advising on IT-business alignment
IT-business alignment about us blog our services articles & reports resources your profile exposure
blog
blog
Friday, January 30, 2009

Software Delivery InFocus podcast - Developing in the cloud

This is the third in our Software Delivery InFocus series of podcast episodes, starring Bola Rotibi - the Principal Analyst of MWD's Software Delivery competency area. In this episode, she discusses the opportunities and challenges associated with using cloud-based software development services. Bola's guest is Debbie Ashton, Product Director for CODA - a provider of both on-premise and SaaS-hosted financial management applications.

Although there is a lot of hype surrounding the concept of "cloud computing", there also appears to be real value to be gained in some usage scenarios. The obvious financial benefit of renting software service (being able to remove up-front capital expenditure and instead account for software as an operating expense) is coupled with the scalability that's possible (you can pay as you go, and pay as you grow) and together it looks like cloud-based offerings will be especially attractive in the tougher economic climate that nearly all of us look likely to be experiencing for quite a while. Many organisations today are tempted to think only of the quick advantages of Cloud – partly as a result of the hype coming from the vendor community. However, whilst the potential and advantages are well documented and clear for people to see, the disadvantages or the challenges of use are not. In this podcast we look specifically at the challenges of developing applications for delivery from cloud-based software platforms. What practices if any should organisations take on board in developing applications and solutions using cloud-based development services? What processes and methods should organisations be putting into practice to get the most out of cloud development services?

CODA developed its SaaS-based offering, CODA2go, on Salesforce.com's Force.com platform - and in this podcast episode we hear what Debbie and her team learned about developing in the cloud along the way. Thanks to Debbie for some great insights. You can download the audio here or alternatively you can subscribe to the podcast feed to make sure you catch this and all future podcasts!

As with all the episodes in this podcast series, we've also published a companion report which summarises the discussion and "key takeaways". You can find it here, and it's free to download for all MWD's Guest Pass research subscribers (joining is free).

Labels: , , , ,

Links for 2009-01-28 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Links for 2009-01-27 [del.icio.us]

  • Process for the Enterprise » Blog Archive » MWD’s Vendor Comparison Report
    Scott Francis of BP3 reviews our recent BPM vendor comparison report. Some good constructive criticism which we'll take on board for future development. "This is a great start to anyone's software vendor analysis, and I imagine anyone who is serious would invest in getting access to the premium service that lets you adjust the scoring to fit your scenarios."
  • Chuck's Blog: More On Private Clouds
    OK, private clouds. I know this makes me really really unfashionable and late-to-the-party, but - we're talking about utility computing here, aren't we? Aren't we? Tell me I'm missing something, please.

Labels:

Saturday, January 24, 2009

Links for 2009-01-22 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Friday, January 23, 2009

SaaS takes centre stage at Lotusphere

One year on from the launch of IBM Lotus's first home-grown effort in the world of software-as-a-service, codenamed project "Bluehouse", SaaS is again top of the news agenda at Lotusphere 2009, and shows up as an underlying theme across the event's big stories.

The main headline was the launch of LotusLive, a new brand for the company's cloud-based services, which will incorporate Bluehouse, Sametime Unyte Meetings, Sametime Unyte Events and Lotus Notes Hosted Messaging, as well as a all future offerings in this space, one of which I'll come to in a moment. In line with the new branding, each of the above products will be renamed, with the aforementioned products becoming "LotusLive Engage", "LotusLive Meetings", "LotusLive Events" and "LotusLive Notes" respectively.

Alongside this was more detail about last week's announcement of IBM's intent to acquire the assets of Outblaze, a Hong Kong-based provider of white-label, SaaS-based webmail services. Upon completion, IBM plans to offer the Outblaze technology as part of LotusLive, under the name LotusLive iNotes. In addition to adding breadth to the LotusLive portfolio which it is selling direct, IBM sees the Outblaze acquisition as providing a new business model, helping the company to develop the SaaS reseller channel through value-added services.

Other major news from Lotusphere centred on partnering activities at IBM, and again SaaS played a central role - Salesforce.com integration with LotusLive Engage and Lotus Notes, integration between the LinkedIn business social network and contacts within LotusLive Engage, and between LotusLive Engage and Skype for VoIP calls.

IBM is clearly determined to show it has a credible story in SaaS, and is working hard to deliver a portfolio which mirrors its breadth in the on-premise software space. The biggest opportunity for IBM in SaaS - particularly with the Engage offering - is clearly the SMB market, and it will be interesting to see whether it is successful here, or whether LotusLive simply becomes an extension of its established enterprise portfolio. In any case, these announcements demonstrate that it is prepared to square up to Microsoft in the battle for supremacy in the cloud.

Keep your eyes open for a new report on Collaboration-as-a-Service which we'll be publishing within the MWD Collaboration advisory service over the next couple of weeks.

Labels: , ,

Links for 2009-01-21 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Links for 2009-01-19 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Saturday, January 17, 2009

Links for 2009-01-15 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Friday, January 16, 2009

Links for 2009-01-14 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Sunday, January 11, 2009

Links for 2009-01-09 [del.icio.us]

Labels:

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Schrödinger's SOA

I've spent a couple of days wavering over whether to jump into an ongoing blogosphere debate over the "Death of SOA". For those who haven't yet read any of the debate online, here's the catalyst: SOA is Dead; Long Live Services - a fictional obituary of SOA by Anne Thomas Manes of the Burton Group. On one hand I wanted to avoid adding another voice to a growing crescendo of opinion and counter-opinion and the risk of not really shedding any extra light: but on the other hand I thought that some people might expect MWD to have something to say! Particularly given past blog posts like SOA 2.0? Stop the madness, Little SOA vs Big SOA, More big vs small thinking: SOA vs BPM, The pointless search for SOA ROI, and On SOA governance: for SOA, read CPOA?.

In the end, I couldn't help myself. Call it New Year exuberance. So what's our take? Is SOA dead or alive? Should anyone care?

I think there are a couple of key points to consider. First, what's wrong with SOA today? And second, what should we do about it? I agree with Anne on the first; but I think I really disagree on the second.

When I look at Anne's post in detail I believe she's making 4 basic points:
  1. The majority of SOA projects have failed to deliver what they promised.
  2. Business people are disillusioned with SOA.
  3. "SOA projects" will be killed by today's difficult economic conditions.
  4. Despite all this, the requirement for SOA is greater than ever.
I'll happily back two of those points up - the first (UPDATE: to a degree - I have anecdotal evidence that suggests many organisations struggle with SOA, but that's not quite the same)and the fourth. There's one section towards the end of Anne's post I'm particularly in agreement with:
SOA is not simply a matter of deploying new technology and building service interfaces to existing applications...it requires a massive shift in the way IT operates. ... The latest shiny new technology will not make things better. Incremental integration projects will not lead to significantly reduced costs and increased agility. If you want spectacular gains, then you need to make a spectacular commitment to change.
This is pretty much what we've been saying about SOA for some time (see Little SOA vs Big SOA from April 2007). In short: SOA won't succeed if you take an overly technical, product-based view of it (and indeed we're far from alone in this - ZapThink bangs this drum a lot, too, for example).

So we agree that not all is well in the State of SOA: but where I diverge with Anne's post is in the prognosis for SOA and the treatment for the illness.

Anne's prognosis/suggested treatment is that SOA (or at least the term) is (or will soon be) dead. Her view appears to be that because its death is inevitable, we should accept it and move on - stopping talking about SOA and starting talking about other things instead. This appears to be bound up with her observations that "business people are disillusioned with SOA" and "SOA projects will be killed by the economic downturn".

Before I move on - I don't know about you, but I think that if any IT group has been trying to sell SOA directly to business people, they deserve everything they get. Regardless of economic conditions. No, no, no! You don't sell methodologies and architectural patterns: you sell outcomes. Argh! And here's a hint: if you work for an IT group that used to try to sell SOA to business people, and is thinking about now trying to sell "mashups", "cloud computing", or similar things - don't bother, you'll get the same result. Sell the outcome and the benefits, not the mechanism or the technology. Double Argh!

There's another risk with changing the way we speak about what Miko Matsumura jokingly now calls "The Artist Formerly Known as SOA": by doing so, we continue to spread the perception that the IT industry is a fashion industry unable to kick its habit of (re)inventing terms to reinvigorate markets when earlier promises go unfulfilled. Whether she knew it or not when she wrote the post, by referring to a change in terminology (away from SOA and towards "services", "mashups", "cloud computing", etc) as an active and influential commentator, Anne is contributing to the fall from grace of the term.

Well, as I said here when I railed against SOA 2.0,
I sincerely believe that analysts should be good stewards of the influence they have - educating, clarifying, abstracting, comparing, acting independently, being measured, etc. It's about filtering out hype and trying to provide practical, independent advice and insight.
Just because SOA is difficult to do, we shouldn't start calling it something else in the hope that we can start over without anyone noticing. And it's no surprise that SOA is tough to sell to business people - I don't believe that was ever up for debate, and it shouldn't be seen as any kind of broader indicator.

Let's acknowledge that we all have more work and education to do - but let's not jump the shark on this. "SOA is Dead" is a headline that no-one needs.

Labels: , ,

A rocky start for Borland in 2009 but a timely move for its CEO

On Tuesday 6th January 2009, Borland made a number of gloomy announcements that, given the prior forecast for 2009 and the company's poor quarterly returns were to be expected. The news that the company is reducing its workforce by 15% will undoubtedly be worrying for those affected but it is hardly unique in an industry that is facing up to tightened spend across the board.

It is, though a far cry from Borland's performance in the last IT crisis - the bursting of the dot com bubble eight years ago - when the company saw a long period of consecutive growth in its quarterly financial statements. The Borland of then was a much different organisation to the one it is now. Since then, Borland has divested itself of a number of its traditional tools products (CodeGear) and the business has been focused around the enterprise ALM market. In the current recession the large IT development projects where people would be looking to use enterprise ALM are on hold. This time around, Borland's ability to ride out this recession is much less clear.

The departure of CEO Tod Nielsen to join VMware in the role of Chief Operating Officer (COO), working with CEO Paul Maritz is perhaps the biggest surprise, not least because of the question it raises over his tenure as CEO at Borland. However, Paul Maritz's choice of COO is not without its merits.

At Borland, Nielsen presided over continued improvements and efficiencies in operating costs and working practices. He and his team had the foresight and commitment to push for the adoption of agile practices. As a result the company was able to quickly bring to market the Borland Management Suite, a high quality product that also embodies the notion of agility.

On one level, Borland now provides a good working example for other organisations looking to bring agile practices to the way they operate, develop and deliver their software services and products. But for all that, the company has not been able to translate the improved operating and development and delivery practices into profit successes on the balance sheet - something that suggests underlying issues with the sales and marketing strategy, though the tough market environment for ALM based solutions may also be a factor.

There will be many critics of Tod Nielsen as he takes up his position at VMware and he will have much to prove over the coming months and years. Presiding over a significant fall in share price - with Borland's share price now languishing around the $1 mark and frequently dipping below it - is not a good record for the copy sheet. But Nielsen's ability to reduce costs at Borland will give the company a better chance for it to weather the storm. Tod Nielsen has also shown that he is not afraid to make tough and unwelcomed decisions no matter how unpalatable the results. The sale of Borland's tool business whilst clumsily handled in parts was ultimately for the best (more so for the tools division) given the focus of Borland for ALM and the size and financial capacity of the company.

It may be this and their past working history that has attracted Paul Maritz, who has shown that he has a desire to change things at VMware. The company faces a highly competitive market, with its core offering largely commoditised by the dual forces of Microsoft and open source (Xen), and the battle ground shifting to management, where it faces the large incumbents of BMC, CA, HP, IBM and to a lesser extent Microsoft.

Nielsen's operating improvements at Borland and his extensive experience of working in a variety of senior management roles in some of the leading software organisations in the market have shown that he is at the very least a sensible choice for the role of COO at VMware. The question will be what he does over the next 6 to 12 months to sharpen the business operations at VMware and put the company into good shape to face formidable competitors. All eyes will be on how he works with Maritz to shape VMware's strategy going forward.

So much for VMware, but where does this leave Borland? In the same announcements that heralded the departure of Tod Nielsen, the company also issued changes on the board, anticipated Q4 2008 sales revenue that are lower than those for Q3 2008 and significantly down on the same period for 2007. There was also the easily missed news that Peter Morowski the SVP of research and development would be leaving to pursue "other opportunities". The loss of both the CEO and the head of R&D and changes on the board coupled with a perilously low share price will be disquieting for shareholders and customers alike. And yet the news is not all bad. Borland is a lean organisation; it has invested wisely in putting in place agile working practices that should allow it to react quickly and engage more effectively with its customers; and there is still a galvanised workforce that is winning awards and loyalty from its customer base.

But if the company's investment with agile working practices and its ALM strategy is to be anything more than an exercise in change, the board and management team will need to act swiftly to demonstrate that it is able to weather these turbulent times. The team will need to reassure its client base with continued developments in its product roadmap. They may also need to restructure their sales and marketing tactics and focus heavily on execution if they are to generate significant rises in revenues and an eventual return to profitability.

The alternatives for the company are not attractive. The pool of potential acquirers has rapidly diminished and the prospects of being sidelined to that of a niche player would be a less than appealing ending for a company with such an illustrious history.

There is nothing inherently wrong with Borland's products, but confidence is a fragile commodity and we have seen from the money markets how fast it can evaporate. All of which makes Borland a somewhat riskier investment at the moment than it deserves to be.

Labels: , , ,

Links for 2009-01-06 [del.icio.us]

Labels:


Burn this feed
Burn this feed!

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Blog home

Previous posts

Normal service will be resumed shortly
Links for 2009-07-02 [del.icio.us]
Seven elements of Cloud value: public vs private
The seven elements of Cloud computing's value
Links for 2009-06-09 [del.icio.us]
Links for 2009-06-02 [del.icio.us]
Links for 2009-05-27 [del.icio.us]
Links for 2009-05-20 [del.icio.us]
Micro Focus gobbles Borland, Compuware assets
Links for 2009-05-05 [del.icio.us]

Blog archive

March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009

Blogroll

Andrew McAfee
Andy Updegrove
Bob Sutor
Dare Obasanjo
Dave Orchard
Digital Identity
Don Box
Fred Chong's WebBlog
Inside Architecture
Irving Wladawsky-Berger
James Governor
Jon Udell
Kim Cameron
Nicholas Carr
Planet Identity
Radovan Janecek
Sandy Kemsley
Service Architecture - SOA
Todd Biske: Outside the Box

Powered by Blogger

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com

Enter your email address to subscribe to updates:

Delivered by FeedBurner