IBM Urged to Open Notes and Domino
Open Notes and Domino – Is this Really a Good Idea?
Hey, don’t get me wrong. I like free stuff as much as the next person. However even in an age of reduced IT budgets and a more open attitude about open software from the corporate perspective, I’m not sure this is in the best interest of the Notes/Domino community. At least not yet.
I don’t know how many of you have seen it, but there is an open letter to Steve Mills, the general manager at IBM’s Software Group, explaining why IBM should take the Notes/Domino groupware stack open source with a community-developed programming model. The author of the open letter is Ian Tree, the chief architect at IT consultancy Hadleigh Marshall Netherlands b.v. of Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
(read more)
Hey, don’t get me wrong. I like free stuff as much as the next person. However even in an age of reduced IT budgets and a more open attitude about open software from the corporate perspective, I’m not sure this is in the best interest of the Notes/Domino community. At least not yet.
I don’t know how many of you have seen it, but there is an open letter to Steve Mills, the general manager at IBM’s Software Group, explaining why IBM should take the Notes/Domino groupware stack open source with a community-developed programming model. The author of the open letter is Ian Tree, the chief architect at IT consultancy Hadleigh Marshall Netherlands b.v. of Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
(read more)
His primary concern seems to be based around the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) brought up by competitors in the messaging and collaboration space calling Notes/Domino a ‘legacy’ product. As competitors (presumably Microsoft with Outlook/Exchange Server, Novell with GroupWise, and a bunch of open source alternatives) increase this FUD, the demise of the product line will continue with the result being more conversion projects that result in more expensive and less functional solutions for the existing customer base.
Ian highlights what he believes are several key opportunities for IBM that will arise out of this change. Among them are:
Forget for a moment that IBM is the poster child for proprietary software and the benefits that come from owning the entire stack (operating system, middleware, database and application). I’m not sure I can see why IBM would do this? I know there are other examples of proprietary products becoming open source. Sun did that with their Solaris operating system when they created OpenSolaris. Even with the benefit of hind sight, I’m not sure I can see what Sun got out of that move. Unfortunately it’s impossible to compare that move with where they might be today if they had not done that. Without a control group, anything I say would be pure speculation.
I’d love to get other thoughts on this topic. What do you think? Would we all be better off if Notes/Domino was open source? Would it be a better product? Would it become ubiquitous across companies and computing environments? Why might IBM consider this move?
Please feel free to comment here, or send me an email at scott_johnsen@teamstudio.com. I’d really would love to hear from you.
Ian highlights what he believes are several key opportunities for IBM that will arise out of this change. Among them are:
- Because Notes/Domino will be more accessible by the education market to use in classroom environments, they will be able to instill its concepts, capabilities and advantages alongside other database technologies and development platforms. [SJ – Wouldn’t programs addressing the educational market accomplish the same thing?]
- The wider community will be able to address many of the longstanding niggles inherent in the product. [SJ – Really? I’m not sure I’m aware of any software product, open source or otherwise that doesn’t have its fair share of ‘niggles’.]
- The product will immediately qualify as a potential offering for projects that mandate the use of Open Source software e.g. European Union, Local and National Governments and education sectors. [SJ – If Notes/Domino is free, how does this help IBM?]
- IBM will enhance its position in the Open Source marketplace. [SJ – And IBM cares why?]
Forget for a moment that IBM is the poster child for proprietary software and the benefits that come from owning the entire stack (operating system, middleware, database and application). I’m not sure I can see why IBM would do this? I know there are other examples of proprietary products becoming open source. Sun did that with their Solaris operating system when they created OpenSolaris. Even with the benefit of hind sight, I’m not sure I can see what Sun got out of that move. Unfortunately it’s impossible to compare that move with where they might be today if they had not done that. Without a control group, anything I say would be pure speculation.
I’d love to get other thoughts on this topic. What do you think? Would we all be better off if Notes/Domino was open source? Would it be a better product? Would it become ubiquitous across companies and computing environments? Why might IBM consider this move?
Please feel free to comment here, or send me an email at scott_johnsen@teamstudio.com. I’d really would love to hear from you.
Category Lotus Notes IBM
| Permalink |
|
|
|
|
|
Comments
Is that free speech or free parking?
Posted by Rob At 05:38:11 PM On 01/05/2009 | - Website - |
As Notes/Domino has slipped farther and farther behind in it's HTML generation and integration of CSS and AJAX, I've started to actively look for something to switch to.
I hate to leave Notes because it does so many things right. If IBM is going continue to let it slide into oblivion, then open sources the code would give it new life and IBM would be positioned to sell support services for it, something that's a huge proportion of IBM's business now, so I understand.
By the way, nothing in the standard open source/free software says it has to cost nothing. They could dual-license it, for example. Us little guys could use it inexpensively and the big guys will want the warm-fuzzy feeling buying from IBM has always given them.
I think it could be a win-win, if properly planed and promoted.
Well, that's my one-man-shop point of view, for what it's worth.
Peace,
Rob:-]
Posted by Rob At 05:59:27 PM On 01/05/2009 | - Website - |
I also think you make an excellent point about the product falling behind in certain areas. I don't know if the community could change that, but it certainly might be able to.
The problem I'm having with IBM open sourcing Domino/Notes is based on their history (which probably isn't fair) and the numbers. The argument that IBM will still continue making money from Domino/Notes through services sounds good until you look at the gross profit numbers. Services are almost always a lower profit margin business. In my opinion, IBM does really well in this area.
These numbers are from IBM's Q32008 earnings presentation.
Category, Revenue and Gross Profit Margin
Global Technical Services, $9.9 billion, 32.7%
Global Business Services, $4.9 billion, 27.4%
The challenge is when you look at the software numbers.
Software,$5.2 billion, 84.7%
It's tough to argue with that kind of gross profit, no matter who you are.
Scott
Posted by Scott Johnsen At 06:56:45 AM On 01/06/2009 | - Website - |
Posted by Jane At 09:42:03 AM On 01/07/2009 | - Website - |
I'm sure IBM is already getting service income related to Notes anyway. So the big question is, if Notes went open source, would this go up or down?
@Jane: Security through obscurity is not a good plan. Open Source, so the story goes, allows hundreds, if not thousands, of eyes to look for flaws. If you compare security fix time between proprietary software and open source, I think you'll find open source is way ahead. History shows that proprietary software companies focus mostly on hiding the flaws, not fixing them.
On the other hand, Notes has done the best job on security I've seen so far. They used digital signatures before most people had ever heard of them. They built encryption in down to the field level. Notes was invented before the Internet took off. As a result, some of the security didn't get translated into their web implementation.
Peace,
Rob:-]
Posted by Rob At 11:23:04 AM On 01/08/2009 | - Website - |