I have a new blog so this blog is now closed down! 

Wait a sec and you should redirected automatically, if not click below 

http://steves.businessblog.com/

Subscribe here

http://steves.businessblog.com/blog/index.xml

If you want to know why I switched have a look here

http://steves.businessblog.com/blog/_archives/2004/8/25/129522.html

- Posted by Steve Richards - 7:56:34 PM - comment []

This is a very very nice summary of how blogs work by Roland Tanglao at Streamline, it complements my comments because it provides more details of some of the server side infrastructure:

1. Joe Blogger writes something and publishes it to his blog.

2. Joe's Blog system updates his site's HTML, updates his RSS file and sends a 'ping' message to the 'Aggregation Ping Server' indicating that his site has updated.

3. Search engines like Google and RSS specific services like Feedster, Technorati and PubSub periodically ask the Aggregation Ping Server, "Which sites have updated?".

4. Since Joe's site sends pings and has an RSS file and is easy to update frequently, Joe's search engine rank is higher than a 'normal site'.

5. Techie Teresa uses a program called an RSS reader to subscribe to Joe's site. The RSS reader checks Joe's RSS file for updates periodically (usually once/hour or once per day) and notifies her of Joe's updates. Teresa no longer wastes time manually surfing Joe's site. She just checks her RSS reader.

6. As a result, Teresa's information flow is more efficient and she can monitor more sites in less time.

7. Joe Surfer (who is not related to Joe Blogger) still can access blogs the old fashioned, slow and less efficient way using his web browser and search engines.

- Posted by Steve Richards - 2:16:35 PM - comment []

The Radicati group recently published a report titled

"IBM Lotus & Microsoft--Corporate Messaging Market Analysis" (June 2004), available at www.radicati.com/reports/single.shtml.

Its a truly awful report, as many people have commented.  It breaks all normal reporting rules:

1. It does not compare like with like
2. It commends Microsoft for the same things it criticises Lotus for
3. It does not provide its sources
4. It uses emotive language to commend Microsoft and Criticise lotus

I actually looked forward to reading it when I first heard it had come out because I had some concerns over Lotus Workplace and how Lotus Notes/Domino would transition to the new architecture.  However the report was so biased I ended up feeling much more positive about Lotus than I had before.  The basis for my change of view "IBM must be on to something with Workplace if such bad analysis is the only tool available to make Microsoft look good".  I was also left even more uncertain over what Microsoft is up to with Exchange, as I have already blogged on here and here.

The last straw for me in this report was the criticism of IBM/Lotus over migration to Workplace and the commendation of Microsoft on the same issue, lets look at a few examples:

1. How seamless was the migration from Exchange 5.* to Exchange 200*, having just done a major project to do this the answer is NOT VERY, admittedly it was a pretty complex environment that we migrated, (with lots of consolidation and some Lotus Notes migration as well).
2. How easy is it to migrate from SharePoint Portal Server 1, using the Web Store to SharePoint Portal server 2003 using SQL Server.  Impossible without significant loss of functionality.
3. How easy will it be for developers who used the Microsoft's Web Storage System, touted by MS as a "Notes Killer - ha ha ha", to a future version of Exchange based on SQL Server, (pretty near impossible probably, if Microsoft failed to do it themselves with SPS what hope does anyone else have!)
4. Who believes that the Migration from Exchange Public folders to some future SQL server based environment like Windows SharePoint Services is going to be seamless!

The bottom line is that Microsoft's record in document management and collaboration type technologies is appalling, with very little strategic continuity and even less product compatibility.  Lotus's record is second to none.

I am guessing that the Radicati group wished they had never gone near this subject, it has damaged their credibility no end.  What is interesting is the power of blogging in bringing this issue to the fore and brutally analysing this flawed work in public.  If you want to read the gory details follow this trail:

http://sharedspaces.typepad.com/blog/2004/07/response_to_the.html

http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/07232004073204AMEBRFJL.htm

http://www.radicati.com/response.html

Eric Mack as always does a superb job of pulling the whole topic together in his blog

http://www.ericmackonline.com/emo/emonline.nsf/dx/dr-radicati-responds-sort-of

And IBM finally gets around to a formal response, which is the final nail in the coffin:

http://www.lotus.com/lotus/offering1.nsf/wdocs/c3b85eec9126b30885256ee4006c9003

- Posted by Steve Richards - 12:34:50 PM - comment []

Microsoft research have come up with some really cool tools for capturing and manipulating whiteboard contents captured using low quality web cams.  My whiteboard is right behind me, (so my web cam points right at it, so it would work just great, but the downloads are MS only.  The best trick is it removes the person writing on the board from the image.  Here are some of the key points:

Other systems use expensive cameras or dedicated electronic whiteboards. The Live Whiteboard system, developed at Microsoft Research by Zhengyou Zhang and Li-wei He, uses whatever whiteboard you already have. It only needs an inexpensive Web cam and some clever software.

Live Whiteboard doesn't just deliver a video stream of the whiteboard. The software takes out all the shadows and uneven surfaces that come through on a Web cam, and turns the whiteboard into an image that allows viewers to see the whiteboard notes. Through a series of image processing procedures, the originally captured image is first transformed into a rectangular bitmap to correct perspective distortion, and then color-enhanced to increase contrast, saturation, and to provide a clean uniform white background.

In addition, if the remote viewer wants to focus his attention only on the content, the system can take out the image of the person who is writing on the board. The remote viewer sees only the new content magically appearing, he never sees the person who is writing the content. This saves even more bandwidth.

The full news article can be found here, and the web site for the developer with more info and the research reports can be found here.

- Posted by Steve Richards - 11:15:25 PM - comment []

Serge van den Oever suggests using an inexpensive commercial product called WebDrive to connect to SharePoint document libraries and sites via WebDav (note that you can also use WebDrive to connect to other types of servers with a drive letter, as well - WebDrive can connect to WebDAV, FTP, SFTP, and HTTP Servers supporting Microsoft FrontPage Server Extensions). See Serge's site for more details about using it with SharePoint:   You can also use it to access Oracle Files, although oFiles includes its own utility.

WebDrive: Accessing SharePoint document libraries through drive letters

I downloaded the trial version and was immediately able to map W: to a document library on MySite on the portal server at work, over a VPN connection, using WebDav. I then transferred files, made sure they work on both ends, ran through the site to make sure everything's operating properly -- It works great!

This will be useful for people who need to map SharePoint "drives" from Windows 2000 or other OS versions, and provides a solid way to repeatedly reconnect drives at login, manage drive-letter connections, etc. On top of using WebDav, you can also connect via FP extensions, FTP, SFTP (SSH), and GroupDrive protocols.

Add WebDrive to the list of useful tools for the SharePoint power user - especially if you're running a version of Windows prior to WinXP and need drive/folder-level access to SharePoint 2003 sites.

- Posted by Steve Richards - 11:18:48 PM - comment []

Just a few links from recent blog-findings related to SharePoint and Infopath that caught my eye:

• SharePoint Portal Server 2003 Webcasts (past and future)
• Eli's SharePoint Resources (posting again becasue it's regularly updated)
• Lamont Harrington's SharePoint List
• Creating Custom Site Definitions for SharePoint Site Creation
• Open Links in a SharePoint List-View Webpart in a New Window
• Use Windows Briefcase to Take Your SharePoint Libraries With You 
• Use the Research Pane in Office 2003 and IE6 to search your SharePoint Servers
• Integrate SharePoint Search into a CMS site using WebService
• Implementing Lookup Fields with InfoPath

- Posted by Steve Richards - 11:17:27 PM - comment []

Ed Brill makes a point in one of his posts about the woes of the Exchange Group in Microsoft, here is the guts of it:

It hasn't been a good few months for the Exchange product team at Microsoft.  First the Outlook team ships an updated connector for Lotus Domino; then they dismantle their own roadmap; and now they are facing internal competition:

"Our first product here is going to be using Outlook that uses the Hotmail e-mail infrastructure. So you don't need to have an Exchange Server if you're a small business; you can just use Hotmail and you can have that synchronized experience, as well as the calendaring and everything else with other people who are on Hotmail."

Sort of confirms the feeling I got when I posted on a simillar topic a while back.  Then I got a bit more encouraged when I posted this.  lets hope for some clarity soon!

- Posted by Steve Richards - 12:51:57 AM - comment []

Which Office Suite? Is shaping up to be a fascinating decision making process.  I am not ready to expose all of my thinking on this topic but it goes something like this:

1. Some people think its easy, MS Office alternatives are cheaper and most people don’t use the bells and whistles in Office so people will migrate provided the alternatives meet peoples core needs.
2. I think its more complex than this and as a minimum the costs of migration, lost productivity, and compatibility and rework need to be factored in
3. Intertia is a big one in Microsofts favour, for a business that has SW Assurance or an EA, the decision is deferred probably for at least 2-3 years after their EA expires and probably longer if they do a lot of data interchange.  That probably means 4-5 years from now!
4. But this is the trivial stuff.  Sure direct and indirect cost comparison is important but I want to consider:
   1. How do people really use Office and is it really true that people only use a small amount of the functionality, and if they do, do they all use a different small amount?
   2. I also want to consider vision, MS has a vision for Office, What is that Vision?
   3. How open is that vision, probably not very!  Is the value proposition worth the lock-in?  Is the ‘integrated innovation’ that Microsoft are fond of worth the lock-in
   4. What’s the vision of the competition, for some of them is it to catch up with Office 97.  For others it’s a complete reworking of the concept.  So it’s important not to just ask the question can it do what office does!
   5. Remember the vision is the important stuff, if the decision is 4-5 years away!

 Maybe that all sounds a bit dry, so why do I think it’s so interesting:

1. Consider how many users of Office there are
2. Consider how much of Microsoft’s profits come from Office and how desperate MS are to keep that profit coming in, desperate people innovate!
3. Consider how important Office is to drive MS Operating system sales and how important OS sales are to MS profits, desperate times two!
4. Consider how desperate the competition is to break the MS Office Suite monopoly
5. Look at the last few versions of Office, basically a stagnant product, innovating sure, but within a straight jacket imposed by the fact that all of the core Office stuff is effectively done, and improvements are marginal.
6. All the real interesting stuff requires further client side, client server, peer to peer and device type to device type integration
7. Hence we see the push in the Office System areas, Mobility, WinFS.

So its integrated integration where the action is from Microsoft's perspective and they are pouring billions into it, how are the competition addressing integrated innovation, or do they have an alternative perspective.  How do the differing approaches affect real enterprises and real users, (see this blog for the difference).  Thats the question I want to answer!

As a twist the answer may not just depend on the type of person you are, but on the type of device you use.  So maybe portable device users and especially tablet device users will have a more compelling reason to stick with MS because for these people the flexible input technologies, online/offiline experience, home/work integration, device integration etc are more important.

Some of the important links are listed below:

Advantages of the OpenOffice.org XML File Format Used by the StarOffice Office Suite

Migrating to StarOffice Software from Microsoft Office

Draft of OO Product Concept Document

Accepted OO Projects

- Posted by Steve Richards - 5:22:43 PM - comment []

In this blog, I started to talk about the evolution of subscription beyond news.  Here is a great example of how this might work.  This site describes the RDF Calendar format.  It provides a few examples, (I have added a few as well), of why you migt want to subscribe to a calendar, and includes ToDo list examples:

1. Subscribe to you travel itinery and have the events automatically added to your calendar, flight times etc, and automatically updated
2. Subscribe to a list of bugs which flow into your todo list
3. Subscribe to an event schedule, for example football matches
4. Subscribe to a favorite TV show

More information is available here

Some of the scenarios are listed below:

• EventDiscovery
• CalendarScraping
• TravelTools, PathCross
• CalendarSynchronization
• ScheduleAnimation
• OpeningHoursUseCase
• AnnounceOMatic
• HTML views of calendars (see datebook2html.xsl in telagent for example)

One more example of the Personal Information Disaster that is the web today!

- Posted by Steve Richards - 5:04:41 PM - comment []