, code-named "Titan." A substantial portion of Microsoft's efforts around this release are focused on gaining ground on Salesforce.com, the software-as-a-service leader in the customer relationship management space and poster-company for SaaS success.

To do that, Microsoft has to make up some significant ground. The new version of Dynamics CRM shares the same code between its traditional licensed-based version and the "on-demand" version--both can be configured as "multi-tenant"--supporting multiple organizations from the same installation. And Microsoft is attempting to make CRM 4.0 more attractive as a hosted solution by cutting the subscription fee for hosting partners by 40 percent.

The ability for customers working with a Microsoft partner to switch easily from on-demand to on-premises is a major selling point. So is the integrated workflow in 4.0, and integration into the Outlook client and the rest of Office.

Microsoft is also going to host CRM 4.0 itself, as part of Dynamics Live. That may be a draw for some of the small businesses who've bought into the Office Live world, but it's doubtful that any mid-sized enterprises will work directly with Microsoft hosting.

Salesforce has a pretty big leap on Microsoft in terms of building a true web-based application platform for CRM. While Microsoft has plenty of partners, it's going to be difficult for Microsoft to leverage them the same way Salesforce has with its burgeoning platform community. Sure, there are lots of .Net-experienced developers out there, and Microsoft has talked up a number of verticals for 4.0.

But when you look at Microsoft's CRM feet on the ground--its actual CRM partners and existing installed base--it looks a lot less like Microsoft can dominate this space. Salesforce's Bruce Francis has been dismissive of the quality of Microsoft's offering, saying ,"Microsoft will do for Software as a Service what Zune did for music players."

Most likely, if Microsoft is lucky, Titan will help it hold its ground against Salesforce. But it won't even begin to address competitive issues with the larger enterprise CRM players like Oracle and SAP.

Posted by Sean Gallagher on December 5, 2007 03:00 AM

Read Oliver Rist’s archived Enterprise Windows columns

Technology White Papers

InfoWorld Technology Marketplace

» Technology White Papers Library

Technology White Papers by Topic

Technology White Papers E-mail Alert