After a week of fantastic spring break skiing at Whistler in British Columbia, I returned to work and was reminded that training alone is not enough to help users successfully build their own SharePoint collaboration sites. It’s a bit like my friend Drew describes learning to snowboard, which he says is “easy to learn but difficult to master.” I’m now convinced that SharePoint has this same characteristic – easy to learn but very difficult to master. Why? ...
...Because most organizations end up with just enough time to train users on the basic features and functions of the tool, not on information architecture and design best practices so that they can optimally build sites. You know, the kind where people can actually find information instead of having it buried in the same useless folder hierarchy that existed on the file shares SharePoint is replacing. Training in the “how to” functions in MOSS 2007 is not enough – site builders, who in many organizations are not going to be IT folks but rather “regular” end users, also need to understand information design best practices.
Here are just a few concepts that can improve the end-user designed sites I have reviewed:
- Tab Navigation: Sub-sites can be more easily organized and visible by leveraging the out of the box tab navigation that comes with SharePoint. On one end user-designed site I reviewed recently, the site designer had multiple sub-sites but they were only visible in the left hand navigation, which, due to a lengthy list of libraries, etc., required a lot of vertical scrolling to find. Grouping the sites on meaningful tabs (and sub-tabs) would have created a much more usable site.
- Consistent Use of Metadata: In a series of sites in the same site collection (designed for the same group of end users), metadata should be consistently applied. On this same site, some document libraries used a field called Keywords to categorize documents and others used a more functional term to categorize documents using the exact same values. All libraries should have used the functional term.
- Limited Use of Folders: I’ve mentioned this in earlier posts, but folders are not the only way or often not the best way to organize information in a document library. On many sites that I’ve reviewed in the past, I’ve seen folders with no documents, folders with one document, and folder hierarchies that are impossible to decipher (often, even for the original designer!). SharePoint training really must include best practices for content organization or we’re going to have SharePoint sites that are as difficult to understand and navigate as the file shares they are designed to replace.
- Consistent Page Layouts: One of my clients described navigating the SharePoint sites in her organization as an “adventure.” Every site uses a different structure – for example, some sites have Announcements web parts in the upper left, some in the upper right, some show 10 items and take up way too much screen real estate and some show just the 3 to 5 most recent items. I shudder to think about how an external partner who works with multiple groups in this organization will react when it seems like they are working with 10 companies, not one! Just because you CAN change the organization of the web parts on your site around doesn’t mean you should! Organizations need to build a collection of templates that work for their business and encourage users with design privileges to understand the value of the templates for their end users – creating a balance between “creativity and productivity,” with an emphasis on the latter.
SharePoint is a fantastic end user tool. The “no code” capabilities are a great way to empower end users to create their own collaboration sites, without requiring IT intervention. But, IT can’t just provide basic skills training in the features of SharePoint without also helping site designers learn to master the best practices of site design. Drew tells me that any downhill skier can probably learn to snowboard almost as well as they ski but they have to really devote 3-5 solid days to master the techniques enough to fully enjoy the experience. They clearly can’t be an expert in 3-5 days, but they can certainly have more than just the basics. I think that’s how we have to look at SharePoint training – all site builders need to learn the basic skills first, but then they absolutely have to dedicate enough time to learn the best practices for site design and information architectures or their sites will just not be usable.
Monday, March 31, 2008
FT.com | Tech Blog | Taking aim at Microsoft’s cash cow
FT.com | Tech Blog | Taking aim at Microsoft’s cash cow
Taking aim at Microsoft’s cash cow
Google’s anti-Microsoft strategy continues to unfold. Today brings news that its online Docs applications will soon step beyond the Web and onto the desktop. (This is accomplished with the Google Gears browser plug-in, which lets you access internet applications while offline by using the hard drive as a cache - a company representative offered to “whitelist” me so I can start using it today, but the less privileged among you will have to wait until this feature becomes generally available over “the next few weeks.”)
Google likes to cloak its new product features in uplifting rhetoric: the company only looks to delight its users, it isn’t motivated by the sort of competitive strategy that other companies employ, and so on. But the evolution of Docs has always looked like a very deliberate plan hatched with its Redmond rival in mind.
Early on, CEO Eric Schmidt talked down the capabilities of Docs as a rival for Office: the main attraction was the ability to share documents, spreadsheets and other files over the Web, and anyway browser-based apps were very poor relations of their desktop cousins.
Then, nearly a year ago, the tune changed. Having rounded out Docs into an Office-like suite of apps, Google said it was adding “applications” to its corporate mission statement (alongside search and advertising.) For good measure, Schmidt said that online apps were starting to become a real alternative to desktop software since browser technology had advanced far faster than he had expected (what a surprise!)
Extending Docs offline looks like the next step. Giving users the ability to write, edit or view files while not connected to the Web (any changes are automatically synchronised with the version on Google’s servers once the machine goes online again) removes one of the main disincentives for using Docs.
Google’s leaders have at times given tell-tale hints about the real strategy here. Last year Mr Schmidt conceded that while many companies might not yet consider adopting Google’s applications, they were still likely to use the threat of switching away from Office as a way to get a better deal out of Microsoft. Thanks to the new offline capabilities, this negotitating leverage is about to get stronger.
March 31st, 2008 in Internet, Software | Permalink
Taking aim at Microsoft’s cash cow
Google’s anti-Microsoft strategy continues to unfold. Today brings news that its online Docs applications will soon step beyond the Web and onto the desktop. (This is accomplished with the Google Gears browser plug-in, which lets you access internet applications while offline by using the hard drive as a cache - a company representative offered to “whitelist” me so I can start using it today, but the less privileged among you will have to wait until this feature becomes generally available over “the next few weeks.”)
Google likes to cloak its new product features in uplifting rhetoric: the company only looks to delight its users, it isn’t motivated by the sort of competitive strategy that other companies employ, and so on. But the evolution of Docs has always looked like a very deliberate plan hatched with its Redmond rival in mind.
Early on, CEO Eric Schmidt talked down the capabilities of Docs as a rival for Office: the main attraction was the ability to share documents, spreadsheets and other files over the Web, and anyway browser-based apps were very poor relations of their desktop cousins.
Then, nearly a year ago, the tune changed. Having rounded out Docs into an Office-like suite of apps, Google said it was adding “applications” to its corporate mission statement (alongside search and advertising.) For good measure, Schmidt said that online apps were starting to become a real alternative to desktop software since browser technology had advanced far faster than he had expected (what a surprise!)
Extending Docs offline looks like the next step. Giving users the ability to write, edit or view files while not connected to the Web (any changes are automatically synchronised with the version on Google’s servers once the machine goes online again) removes one of the main disincentives for using Docs.
Google’s leaders have at times given tell-tale hints about the real strategy here. Last year Mr Schmidt conceded that while many companies might not yet consider adopting Google’s applications, they were still likely to use the threat of switching away from Office as a way to get a better deal out of Microsoft. Thanks to the new offline capabilities, this negotitating leverage is about to get stronger.
March 31st, 2008 in Internet, Software | Permalink
Friday, March 28, 2008
Microsoft SharePoint taking business by storm
Versatile Microsoft server may not be perfect, but it is attracting interest as tool to address anything from collaboration to process management
Microsoft's SharePoint Server is on a billion dollar juggernaut to potentially become the next must-have technology, offering companies tools for building everything from collaborative applications to Internet sites and potentially handing Microsoft its next cash cow.
I have not seen anything like this since the early days of [Lotus] Notes," says Mike Gotta, an analyst with the Burton Group. In those days, corporate users were enamored with a shiny new technology that seemed to have infinite uses. "The talk [around SharePoint] is getting strategic now and people are talking about it as a middleware decision," Gotta says.
Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) 2007 is the fastest growing product in the company's history and seems to have as many uses as a Swiss Army knife. Its six focus areas are collaboration, portal, search, enterprise content management (ECM), business process management and business intelligence.(Compare collaboration products.)
Just last month, Microsoft added a hosted alternative to fuel adoption. There is a "perfect storm," observers say, around SharePoint in terms of the popularity of Web-based computing, demand for less-expensive ECM and portal tools, collaboration technology and integration around Microsoft's Office suite.
The attention is a wake up call for competitors, especially IBM/Lotus, as SharePoint could pull customers to other Microsoft software because it is closely integrated with Microsoft's unified communications stack, its e-mail server, Office and Office applications including back-end file sharing repositories for Excel, Word and PowerPoint.
SharePoint was first introduced in 2001 to less than lukewarm reviews as SharePoint Portal Server. In 2003, a stripped down version was offered for free as part of Windows Server 2003 R2, which made it easy for users to test drive the software and soon end-user created team worksites began popping up all over corporate networks.
In 2008, SharePoint has evolved into the prototypical Microsoft tool – good enough for small-to-midsize businesses, adaptable to large enterprises, and, most important, plenty of financial opportunities for third-party independent software vendors and systems integrators.
Partners involved in everything from directory management to archiving to single sign-on are reporting that SharePoint is improving their own revenue.
In March, Bill Gates, Microsoft's chief software architect, said SharePoint had passed 100 million licenses sold, had attracted 17,000 user companies, and eclipsed $1 billion in sales for his company.
Many critics dispute the licensing number but not the message that SharePoint is on fire.
SharePoint, however, isn't without issues that users should consider, including the fact that it does not scale well given the way it stores data in SQL Server, a concern Microsoft is working to answer in the next version likely to ship in 2009.
Or that its social networking tools are considered rudimentary, that SharePoint's portal capabilities still don't measure up to enterprise-class platforms and that the server takes customizations to make it truly sing.
"I think there is going to be some buyer's remorse," Gotta says.
SharePoint does many things, but scaling is not one of them. SharePoint stores everything in SQL Server in what amounts to one universal table, which leads to lots of on-the-wire traffic and a Microsoft recommendation of only 2,000 items per list. By contrast, IBM WebSphere permits hundreds of millions of items per list.
The social networking tools are uninspiring and Microsoft is partnering with NewsGator (feed reader) and Atlassian (wiki) to cover bases, which will lead to inevitable feature clashes as SharePoint evolves.
"Compared to what is out there today, Microsoft's Web 2.0 tools look old and very static and are clunky and difficult to use," says Oliver Young, an analyst with Forrester.
But Young says those limitations and others are speed bumps not show-stoppers.
"I'm not sure I've seen anything that has taken off this big, this quickly. SharePoint 2007 has just blown up," he says.
Late last year, an IDC survey of 300 users found 61% were deploying SharePoint enterprise-wide, and that 28% of those using SharePoint in departments now are expected to expand usage to the enterprise within the next 12 months.
Current users can attest to that transition saying they have persevered from SharePoint's early days to what is now a tactical platform.
In 2006, Brad Marshall, corporate IT director for Bowen Family Homes in Duluth, Ga., backed into SharePoint as part of a hosting deal centered on Microsoft Exchange. Marshall did not like what he had originally seen in Windows SharePoint Services, which offered team workspaces and file sharing for free as part of Windows Server 2003.
But having SharePoint Portal 2003 hosted eliminated some technological limitations and development chores and eventually resulted in a business process workflow application for selling homes that cut up to two days the time it took to do the same process using the old paper-based system.
"We have it down today where in a push we could get it done in less than an hour," Marshall says. The company has built eight to 10 applications on SharePoint, including vacation and performance-review programs.
But Marshall says customizing SharePoint is mandatory and he has used tools from CorasWorks to make that easier.
"If it was just regular, out-of-the-box SharePoint we might not be using it today to be honest," he says.
What's also becoming important are add-ons from partners.
"One of the things we find is people bought SharePoint and they have not figured out the power that is there," says Brian Kellner, vice president of product development for NewsGator. "We help make that more obvious and simple."
Others are building on features that users will need when they begin to harvest that power, such as Symantec with its archiving system, Enterprise Vault.
"In the last year IT has become more aware and more concerned in having a managed approach to SharePoint," says Dave Scott, group product manager for Symantec.
Microsoft for its part compares the popularity of SharePoint with an application that has helped define its success.
"We see tremendous momentum just like Office in the early days when people said this is a new way to work," says Tom Rizzo, director of SharePoint. Consulting firm Accenture has built a Facebook-like SharePoint application to find experts, Ford Motor Co. uses SharePoint for its dealer portal, and the Marines have deployed collaborative applications to aid their efforts in Iraq.
Rizzo says SharePoint has so many entry points for users that Microsoft calls it a business productivity server. He says the next version will show investments in social computing and new features he would not disclose.
"The beauty of SharePoint is that it hits a number of sweet spots," Rizzo says.
It also hits competitors between the eyes.
"I think the most interesting trend to watch for this year and next is how IBM/Lotus reacts to this SharePoint phenomenon," says Harry Wong, CEO and founder of Casahl Technology, which has been helping users migrate either to or from Microsoft and Lotus messaging platforms for years.
Wong says SharePoint is proving to be a powerful leading punch for Microsoft to sell IBM/Lotus users on migration to Exchange and Microsoft's entire slate of collaboration tools.
IBM/Lotus is countering with a similar product called Quickr, and just like Microsoft with Windows SharePoint Services, is giving users a free version to get started.
To be successful, Wong says Lotus has to sell customers on Quickr vs. SharePoint; on Lotus Notes 8 and its Outlook-like interface and integration with Lotus Sametime and Connections; and convince bigger Domino shops the J2EE version of Quickr will provide the scale that SharePoint lacks
"IBM/Lotus has the weapons to defend against Microsoft SharePoint if IBM/Lotus acts quickly and aggressively," he says.
As the battle emerges, it might begin to look like the messaging wars the two fought in the 1990s, but given the breadth of the technology the prize could be much bigger.
Microsoft's SharePoint Server is on a billion dollar juggernaut to potentially become the next must-have technology, offering companies tools for building everything from collaborative applications to Internet sites and potentially handing Microsoft its next cash cow.
I have not seen anything like this since the early days of [Lotus] Notes," says Mike Gotta, an analyst with the Burton Group. In those days, corporate users were enamored with a shiny new technology that seemed to have infinite uses. "The talk [around SharePoint] is getting strategic now and people are talking about it as a middleware decision," Gotta says.
Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) 2007 is the fastest growing product in the company's history and seems to have as many uses as a Swiss Army knife. Its six focus areas are collaboration, portal, search, enterprise content management (ECM), business process management and business intelligence.(Compare collaboration products.)
Just last month, Microsoft added a hosted alternative to fuel adoption. There is a "perfect storm," observers say, around SharePoint in terms of the popularity of Web-based computing, demand for less-expensive ECM and portal tools, collaboration technology and integration around Microsoft's Office suite.
The attention is a wake up call for competitors, especially IBM/Lotus, as SharePoint could pull customers to other Microsoft software because it is closely integrated with Microsoft's unified communications stack, its e-mail server, Office and Office applications including back-end file sharing repositories for Excel, Word and PowerPoint.
SharePoint was first introduced in 2001 to less than lukewarm reviews as SharePoint Portal Server. In 2003, a stripped down version was offered for free as part of Windows Server 2003 R2, which made it easy for users to test drive the software and soon end-user created team worksites began popping up all over corporate networks.
In 2008, SharePoint has evolved into the prototypical Microsoft tool – good enough for small-to-midsize businesses, adaptable to large enterprises, and, most important, plenty of financial opportunities for third-party independent software vendors and systems integrators.
Partners involved in everything from directory management to archiving to single sign-on are reporting that SharePoint is improving their own revenue.
In March, Bill Gates, Microsoft's chief software architect, said SharePoint had passed 100 million licenses sold, had attracted 17,000 user companies, and eclipsed $1 billion in sales for his company.
Many critics dispute the licensing number but not the message that SharePoint is on fire.
SharePoint, however, isn't without issues that users should consider, including the fact that it does not scale well given the way it stores data in SQL Server, a concern Microsoft is working to answer in the next version likely to ship in 2009.
Or that its social networking tools are considered rudimentary, that SharePoint's portal capabilities still don't measure up to enterprise-class platforms and that the server takes customizations to make it truly sing.
"I think there is going to be some buyer's remorse," Gotta says.
SharePoint does many things, but scaling is not one of them. SharePoint stores everything in SQL Server in what amounts to one universal table, which leads to lots of on-the-wire traffic and a Microsoft recommendation of only 2,000 items per list. By contrast, IBM WebSphere permits hundreds of millions of items per list.
The social networking tools are uninspiring and Microsoft is partnering with NewsGator (feed reader) and Atlassian (wiki) to cover bases, which will lead to inevitable feature clashes as SharePoint evolves.
"Compared to what is out there today, Microsoft's Web 2.0 tools look old and very static and are clunky and difficult to use," says Oliver Young, an analyst with Forrester.
But Young says those limitations and others are speed bumps not show-stoppers.
"I'm not sure I've seen anything that has taken off this big, this quickly. SharePoint 2007 has just blown up," he says.
Late last year, an IDC survey of 300 users found 61% were deploying SharePoint enterprise-wide, and that 28% of those using SharePoint in departments now are expected to expand usage to the enterprise within the next 12 months.
Current users can attest to that transition saying they have persevered from SharePoint's early days to what is now a tactical platform.
In 2006, Brad Marshall, corporate IT director for Bowen Family Homes in Duluth, Ga., backed into SharePoint as part of a hosting deal centered on Microsoft Exchange. Marshall did not like what he had originally seen in Windows SharePoint Services, which offered team workspaces and file sharing for free as part of Windows Server 2003.
But having SharePoint Portal 2003 hosted eliminated some technological limitations and development chores and eventually resulted in a business process workflow application for selling homes that cut up to two days the time it took to do the same process using the old paper-based system.
"We have it down today where in a push we could get it done in less than an hour," Marshall says. The company has built eight to 10 applications on SharePoint, including vacation and performance-review programs.
But Marshall says customizing SharePoint is mandatory and he has used tools from CorasWorks to make that easier.
"If it was just regular, out-of-the-box SharePoint we might not be using it today to be honest," he says.
What's also becoming important are add-ons from partners.
"One of the things we find is people bought SharePoint and they have not figured out the power that is there," says Brian Kellner, vice president of product development for NewsGator. "We help make that more obvious and simple."
Others are building on features that users will need when they begin to harvest that power, such as Symantec with its archiving system, Enterprise Vault.
"In the last year IT has become more aware and more concerned in having a managed approach to SharePoint," says Dave Scott, group product manager for Symantec.
Microsoft for its part compares the popularity of SharePoint with an application that has helped define its success.
"We see tremendous momentum just like Office in the early days when people said this is a new way to work," says Tom Rizzo, director of SharePoint. Consulting firm Accenture has built a Facebook-like SharePoint application to find experts, Ford Motor Co. uses SharePoint for its dealer portal, and the Marines have deployed collaborative applications to aid their efforts in Iraq.
Rizzo says SharePoint has so many entry points for users that Microsoft calls it a business productivity server. He says the next version will show investments in social computing and new features he would not disclose.
"The beauty of SharePoint is that it hits a number of sweet spots," Rizzo says.
It also hits competitors between the eyes.
"I think the most interesting trend to watch for this year and next is how IBM/Lotus reacts to this SharePoint phenomenon," says Harry Wong, CEO and founder of Casahl Technology, which has been helping users migrate either to or from Microsoft and Lotus messaging platforms for years.
Wong says SharePoint is proving to be a powerful leading punch for Microsoft to sell IBM/Lotus users on migration to Exchange and Microsoft's entire slate of collaboration tools.
IBM/Lotus is countering with a similar product called Quickr, and just like Microsoft with Windows SharePoint Services, is giving users a free version to get started.
To be successful, Wong says Lotus has to sell customers on Quickr vs. SharePoint; on Lotus Notes 8 and its Outlook-like interface and integration with Lotus Sametime and Connections; and convince bigger Domino shops the J2EE version of Quickr will provide the scale that SharePoint lacks
"IBM/Lotus has the weapons to defend against Microsoft SharePoint if IBM/Lotus acts quickly and aggressively," he says.
As the battle emerges, it might begin to look like the messaging wars the two fought in the 1990s, but given the breadth of the technology the prize could be much bigger.
Will Content Management Be Most Affected By Open Source? - Content Management Blog - InformationWeek
Will Content Management Be Most Affected By Open Source? - Content Management Blog - InformationWeek
Will Content Management Be Most Affected By Open Source?
Posted by George Dearing, Mar 26, 2008 04:35 PM
Some of open source's biggest proponents were probably gloating this week over some results from North Bridge Venture Partners' annual open source survey (PDF). Most of the findings weren't terribly prophetic, but there were a few that caught my eye.
Apparently the respondents singled out the content management market as the segment with the highest chance of being turned upside down within the next five years. The drama, however, is well under way, with a cast of thousands being led by companies such as Alfresco, Acquia, and a cottage industry of solution providers pitching Web platforms like Joomla, DotNetNuke, and Drupal.
Throw in the bevy of SaaS providers delivering content capabilities via cloud computing and you've got even more disruption. Will all these choices add up to more confusion for customers? I doubt it. With Web standards continuing to be ironed out and open source business models maturing quickly, companies can go as commercial (read proprietary or on-premise) or open source as they choose without the dreaded vendor lock-in.
It's pretty clear that the social Web is driving the demand for open source frameworks and with the mindset of "social publishing" continuing to be on Web agendas everywhere, look for community-led expansion and innovation to accelerate.
Smart companies realize the social part of the Web isn't leaving the party anytime soon and have made their demands clear. They want to be their own media companies, creating and distributing content globally on their own terms. If vendors can't provide the tools, they'll find their own.
« Squeezing Costs Out Of IT | Main | Helpstream Helps Those Who Help Themselves »
Will Content Management Be Most Affected By Open Source?
Posted by George Dearing, Mar 26, 2008 04:35 PM
Some of open source's biggest proponents were probably gloating this week over some results from North Bridge Venture Partners' annual open source survey (PDF). Most of the findings weren't terribly prophetic, but there were a few that caught my eye.
Apparently the respondents singled out the content management market as the segment with the highest chance of being turned upside down within the next five years. The drama, however, is well under way, with a cast of thousands being led by companies such as Alfresco, Acquia, and a cottage industry of solution providers pitching Web platforms like Joomla, DotNetNuke, and Drupal.
Throw in the bevy of SaaS providers delivering content capabilities via cloud computing and you've got even more disruption. Will all these choices add up to more confusion for customers? I doubt it. With Web standards continuing to be ironed out and open source business models maturing quickly, companies can go as commercial (read proprietary or on-premise) or open source as they choose without the dreaded vendor lock-in.
It's pretty clear that the social Web is driving the demand for open source frameworks and with the mindset of "social publishing" continuing to be on Web agendas everywhere, look for community-led expansion and innovation to accelerate.
Smart companies realize the social part of the Web isn't leaving the party anytime soon and have made their demands clear. They want to be their own media companies, creating and distributing content globally on their own terms. If vendors can't provide the tools, they'll find their own.
« Squeezing Costs Out Of IT | Main | Helpstream Helps Those Who Help Themselves »
Microsoft Sharepoint wird strategische Plattform und bedrängt IBM - Produkte + Technik - Software - computerwoche.de
Microsoft Sharepoint wird strategische Plattform und bedrängt IBM - Produkte + Technik - Software - computerwoche.de
Microsoft Sharepoint wird strategische Plattform und bedrängt IBM
Seite 1 von 628.03.2008
Mit "Sharepoint Server" liefert Microsoft Unternehmen ein Werkzeug für viele Zwecke, vom Erzeugen kollaborativer Applikationen bis zum Bau von Internet-Sites. Das Produkt dümpelte lange Zeit vor sich hin, könnte sich aber zu einer der wichtigsten Lösungen des Konzerns entwickeln.
Zwar ist Sharepoint nicht neu, doch erst mit der Version 2007 scheint das Produkt so richtig abzuheben. "Ich habe nichts Vergleichbares gesehen, seitdem Lotus Notes auf den Markt gekommen ist", so Mike Gotta, Analyst beim Beratungs- und Marktforschungsunternehmen Burton Group gegenüber der amerikanischen CW-Schwesterzeitschrift "Network World". Als das heutige IBM-Produkt vor vielen Jahren auf den Markt kam, schienen die Möglichkeiten der neuen Technik grenzenlos. Geht es nach dem Analysten, dann zeigen sich Firmen heute vom Microsoft-System begeistert: "Unternehmen messen Sharepoint eine strategische Bedeutung bei und nehmen das Produkt als Middleware wahr", so der Analyst weiter.
Microsoft Sharepoint wird strategische Plattform und bedrängt IBM
Seite 1 von 628.03.2008
Mit "Sharepoint Server" liefert Microsoft Unternehmen ein Werkzeug für viele Zwecke, vom Erzeugen kollaborativer Applikationen bis zum Bau von Internet-Sites. Das Produkt dümpelte lange Zeit vor sich hin, könnte sich aber zu einer der wichtigsten Lösungen des Konzerns entwickeln.
Zwar ist Sharepoint nicht neu, doch erst mit der Version 2007 scheint das Produkt so richtig abzuheben. "Ich habe nichts Vergleichbares gesehen, seitdem Lotus Notes auf den Markt gekommen ist", so Mike Gotta, Analyst beim Beratungs- und Marktforschungsunternehmen Burton Group gegenüber der amerikanischen CW-Schwesterzeitschrift "Network World". Als das heutige IBM-Produkt vor vielen Jahren auf den Markt kam, schienen die Möglichkeiten der neuen Technik grenzenlos. Geht es nach dem Analysten, dann zeigen sich Firmen heute vom Microsoft-System begeistert: "Unternehmen messen Sharepoint eine strategische Bedeutung bei und nehmen das Produkt als Middleware wahr", so der Analyst weiter.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Microsoft SharePoint taking business by storm
Microsoft's SharePoint Server is on a billion-dollar quest to potentially become the next must-have technology, offering companies tools for building everything from collaborative applications to Internet sites and potentially handing Microsoft its next cash cow.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 [Computerwoche Wiki]
Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 [Computerwoche Wiki]
Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 (MOSS) ist eine datenbankbasierte Plattform mit der sich robuste, webbasierte Zusammenarbeits-, Intranet-, Extranet- oder Internetportale realisieren lassen.
Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 (MOSS) ist eine datenbankbasierte Plattform mit der sich robuste, webbasierte Zusammenarbeits-, Intranet-, Extranet- oder Internetportale realisieren lassen.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Media Cos. Battle Web Portals on Ads - Forbes.com
Media Cos. Battle Web Portals on Ads - Forbes.com
NEW YORK - Traditional media companies trying to stem the flow of advertising dollars to Google and other large Internet companies are increasingly building ad networks of their own, anchored by their brands.
NEW YORK - Traditional media companies trying to stem the flow of advertising dollars to Google and other large Internet companies are increasingly building ad networks of their own, anchored by their brands.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Nedstat partnership
Nedstat partnership
SDL Tridion today announces it has signed a formal partnership with Nedstat, European leader in web analytics. The partnership includes an integrated tag management approach for SDL Tridion R5.3 and Sitestat, the core web analytics product of Nedstat. The integrated web analytics software is called the ‘Sitestat Enabler’.
SDL Tridion today announces it has signed a formal partnership with Nedstat, European leader in web analytics. The partnership includes an integrated tag management approach for SDL Tridion R5.3 and Sitestat, the core web analytics product of Nedstat. The integrated web analytics software is called the ‘Sitestat Enabler’.
Monday, March 17, 2008
FT.com / Technology - A bright future in the cloud
FT.com / Technology - A bright future in the cloud
A bright future in the cloud
By Shane Robison
Published: March 4 2008 17:36 | Last updated: March 4 2008 17:36
Nicholas Carr is right – the future of computing lies in the internet cloud. The technology industry is shifting to a new model in which people and businesses no longer install packaged software applications on their computers. Instead, they use their web browsers to access a wide range of “cloud services”, available on demand over the internet.
Without question, this marks an exciting new era in computing.
But there is a risk of over-simplifying this picture. The “cloud” itself – a vast data-processing infrastructure – represents a critical foundational piece. But on its own, it cannot deliver the rich experience that people and companies want as they look for a better way to access information, enjoy content, and communicate.
To realise the full potential of this new model, the IT industry needs to think about the cloud as a platform for creating new services and experiences that we have yet to imagine.
For example, cloud services could eveolve that are intelligent enough to anticipate people’s needs. In this next phase, searching will be done for users, not by them. This would be accompanied by a seamless, consistent experience across all of the different devices users own, and all the on-demand services they care about.
This leaves the IT industry with a lot of hard work to do. It requires a new set of core building blocks to deliver this new category of services; it needs smarter devices and more intelligent networks; and software will be the “secret sauce” that powers these new services and shapes the quality of the user experience.
The power of the cloud happens when there is continuous interaction between a device – smartphone, laptop, TV – and the network. A simple example: it is 2pm and your calendar shows you are booked on a flight to Toronto at 6pm. Your device should anticipate this trip and gather relevant information – weather forecast for the Toronto area, status update on the flight, recommended route to the airport based on latest traffic conditions, and so on. In this scenario, the step forward is the pervasive, proactive and personalised nature of cloud services.
Some may say they heard this during the 1990s internet bubble but at that time it was not possible to use the internet as a platform for anything more than static pages. Broadband changes all that but brings us to the need for a higher level of intelligence built into devices and networks, and the software that ties everything together.
Nicholas Carr correctly points out that the shift to cloud computing will dramatically reduce the cost of IT. But this shift goes far beyond cost savings; it marks a quantum-leap in the user experience.
Much attention so far has focused on software as a service, a proven model for making software applications available on demand over the internet – it frees customers from the expense and hassle of having to install and maintain applications locally.
But Saas is the tip of the iceberg. In the future, everything will be delivered as a service, from work life to entertainment to communities. In an “Everything as a service” world individuals and businesses will customise their computing environments and shape their experiences – from individual consumers to the largest global enterprises, which will increasingly turn to dynamic cloud-based offerings to meet their most demanding computing requirements.
As we approach the tipping point where computing moves into the cloud, there are five trends I believe worthy of close attention:
1. The digital world will converge with the physical world: Starting in about 1995, the mantra was, “Everything is virtual. Geography is irrelevant”. But from 2008, factors such as your physical location will mean a lot. Cloud services will be increasingly aware of context, down to details such as time, weather, where a user is headed, and which friends or business colleagues are nearby.
2. The era of device-centric computing is over. Connectivity-centric computing will take centre stage. The question “When am I going to get that one device that does everything I can imagine?” will be flipped on its head as any number of devices will provide easy access to all services and content. Devices become interchangeable, with cloud services becoming the focal point.
3. Publishing will be democratised. A global internet population of 1.2bn people now has the tools to produce everything from books and magazines to music and videos. This represents a massive disruption of old publishing models. People will soon be able to print on demand any book ever published; warehouses of physical inventory in the publishing world will no longer be necessary.
4. Crowd-sourcing is going mainstream. Fortune 50 companies will access top talent on a global basis via the internet, saving millions of dollars in professional areas as diverse as accountants, advertising professionals, attorneys, engineers, etc. Reputation systems will lower the risks involved by exposing poor performers.
5. Enterprises will use radically different tools to make key business decisions, including systems to predict the future. A merger is taking place between the structured data that fuels business intelligence and the unstructured data of the web. This combination will advance business intelligence. At the same time, market-based systems enabling accurate predictions of the future will become common practice in the enterprise.
By moving from the desktop to the cloud, we have an opportunity to reshape the computing industry and, more importantly, create more dynamic services that enrich lives and improve how we do business.
To realise this potential, we must innovate by building a higher level of intelligence into the next generation of devices, networks and software. When we are successful in providing a dramatically better user experience, we will be poised for the next wave of growth.
Shane Robison is executive vice president, chief strategy and technology officer, HP
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
A bright future in the cloud
By Shane Robison
Published: March 4 2008 17:36 | Last updated: March 4 2008 17:36
Nicholas Carr is right – the future of computing lies in the internet cloud. The technology industry is shifting to a new model in which people and businesses no longer install packaged software applications on their computers. Instead, they use their web browsers to access a wide range of “cloud services”, available on demand over the internet.
Without question, this marks an exciting new era in computing.
But there is a risk of over-simplifying this picture. The “cloud” itself – a vast data-processing infrastructure – represents a critical foundational piece. But on its own, it cannot deliver the rich experience that people and companies want as they look for a better way to access information, enjoy content, and communicate.
To realise the full potential of this new model, the IT industry needs to think about the cloud as a platform for creating new services and experiences that we have yet to imagine.
For example, cloud services could eveolve that are intelligent enough to anticipate people’s needs. In this next phase, searching will be done for users, not by them. This would be accompanied by a seamless, consistent experience across all of the different devices users own, and all the on-demand services they care about.
This leaves the IT industry with a lot of hard work to do. It requires a new set of core building blocks to deliver this new category of services; it needs smarter devices and more intelligent networks; and software will be the “secret sauce” that powers these new services and shapes the quality of the user experience.
The power of the cloud happens when there is continuous interaction between a device – smartphone, laptop, TV – and the network. A simple example: it is 2pm and your calendar shows you are booked on a flight to Toronto at 6pm. Your device should anticipate this trip and gather relevant information – weather forecast for the Toronto area, status update on the flight, recommended route to the airport based on latest traffic conditions, and so on. In this scenario, the step forward is the pervasive, proactive and personalised nature of cloud services.
Some may say they heard this during the 1990s internet bubble but at that time it was not possible to use the internet as a platform for anything more than static pages. Broadband changes all that but brings us to the need for a higher level of intelligence built into devices and networks, and the software that ties everything together.
Nicholas Carr correctly points out that the shift to cloud computing will dramatically reduce the cost of IT. But this shift goes far beyond cost savings; it marks a quantum-leap in the user experience.
Much attention so far has focused on software as a service, a proven model for making software applications available on demand over the internet – it frees customers from the expense and hassle of having to install and maintain applications locally.
But Saas is the tip of the iceberg. In the future, everything will be delivered as a service, from work life to entertainment to communities. In an “Everything as a service” world individuals and businesses will customise their computing environments and shape their experiences – from individual consumers to the largest global enterprises, which will increasingly turn to dynamic cloud-based offerings to meet their most demanding computing requirements.
As we approach the tipping point where computing moves into the cloud, there are five trends I believe worthy of close attention:
1. The digital world will converge with the physical world: Starting in about 1995, the mantra was, “Everything is virtual. Geography is irrelevant”. But from 2008, factors such as your physical location will mean a lot. Cloud services will be increasingly aware of context, down to details such as time, weather, where a user is headed, and which friends or business colleagues are nearby.
2. The era of device-centric computing is over. Connectivity-centric computing will take centre stage. The question “When am I going to get that one device that does everything I can imagine?” will be flipped on its head as any number of devices will provide easy access to all services and content. Devices become interchangeable, with cloud services becoming the focal point.
3. Publishing will be democratised. A global internet population of 1.2bn people now has the tools to produce everything from books and magazines to music and videos. This represents a massive disruption of old publishing models. People will soon be able to print on demand any book ever published; warehouses of physical inventory in the publishing world will no longer be necessary.
4. Crowd-sourcing is going mainstream. Fortune 50 companies will access top talent on a global basis via the internet, saving millions of dollars in professional areas as diverse as accountants, advertising professionals, attorneys, engineers, etc. Reputation systems will lower the risks involved by exposing poor performers.
5. Enterprises will use radically different tools to make key business decisions, including systems to predict the future. A merger is taking place between the structured data that fuels business intelligence and the unstructured data of the web. This combination will advance business intelligence. At the same time, market-based systems enabling accurate predictions of the future will become common practice in the enterprise.
By moving from the desktop to the cloud, we have an opportunity to reshape the computing industry and, more importantly, create more dynamic services that enrich lives and improve how we do business.
To realise this potential, we must innovate by building a higher level of intelligence into the next generation of devices, networks and software. When we are successful in providing a dramatically better user experience, we will be poised for the next wave of growth.
Shane Robison is executive vice president, chief strategy and technology officer, HP
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Gartner Magic Quadrant Reports for Portals & Social Software
Gartner Magic Quadrant Reports for Portals & Social Software
Research Report:
Gartner Magic Quadrant Reports for Portals & Social Software
Gartner - the world's leading information technology research and advisory company, published two new Magic Quadrant Reports:
Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portal Products, 2007
Magic Quadrant for Team Collaboration and Social Software, 2007
BEA Systems has been positioned in the “leaders” quadrant of the Horizontal Portal Products 2007 Magic Quadrant report. Leaders “have a full range of capabilities to support all portal deployment scenarios, and have demonstrated consistent product delivery over a considerable period to meet customer needs, significant product innovation and continued success in selling to new customers.”
BEA provides a broad range of application and portal infrastructure services that are designed to simplify development and management of portal solutions, and help improve user effectiveness. In addition, BEA is one of the most innovative vendors, and continues to aggressively introduce new technologies in support of emerging customer needs, providing the best-of-breed portal solutions and user experience.
The second report, Team Collaboration and Social Software 2007 Magic Quadrant, was published for the first time ever and covers new Web 2.0 technology initiatives and vendors.
BEA has a long tradition of providing excellent portal and collaboration solutions and now became one of the pioneers in the Web 2.0 space. Our recent products, AquaLogic Ensemble, Pages and Pathways provide cutting-edge solutions for creating mashups, blogs, wikis, content tagging and much more.
Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portal Products, 2007
http://bea.com/content/news_events/white_papers/BEA_Gartner_MQ_Horizontal_Portals_2007.pdf
Magic Quadrant for Team Collaboration and Social Software, 2007
http://bea.com/content/news_events/white_papers/BEA_Gartner_MQ_Collab_and_Social_Software_2007.pdf
Research Report:
Gartner Magic Quadrant Reports for Portals & Social Software
Gartner - the world's leading information technology research and advisory company, published two new Magic Quadrant Reports:
Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portal Products, 2007
Magic Quadrant for Team Collaboration and Social Software, 2007
BEA Systems has been positioned in the “leaders” quadrant of the Horizontal Portal Products 2007 Magic Quadrant report. Leaders “have a full range of capabilities to support all portal deployment scenarios, and have demonstrated consistent product delivery over a considerable period to meet customer needs, significant product innovation and continued success in selling to new customers.”
BEA provides a broad range of application and portal infrastructure services that are designed to simplify development and management of portal solutions, and help improve user effectiveness. In addition, BEA is one of the most innovative vendors, and continues to aggressively introduce new technologies in support of emerging customer needs, providing the best-of-breed portal solutions and user experience.
The second report, Team Collaboration and Social Software 2007 Magic Quadrant, was published for the first time ever and covers new Web 2.0 technology initiatives and vendors.
BEA has a long tradition of providing excellent portal and collaboration solutions and now became one of the pioneers in the Web 2.0 space. Our recent products, AquaLogic Ensemble, Pages and Pathways provide cutting-edge solutions for creating mashups, blogs, wikis, content tagging and much more.
Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portal Products, 2007
http://bea.com/content/news_events/white_papers/BEA_Gartner_MQ_Horizontal_Portals_2007.pdf
Magic Quadrant for Team Collaboration and Social Software, 2007
http://bea.com/content/news_events/white_papers/BEA_Gartner_MQ_Collab_and_Social_Software_2007.pdf
Monday, March 10, 2008
FT.com / Companies / Media & internet - Microsoft learns to love the net
FT.com / Companies / Media & internet - Microsoft learns to love the net
Microsoft learns to love the net
By Richard Waters in San Francisco
Published: March 9 2008 22:03 | Last updated: March 9 2008 22:03
It is nearly 2½ years since Bill Gates warned that a “services wave” was about to break on the internet that would be highly disruptive to established technology companies such as Microsoft.
The man he put in charge of devising a response to that technological sea-change now says the results of this long-awaited push, which amount to an fundamental overhaul of Microsoft’s business, are about to come into focus.
That it has taken Ray Ozzie this long to feel confident enough to promise that changes are at hand – the actual results are still under wraps and will become clear only in the coming months – is a testament to the difficulty of turning around a behemoth such as Microsoft.
“When I came in I saw a lot of things still focused on the enterprise, a lot of things still focused on the desktop, that I really wanted to change,” said Mr Ozzie, who arrived at the company three years ago and was later named chief software architect. “But the problem was that a lot of the company was still occupied in shipping the existing products they were working on.”
It was only after the latest versions of Windows and Office, Microsoft’s biggest cash-cows, were completed in late 2006 that the real planning could even begin on a new generation of products and services designed around the internet. “You’ll see many pieces this year, and you’ll continue to see things happen beyond that,” Mr Ozzie said.
So what does Microsoft have up its sleeve?
Central to its internet push is the extension of its existing computing platform, which currently resides on desktop PCs and servers, to the internet. As Mr Ozzie says: “Essentially, Microsoft’s a platform company.” It is the many developers who write programs to run on its software who account for its entrenched position.
The company’s new internet platform will rest on hardware (the new data centres it has been racing to build) and software (a new range of services, such as storage and processing delivered over the internet). One of those software services – an online version of the SQL database – was announced last week, but the main push is expected to be unveiled at the company’s developer conference in October.
“I assume that some number of years from now most major enterprises and many independent developers will be running their services in our data centres,” Mr Ozzie said. “They will, because there aren’t many people who have the capacity and the number of business reasons we have to build out that infrastructure.”
While Microsoft doubled its data centre capacity last year, though, Mr Ozzie ruled out a “step function” that would involve bringing a vast new bank of computing power on stream at one time. “It would be kind of insane to build too far ahead of what you need – you would buy hardware that was outdated by the time it was deployed,” he said. Also, the sheer difficulty of creating reliable internet services made it sensible to move slowly.
“If you look at any of the companies that have been experimenting with service delivery, and infrastructure for service delivery, you realise very quickly that you can take people’s businesses down by not having the right service quality of the right architecture at the back end,” he said. “There are no delays here. We want to be a long-term player.”
Meanwhile, consumers are also likely to see new services in the coming months as Microsoft extends its computing platform to the internet.
The most intriguing hint Mr Ozzie dropped last week was for something he termed a “device mesh”. To judge by comments by him and others familiar with Microsoft’s thinking, this would provide a way for consumers to link all of their computing devices over the internet – such as their PCs, smartphones, games consoles – so that personal data can be accessed from any of them.
The company has already registered internet address www.mesh.com, and is understood to be planning to use this as a location where consumers will be able to go to register their devices for the new services and set the levels of information they want to access from different places.
It is with new services such as these that Microsoft hopes finally to prove that it can turn the internet to its advantage, rather than seeing it as a disruptive threat to its existing businesses.
“Any time in my entire career that I have been through a technology transition – every single time someone was afraid of one of those technology transitions cannibalising [their existing business],” Mr Ozzie said. “If you think about it the right way it ends up in net growth. It doesn’t mean the old thing doesn’t change, it transforms in some way, shape or form.”
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
Microsoft learns to love the net
By Richard Waters in San Francisco
Published: March 9 2008 22:03 | Last updated: March 9 2008 22:03
It is nearly 2½ years since Bill Gates warned that a “services wave” was about to break on the internet that would be highly disruptive to established technology companies such as Microsoft.
The man he put in charge of devising a response to that technological sea-change now says the results of this long-awaited push, which amount to an fundamental overhaul of Microsoft’s business, are about to come into focus.
That it has taken Ray Ozzie this long to feel confident enough to promise that changes are at hand – the actual results are still under wraps and will become clear only in the coming months – is a testament to the difficulty of turning around a behemoth such as Microsoft.
“When I came in I saw a lot of things still focused on the enterprise, a lot of things still focused on the desktop, that I really wanted to change,” said Mr Ozzie, who arrived at the company three years ago and was later named chief software architect. “But the problem was that a lot of the company was still occupied in shipping the existing products they were working on.”
It was only after the latest versions of Windows and Office, Microsoft’s biggest cash-cows, were completed in late 2006 that the real planning could even begin on a new generation of products and services designed around the internet. “You’ll see many pieces this year, and you’ll continue to see things happen beyond that,” Mr Ozzie said.
So what does Microsoft have up its sleeve?
Central to its internet push is the extension of its existing computing platform, which currently resides on desktop PCs and servers, to the internet. As Mr Ozzie says: “Essentially, Microsoft’s a platform company.” It is the many developers who write programs to run on its software who account for its entrenched position.
The company’s new internet platform will rest on hardware (the new data centres it has been racing to build) and software (a new range of services, such as storage and processing delivered over the internet). One of those software services – an online version of the SQL database – was announced last week, but the main push is expected to be unveiled at the company’s developer conference in October.
“I assume that some number of years from now most major enterprises and many independent developers will be running their services in our data centres,” Mr Ozzie said. “They will, because there aren’t many people who have the capacity and the number of business reasons we have to build out that infrastructure.”
While Microsoft doubled its data centre capacity last year, though, Mr Ozzie ruled out a “step function” that would involve bringing a vast new bank of computing power on stream at one time. “It would be kind of insane to build too far ahead of what you need – you would buy hardware that was outdated by the time it was deployed,” he said. Also, the sheer difficulty of creating reliable internet services made it sensible to move slowly.
“If you look at any of the companies that have been experimenting with service delivery, and infrastructure for service delivery, you realise very quickly that you can take people’s businesses down by not having the right service quality of the right architecture at the back end,” he said. “There are no delays here. We want to be a long-term player.”
Meanwhile, consumers are also likely to see new services in the coming months as Microsoft extends its computing platform to the internet.
The most intriguing hint Mr Ozzie dropped last week was for something he termed a “device mesh”. To judge by comments by him and others familiar with Microsoft’s thinking, this would provide a way for consumers to link all of their computing devices over the internet – such as their PCs, smartphones, games consoles – so that personal data can be accessed from any of them.
The company has already registered internet address www.mesh.com, and is understood to be planning to use this as a location where consumers will be able to go to register their devices for the new services and set the levels of information they want to access from different places.
It is with new services such as these that Microsoft hopes finally to prove that it can turn the internet to its advantage, rather than seeing it as a disruptive threat to its existing businesses.
“Any time in my entire career that I have been through a technology transition – every single time someone was afraid of one of those technology transitions cannibalising [their existing business],” Mr Ozzie said. “If you think about it the right way it ends up in net growth. It doesn’t mean the old thing doesn’t change, it transforms in some way, shape or form.”
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
Friday, March 07, 2008
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Monitor | The battle for Wikipedia's soul | Economist.com
Monitor | The battle for Wikipedia's soul | Economist.com
Monitor
The battle for Wikipedia's soul
Mar 6th 2008
From The Economist print edition
The internet: The popular online encyclopedia, written by volunteer contributors, has unlimited space. So does it matter if it includes trivia?
IT IS the biggest encyclopedia in history and the most successful example of “user-generated content” on the internet, with over 9m articles in 250 languages contributed by volunteers collaborating online. But Wikipedia is facing an identity crisis as it is torn between two alternative futures. It can either strive to encompass every aspect of human knowledge, no matter how trivial; or it can adopt a more stringent editorial policy and ban articles on trivial subjects, in the hope that this will enhance its reputation as a trustworthy and credible reference source. These two conflicting visions are at the heart of a bitter struggle inside Wikipedia between “inclusionists”, who believe that applying strict editorial criteria will dampen contributors' enthusiasm for the project, and “deletionists” who argue that Wikipedia should be more cautious and selective about its entries.
Consider the fictional characters of Pokémon, the Japanese game franchise with a huge global following, for example. Almost 500 of them have biographies on the English-language version of Wikipedia (the largest edition, with over 2m entries), with a level of detail that many real characters would envy. But search for biographies of the leaders of the Solidarity movement in Poland, and you would find no more than a dozen—and they are rather poorly edited.
Inclusionists believe that the disparity between Pokémon and Solidarity biographies would disappear by itself, if only Wikipedia loosened its relatively tight editorial control and allowed anyone to add articles about almost anything. They argue that since Wikipedia exists online, it should not have the space constraints of a physical encyclopedia imposed upon it artificially. (“Wikipedia is not paper”, runs one slogan of the inclusionists.)
Surely there is no harm, they argue, in including articles about characters from television programmes who only appear in a single episode, say? After all, since most people access Wikipedia pages via search, the inclusion of articles on niche topics will not inconvenience them. People will not be more inclined to create entries about Polish union leaders if the number of Pokémon entries is reduced from 500 to 200. The ideal Wikipedia of the inclusionists would feature as many articles on as many subjects as its contributors were able to produce, as long as they were of interest to more than just a few users.
Deletionists believe that Wikipedia will be more successful if it maintains a certain relevance and quality threshold for its entries. So their ideal Wikipedia might contain biographies of the five most important leaders of Solidarity, say, and the five most important Pokémon characters, but any more than that would dilute Wikipedia's quality and compromise the brand. The presence of so many articles on trivial subjects, they argue, makes it less likely that Wikipedia will be taken seriously, so articles dealing with trivial subjects should be deleted.
The rules of the game
In practice, deciding what is trivial and what is important is not easy. How do you draw editorial distinctions between an article entitled “List of nicknames used by George W. Bush” (status: kept) and one about “Vice-presidents who have shot people” (status: deleted)? Or how about “Natasha Demkina: Russian girl who claims to have X-ray vision” (status: kept) and “The role of clowns in modern society” (status: deleted)?
To measure a subject's worthiness for inclusion (or “notability”, in the jargon of Wikipedians), all kinds of rules have been devised. So an article in an international journal counts more than a mention in a local newspaper; ten matches on Google is better than one match; and so on. These rules are used to devise official policies on particular subjects, such as the notability of pornographic stars (a Playboy appearance earns you a Wikipedia mention; starring in a low-budget movie does not) or diplomats (permanent chiefs of station are notable, while chargés d'affaires ad interim are not).
Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, has himself fallen foul of these tricky notability criteria. Last summer he created a short entry about a restaurant in South Africa where he had dined. The entry was promptly nominated for deletion, since the restaurant had a poor Google profile and was therefore considered not notable enough. After a lot of controversy and media coverage (which, ahem, increased the restaurant's notability), the entry was kept, but the episode prompted many questions about the adequacy of the editorial process.
As things stand, decisions whether to keep or delete articles are made after deliberations by Wikipedia's most ardent editors and administrators (the 1,000 or so most active Wikipedia contributors). Imagine you have just created a new entry, consisting of a few words. If a member of the Wikipedia elite believes that your submission fails to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, it may be nominated for “speedy” deletion—in other words, removed right away—or “regular” deletion, which means the entry is removed after five days if nobody objects. (To avoid deletion or vandalism, many highly controversial articles, such as the entries on the Holocaust, Islam, terrorism or Mr Bush, can be “locked” to prevent editing or removal.)
If your article is selected for deletion, you may choose to contest the decision, in which case you may be asked to provide further information. There is also a higher authority with the ultimate power to rule in controversial cases: the Arbitration Committee, which settles disputes that the administrators cannot resolve.
Debates about the merits of articles often drag on for weeks, draining energy and taking up far more space than the entries themselves. Such deliberations involve volleys of arcane internal acronyms and references to obscure policies and guidelines, such as WP:APT (“Avoid Peacock Terms”—terms that merely promote the subject, without giving real information) and WP:MOSMAC (a set of guidelines for “Wikipedia articles discussing the Republic of Macedonia and the Province of Macedonia, Greece”). Covert alliances and intrigues are common. Sometimes editors resort to a practice called “sock puppetry”, in which one person creates lots of accounts and pretends to be several different people in a debate so as to create the illusion of support for a particular position.
The result is that novices can quickly get lost in Wikipedia's Kafkaesque bureaucracy. According to one estimate from 2006, entries about governance and editorial policies are one of the fastest-growing areas of the site and represent around one-quarter of its content. In some ways this is a sign of Wikipedia's maturity and importance: a project of this scale needs rules to govern how it works. But the proliferation of rules, and the fact that select Wikipedians have learnt how to handle them to win arguments, now represents a danger, says Andrew Lih, a former deletionist who is now an inclusionist, and who is writing a book about Wikipedia. The behaviour of Wikipedia's self-appointed deletionist guardians, who excise anything that does not meet their standards, justifying their actions with a blizzard of acronyms, is now known as “wiki-lawyering”.
Mr Lih and other inclusionists worry that this deters people from contributing to Wikipedia, and that the welcoming environment of Wikipedia's early days is giving way to hostility and infighting. There is already some evidence that the growth rate of Wikipedia's article-base is slowing. Unofficial data from October 2007 suggests that users' activity on the site is falling, when measured by the number of times an article is edited and the number of edits per month. The official figures have not been gathered and made public for almost a year, perhaps because they reveal some unpleasant truths about Wikipedia's health.
It may be that Wikipedians have already taken care of the “low-hanging fruit”, having compiled articles on the most obvious topics (though this could, again, be taken as evidence of Wikipedia's maturity). But there is a limit to how much information a group of predominantly non-specialist volunteers, armed with a search engine, can create and edit. Producing articles about specialist subjects such as Solidarity activists, as opposed to Pokémon characters, requires expert knowledge from contributors and editors. If the information is not available elsewhere on the web, its notability cannot be assessed using Google.
To create a new article on Wikipedia and be sure that it will survive, you need to be able to write a “deletionist-proof” entry and ensure that you have enough online backing (such as Google matches) to convince the increasingly picky Wikipedia people of its importance. This raises the threshold for writing articles so high that very few people actually do it. Many who are excited about contributing to the site end up on the “Missing Wikipedians” page: a constantly updated list of those who have decided to stop contributing. It serves as a reminder that frustration at having work removed prompts many people to abandon the project.
Google has recently announced its own entry into the field, in the form of an encyclopedia-like project called “Knol” that will allow anybody to create entries on topics of their choice, with a voting system that means the best rise to the top. Tellingly, this approach is based on individualism rather than collaboration (Google will share ad revenues with the authors). No doubt it will produce its own arguments and unexpected consequences. But even if it does not turn out to be the Wikipedia-killer that some people imagine, it may push Wikipedia to rethink its editorial stance.
Monitor
The battle for Wikipedia's soul
Mar 6th 2008
From The Economist print edition
The internet: The popular online encyclopedia, written by volunteer contributors, has unlimited space. So does it matter if it includes trivia?
IT IS the biggest encyclopedia in history and the most successful example of “user-generated content” on the internet, with over 9m articles in 250 languages contributed by volunteers collaborating online. But Wikipedia is facing an identity crisis as it is torn between two alternative futures. It can either strive to encompass every aspect of human knowledge, no matter how trivial; or it can adopt a more stringent editorial policy and ban articles on trivial subjects, in the hope that this will enhance its reputation as a trustworthy and credible reference source. These two conflicting visions are at the heart of a bitter struggle inside Wikipedia between “inclusionists”, who believe that applying strict editorial criteria will dampen contributors' enthusiasm for the project, and “deletionists” who argue that Wikipedia should be more cautious and selective about its entries.
Consider the fictional characters of Pokémon, the Japanese game franchise with a huge global following, for example. Almost 500 of them have biographies on the English-language version of Wikipedia (the largest edition, with over 2m entries), with a level of detail that many real characters would envy. But search for biographies of the leaders of the Solidarity movement in Poland, and you would find no more than a dozen—and they are rather poorly edited.
Inclusionists believe that the disparity between Pokémon and Solidarity biographies would disappear by itself, if only Wikipedia loosened its relatively tight editorial control and allowed anyone to add articles about almost anything. They argue that since Wikipedia exists online, it should not have the space constraints of a physical encyclopedia imposed upon it artificially. (“Wikipedia is not paper”, runs one slogan of the inclusionists.)
Surely there is no harm, they argue, in including articles about characters from television programmes who only appear in a single episode, say? After all, since most people access Wikipedia pages via search, the inclusion of articles on niche topics will not inconvenience them. People will not be more inclined to create entries about Polish union leaders if the number of Pokémon entries is reduced from 500 to 200. The ideal Wikipedia of the inclusionists would feature as many articles on as many subjects as its contributors were able to produce, as long as they were of interest to more than just a few users.
Deletionists believe that Wikipedia will be more successful if it maintains a certain relevance and quality threshold for its entries. So their ideal Wikipedia might contain biographies of the five most important leaders of Solidarity, say, and the five most important Pokémon characters, but any more than that would dilute Wikipedia's quality and compromise the brand. The presence of so many articles on trivial subjects, they argue, makes it less likely that Wikipedia will be taken seriously, so articles dealing with trivial subjects should be deleted.
The rules of the game
In practice, deciding what is trivial and what is important is not easy. How do you draw editorial distinctions between an article entitled “List of nicknames used by George W. Bush” (status: kept) and one about “Vice-presidents who have shot people” (status: deleted)? Or how about “Natasha Demkina: Russian girl who claims to have X-ray vision” (status: kept) and “The role of clowns in modern society” (status: deleted)?
To measure a subject's worthiness for inclusion (or “notability”, in the jargon of Wikipedians), all kinds of rules have been devised. So an article in an international journal counts more than a mention in a local newspaper; ten matches on Google is better than one match; and so on. These rules are used to devise official policies on particular subjects, such as the notability of pornographic stars (a Playboy appearance earns you a Wikipedia mention; starring in a low-budget movie does not) or diplomats (permanent chiefs of station are notable, while chargés d'affaires ad interim are not).
Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, has himself fallen foul of these tricky notability criteria. Last summer he created a short entry about a restaurant in South Africa where he had dined. The entry was promptly nominated for deletion, since the restaurant had a poor Google profile and was therefore considered not notable enough. After a lot of controversy and media coverage (which, ahem, increased the restaurant's notability), the entry was kept, but the episode prompted many questions about the adequacy of the editorial process.
As things stand, decisions whether to keep or delete articles are made after deliberations by Wikipedia's most ardent editors and administrators (the 1,000 or so most active Wikipedia contributors). Imagine you have just created a new entry, consisting of a few words. If a member of the Wikipedia elite believes that your submission fails to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, it may be nominated for “speedy” deletion—in other words, removed right away—or “regular” deletion, which means the entry is removed after five days if nobody objects. (To avoid deletion or vandalism, many highly controversial articles, such as the entries on the Holocaust, Islam, terrorism or Mr Bush, can be “locked” to prevent editing or removal.)
If your article is selected for deletion, you may choose to contest the decision, in which case you may be asked to provide further information. There is also a higher authority with the ultimate power to rule in controversial cases: the Arbitration Committee, which settles disputes that the administrators cannot resolve.
Debates about the merits of articles often drag on for weeks, draining energy and taking up far more space than the entries themselves. Such deliberations involve volleys of arcane internal acronyms and references to obscure policies and guidelines, such as WP:APT (“Avoid Peacock Terms”—terms that merely promote the subject, without giving real information) and WP:MOSMAC (a set of guidelines for “Wikipedia articles discussing the Republic of Macedonia and the Province of Macedonia, Greece”). Covert alliances and intrigues are common. Sometimes editors resort to a practice called “sock puppetry”, in which one person creates lots of accounts and pretends to be several different people in a debate so as to create the illusion of support for a particular position.
The result is that novices can quickly get lost in Wikipedia's Kafkaesque bureaucracy. According to one estimate from 2006, entries about governance and editorial policies are one of the fastest-growing areas of the site and represent around one-quarter of its content. In some ways this is a sign of Wikipedia's maturity and importance: a project of this scale needs rules to govern how it works. But the proliferation of rules, and the fact that select Wikipedians have learnt how to handle them to win arguments, now represents a danger, says Andrew Lih, a former deletionist who is now an inclusionist, and who is writing a book about Wikipedia. The behaviour of Wikipedia's self-appointed deletionist guardians, who excise anything that does not meet their standards, justifying their actions with a blizzard of acronyms, is now known as “wiki-lawyering”.
Mr Lih and other inclusionists worry that this deters people from contributing to Wikipedia, and that the welcoming environment of Wikipedia's early days is giving way to hostility and infighting. There is already some evidence that the growth rate of Wikipedia's article-base is slowing. Unofficial data from October 2007 suggests that users' activity on the site is falling, when measured by the number of times an article is edited and the number of edits per month. The official figures have not been gathered and made public for almost a year, perhaps because they reveal some unpleasant truths about Wikipedia's health.
It may be that Wikipedians have already taken care of the “low-hanging fruit”, having compiled articles on the most obvious topics (though this could, again, be taken as evidence of Wikipedia's maturity). But there is a limit to how much information a group of predominantly non-specialist volunteers, armed with a search engine, can create and edit. Producing articles about specialist subjects such as Solidarity activists, as opposed to Pokémon characters, requires expert knowledge from contributors and editors. If the information is not available elsewhere on the web, its notability cannot be assessed using Google.
To create a new article on Wikipedia and be sure that it will survive, you need to be able to write a “deletionist-proof” entry and ensure that you have enough online backing (such as Google matches) to convince the increasingly picky Wikipedia people of its importance. This raises the threshold for writing articles so high that very few people actually do it. Many who are excited about contributing to the site end up on the “Missing Wikipedians” page: a constantly updated list of those who have decided to stop contributing. It serves as a reminder that frustration at having work removed prompts many people to abandon the project.
Google has recently announced its own entry into the field, in the form of an encyclopedia-like project called “Knol” that will allow anybody to create entries on topics of their choice, with a voting system that means the best rise to the top. Tellingly, this approach is based on individualism rather than collaboration (Google will share ad revenues with the authors). No doubt it will produce its own arguments and unexpected consequences. But even if it does not turn out to be the Wikipedia-killer that some people imagine, it may push Wikipedia to rethink its editorial stance.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Erweiterte Open Text-Lösung beschleunigt Social Computing und Collaboration unternehmensweit
Erweiterte Open Text-Lösung beschleunigt Social Computing und Collaboration unternehmensweit
Open Text, globaler Anbieter im Enterprise Content Management (ECM), präsentiert auf der CeBIT in Halle 3, D09 seine neue Lösung Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration. Mit diesem umfassenden neuen Angebot an Tools für Online-Communities, Social Computing und Echtzeit-Collaboration hebt Open Text Web 2.0 auf eine neue Stufe: Enterprise 2.0.
Das neue Angebot ist Teil einer ganzen Serie von Produktinitiativen, die Open Text im Rahmen seiner umfassenden, ebenfalls heute vorgestellten Enterprise 2.0-Strategie bereits auf den Markt gebracht hat und bringen wird. Das Ziel dieser Strategie besteht in der Weiterentwicklung von Organisationsstrukturen durch den unternehmensweiten Einsatz leistungsstarker Social-Computing-Werkzeuge. Open Text stattet die neue Generation seiner Collaboration- und Weblösungen mit Web 2.0-Funktionalitäten wie Wikis, Foren, Blogs, Tagging, Moderation, Online-Communities und Echtzeit-Collaboration aus, die Unternehmen im Rahmen breit angelegter ECM-Strategien einsetzen können. Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration folgte den leistungsstarken Angeboten an Weblösungen von RedDot, der Open Text Web Solutions Group, die alle mit der Livelink ECM-Plattform und anderen gängigen Content Repositories integrierbar sind.
"Große Unternehmen operieren heute auf hart umkämpften globalen Märkten und müssen eine internationale und zunehmend mobile Belegschaft managen. Transparenz, Collaboration und der Austausch von Wissen sind daher wichtiger denn je", so Cheryl McKinnon, Director, Collaborative Content Management bei Open Text. "Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration gibt Unternehmen einen Leitfaden zu Enterprise 2.0 im Rahmen einer breit angelegten ECM-Strategie an die Hand. Gleichzeitig eröffnet das Produkt neue Wege, um die Zusammenarbeit und Produktivität der Mitarbeiter zu verbessern und die Kundentreue zu steigern."
Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration verbindet Menschen, Prozesse und Inhalte unternehmensweit und lässt eine Arbeitsumgebung entstehen, in der die Mitarbeiter problemlos Ideen, Erfahrungen und Wissen in Echtzeit austauschen können. Die Lösung verbindet eine zuverlässige Wissensdatenbank mit Funktionalitäten für Projekträume, Umfragen, Nachrichtenticker, Aufgaben und Projektmanagement. Community-Applikationen mit speziellen, unternehmensweit skalierbaren Tools und Echtzeit-Collaboration sowie Newsletter, FAQ, und Veranstaltungskalender fördern den Austausch von Expertise und Best Practices.
Die Collaboration- und Community-Tools sind zusammen mit sämtlichen Inhalten in einer intuitiv bedienbaren Umgebung zugänglich. Das fördert die Zusammenarbeit und gleichzeitig werden Projektinformationen im darunter liegenden ECM Framework erfasst. Sicherheit, Zugriffskontrolle und Aufbewahrungsregeln werden unter Nutzung der bereits vorhandenen nativen Sicherheitsmechanismen und ohne zusätzliche Administrationsschicht durchgängig angewandt. Die damit ausgestatteten Mitarbeiter können schnell und sicher bereichs- und aufgabenübergreifende Teams bilden, ausgetauschtes Wissen erfassen, Prozesse managen und Projektfristen selbst über Abteilungs- und Ländergrenzen hinweg zuverlässig einhalten.
- Verbreitung von Expertenwissen und Best Practices in Communities: Unternehmen können effektiv ihre Wissensinseln miteinander verknüpfen und Mitarbeiter, die vor ähnlichen Zielen und Herausforderungen stehen, zusammenbringen. Neue Ideen und Chancen lassen sich in Support-Netzwerken kommunizieren, Standards und Best Practices können festgelegt werden, die Zusammenarbeit mit Kunden und Partnern wird effektiver. Zudem können mit Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration sichere Records Management-Kontrollen auf Inhalte aus der Community-Umgebung angewandt werden.
- Agilere Unternehmensstrukturen durch Projektmanagement: In eigenen Projekträumen können sich Mitarbeiter voll und ganz auf ihre Arbeit konzentrieren. Projektleiter können flexibel Teams zusammenstellen, neue Teammitglieder über eine Browser-basierende Benutzeroberfläche hinzufügen und ihnen verschiedene Rollen und Aufgaben zuweisen. Alle relevanten Projektinformationen - Pläne, Dokumente, Aufgabenlisten, URLs etc. - werden zentral im Projektraum gespeichert und vorgehalten. Die Kommunikation der Projektmitglieder kann innerhalb so genannter Threaded Discussions erfasst, in gängige E-Mail-Systeme integriert und auf dem Desktop bereitgestellt werden.
- Echtzeit-Zugriff auf Menschen und Informationen: Echtzeit-Funktionalitäten ermöglichen die flexible und vor unerlaubtem Zugriff geschützte Zusammenarbeit im Unternehmen. Unterstützung für Teambesprechungen, Instant Messaging, Screen- und Applikationssharing sowie gemeinsam genutzte Arbeitsräume verbessern das Arbeiten im Team und erhöhen die Produktivität.
Verfügbarkeit
Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration wird im Mai 2008 verfügbar sein. Weitere Informationen sind unter http://www.opentext.com/... erhältlich.
05.03.2008, Katalin Balogh
Open Text, globaler Anbieter im Enterprise Content Management (ECM), präsentiert auf der CeBIT in Halle 3, D09 seine neue Lösung Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration. Mit diesem umfassenden neuen Angebot an Tools für Online-Communities, Social Computing und Echtzeit-Collaboration hebt Open Text Web 2.0 auf eine neue Stufe: Enterprise 2.0.
Das neue Angebot ist Teil einer ganzen Serie von Produktinitiativen, die Open Text im Rahmen seiner umfassenden, ebenfalls heute vorgestellten Enterprise 2.0-Strategie bereits auf den Markt gebracht hat und bringen wird. Das Ziel dieser Strategie besteht in der Weiterentwicklung von Organisationsstrukturen durch den unternehmensweiten Einsatz leistungsstarker Social-Computing-Werkzeuge. Open Text stattet die neue Generation seiner Collaboration- und Weblösungen mit Web 2.0-Funktionalitäten wie Wikis, Foren, Blogs, Tagging, Moderation, Online-Communities und Echtzeit-Collaboration aus, die Unternehmen im Rahmen breit angelegter ECM-Strategien einsetzen können. Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration folgte den leistungsstarken Angeboten an Weblösungen von RedDot, der Open Text Web Solutions Group, die alle mit der Livelink ECM-Plattform und anderen gängigen Content Repositories integrierbar sind.
"Große Unternehmen operieren heute auf hart umkämpften globalen Märkten und müssen eine internationale und zunehmend mobile Belegschaft managen. Transparenz, Collaboration und der Austausch von Wissen sind daher wichtiger denn je", so Cheryl McKinnon, Director, Collaborative Content Management bei Open Text. "Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration gibt Unternehmen einen Leitfaden zu Enterprise 2.0 im Rahmen einer breit angelegten ECM-Strategie an die Hand. Gleichzeitig eröffnet das Produkt neue Wege, um die Zusammenarbeit und Produktivität der Mitarbeiter zu verbessern und die Kundentreue zu steigern."
Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration verbindet Menschen, Prozesse und Inhalte unternehmensweit und lässt eine Arbeitsumgebung entstehen, in der die Mitarbeiter problemlos Ideen, Erfahrungen und Wissen in Echtzeit austauschen können. Die Lösung verbindet eine zuverlässige Wissensdatenbank mit Funktionalitäten für Projekträume, Umfragen, Nachrichtenticker, Aufgaben und Projektmanagement. Community-Applikationen mit speziellen, unternehmensweit skalierbaren Tools und Echtzeit-Collaboration sowie Newsletter, FAQ, und Veranstaltungskalender fördern den Austausch von Expertise und Best Practices.
Die Collaboration- und Community-Tools sind zusammen mit sämtlichen Inhalten in einer intuitiv bedienbaren Umgebung zugänglich. Das fördert die Zusammenarbeit und gleichzeitig werden Projektinformationen im darunter liegenden ECM Framework erfasst. Sicherheit, Zugriffskontrolle und Aufbewahrungsregeln werden unter Nutzung der bereits vorhandenen nativen Sicherheitsmechanismen und ohne zusätzliche Administrationsschicht durchgängig angewandt. Die damit ausgestatteten Mitarbeiter können schnell und sicher bereichs- und aufgabenübergreifende Teams bilden, ausgetauschtes Wissen erfassen, Prozesse managen und Projektfristen selbst über Abteilungs- und Ländergrenzen hinweg zuverlässig einhalten.
- Verbreitung von Expertenwissen und Best Practices in Communities: Unternehmen können effektiv ihre Wissensinseln miteinander verknüpfen und Mitarbeiter, die vor ähnlichen Zielen und Herausforderungen stehen, zusammenbringen. Neue Ideen und Chancen lassen sich in Support-Netzwerken kommunizieren, Standards und Best Practices können festgelegt werden, die Zusammenarbeit mit Kunden und Partnern wird effektiver. Zudem können mit Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration sichere Records Management-Kontrollen auf Inhalte aus der Community-Umgebung angewandt werden.
- Agilere Unternehmensstrukturen durch Projektmanagement: In eigenen Projekträumen können sich Mitarbeiter voll und ganz auf ihre Arbeit konzentrieren. Projektleiter können flexibel Teams zusammenstellen, neue Teammitglieder über eine Browser-basierende Benutzeroberfläche hinzufügen und ihnen verschiedene Rollen und Aufgaben zuweisen. Alle relevanten Projektinformationen - Pläne, Dokumente, Aufgabenlisten, URLs etc. - werden zentral im Projektraum gespeichert und vorgehalten. Die Kommunikation der Projektmitglieder kann innerhalb so genannter Threaded Discussions erfasst, in gängige E-Mail-Systeme integriert und auf dem Desktop bereitgestellt werden.
- Echtzeit-Zugriff auf Menschen und Informationen: Echtzeit-Funktionalitäten ermöglichen die flexible und vor unerlaubtem Zugriff geschützte Zusammenarbeit im Unternehmen. Unterstützung für Teambesprechungen, Instant Messaging, Screen- und Applikationssharing sowie gemeinsam genutzte Arbeitsräume verbessern das Arbeiten im Team und erhöhen die Produktivität.
Verfügbarkeit
Livelink ECM - Extended Collaboration wird im Mai 2008 verfügbar sein. Weitere Informationen sind unter http://www.opentext.com/... erhältlich.
05.03.2008, Katalin Balogh
Strategiewechsel der SPD Ein Fundament der Lüge - Deutschland - sueddeutsche.de
Strategiewechsel der SPD Ein Fundament der Lüge - Deutschland - sueddeutsche.de
Ypsilantis Beteuerung, auf keinen Fall mit der Linken kooperieren zu wollen, war eines ihrer zentralen Wahlversprechen. Wenn sie dieses jetzt bricht, tut sie das auch deswegen, weil sie unbedingt Ministerpräsidentin werden will.
Ein Kommentar von Kurt Kister
Ypsilantis Beteuerung, auf keinen Fall mit der Linken kooperieren zu wollen, war eines ihrer zentralen Wahlversprechen. Wenn sie dieses jetzt bricht, tut sie das auch deswegen, weil sie unbedingt Ministerpräsidentin werden will.
Ein Kommentar von Kurt Kister
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Microsoft opens online services to small, medium companies - SiliconValley.com
Microsoft opens online services to small, medium companies - SiliconValley.com
Microsoft, facing a threat from Google, IBM and other rivals, is ramping up its online services, which are hosted applications that manage such things as e-mail, calendars and video conferencing.
Microsoft, facing a threat from Google, IBM and other rivals, is ramping up its online services, which are hosted applications that manage such things as e-mail, calendars and video conferencing.
Cebit 2008 sueddeutsche.de
Cebit 2008 sueddeutsche.de
Cebit 2008
Das Spezial zur weltgrößten Computermesse
Auf der Cebit, die vom 4. bis zum 9. März in Hannover stattfindet, präsentieren knapp 5900 Aussteller auf insgesamt 241.000 Quadratmeter Hallenfläche ihre Neuheiten. In diesem Jahr gliedert sich die Messe in vier Themenbereiche: Technik- und Infrastruktur, Soft- und Hardware für Geschäftskunden, öffentlicher Sektor und digitales Leben. Wir zeigen die Highlights und berichten über die wichtigsten Trends und Themen.
Cebit 2008
Das Spezial zur weltgrößten Computermesse
Auf der Cebit, die vom 4. bis zum 9. März in Hannover stattfindet, präsentieren knapp 5900 Aussteller auf insgesamt 241.000 Quadratmeter Hallenfläche ihre Neuheiten. In diesem Jahr gliedert sich die Messe in vier Themenbereiche: Technik- und Infrastruktur, Soft- und Hardware für Geschäftskunden, öffentlicher Sektor und digitales Leben. Wir zeigen die Highlights und berichten über die wichtigsten Trends und Themen.
Cebit Ideen von gestern - Computer - sueddeutsche.de
Cebit Ideen von gestern - Computer - sueddeutsche.de
Nach sechs Jahren kommt Microsoft-Chef Steve Ballmer wieder nach Hannover - mit Konzepten, die er schon vor sechs Jahren präsentierte. Auch der Gegner heißt immer noch Google.
Nach sechs Jahren kommt Microsoft-Chef Steve Ballmer wieder nach Hannover - mit Konzepten, die er schon vor sechs Jahren präsentierte. Auch der Gegner heißt immer noch Google.
FTD.de - IT+Telekommunikation - Nachrichten - Merkel macht den Weg frei auf der Cebit
FTD.de - IT+Telekommunikation - Nachrichten - Merkel macht den Weg frei auf der Cebit
Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel hat mit dem traditionellen Rundgang die Cebit für das Publikum eröffnet. Ihr erstes Ziel auf der weltgrößten Computermesse war der Stand der französischen IT-Industrie.
Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel hat mit dem traditionellen Rundgang die Cebit für das Publikum eröffnet. Ihr erstes Ziel auf der weltgrößten Computermesse war der Stand der französischen IT-Industrie.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Google Pressures Microsoft With Team Collaboration Tool
Google Pressures Microsoft With Team Collaboration Tool
Google expanded its suite of personal and group productivity tools by adding a persistent collaboration repository to Google Apps. This move increases the pressure on Microsoft and once again alters IT pricing economics.
Google expanded its suite of personal and group productivity tools by adding a persistent collaboration repository to Google Apps. This move increases the pressure on Microsoft and once again alters IT pricing economics.
FT.com / Companies / IT - Microsoft line extended to small business
FT.com / Companies / IT - Microsoft line extended to small business
Microsoft line extended to small business
By Richard Waters in San Francisco
Published: March 3 2008 05:03 | Last updated: March 3 2008 05:03
Microsoft will on Monday take the wraps off a new service designed to repel Google’s incursion into one of its core markets, selling software applications to small and medium-sized businesses.
The plan will involve delivering a service over the internet for small companies to do things such as manage corporate e-mail and let workers collaborate on documents, rather than requiring them to buy the software. Users of the new internet services will be charged a flat annual subscription fee per worker.
The move marks a response to Google’s launch a year ago of a set of online applications for business customers, for a fee of $50 a year for each worker. Google executives have suggested that even if companies don’t end up using their services, the presence of an alternative could still lead companies to negotiate lower prices from Microsoft.
Chris Capossela, head of Microsoft’s Office desktop applications and related server software businesses, dismissed the threat from this new low-priced competition. He refused to disclose what Microsoft would charge for its online services, but said: “We’re really not worried about cannibalisation.”
The new Microsoft services involve two of its main server products – the Exchange e-mail software and SharePoint, which is used to manage documents centrally and make it easier for workers to collaborate.
Internet-based versions of this software were made available to big companies last year. It will now be extended for a test period to the smaller companies that have traditionally formed the backbone of Microsoft’s business.
In spite of the experimentation with offering online versions of its server-based software, Microsoft has so far retained its traditional business model for its dominant Office suite of PC applications.
It is counting on the functionality of its software to counter Google. “Looking at their software, it’s incredibly basic,” said Mr Capossela. “It isn’t good enough for a 50-person company.”
He also said Google, which has been building a sales force to improve relations with business customers, had a long way to go before being taken seriously as a business software supplier.
“The reality is, it takes a very long time to build the credibility with [chief information officers],” he said.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
Microsoft line extended to small business
By Richard Waters in San Francisco
Published: March 3 2008 05:03 | Last updated: March 3 2008 05:03
Microsoft will on Monday take the wraps off a new service designed to repel Google’s incursion into one of its core markets, selling software applications to small and medium-sized businesses.
The plan will involve delivering a service over the internet for small companies to do things such as manage corporate e-mail and let workers collaborate on documents, rather than requiring them to buy the software. Users of the new internet services will be charged a flat annual subscription fee per worker.
The move marks a response to Google’s launch a year ago of a set of online applications for business customers, for a fee of $50 a year for each worker. Google executives have suggested that even if companies don’t end up using their services, the presence of an alternative could still lead companies to negotiate lower prices from Microsoft.
Chris Capossela, head of Microsoft’s Office desktop applications and related server software businesses, dismissed the threat from this new low-priced competition. He refused to disclose what Microsoft would charge for its online services, but said: “We’re really not worried about cannibalisation.”
The new Microsoft services involve two of its main server products – the Exchange e-mail software and SharePoint, which is used to manage documents centrally and make it easier for workers to collaborate.
Internet-based versions of this software were made available to big companies last year. It will now be extended for a test period to the smaller companies that have traditionally formed the backbone of Microsoft’s business.
In spite of the experimentation with offering online versions of its server-based software, Microsoft has so far retained its traditional business model for its dominant Office suite of PC applications.
It is counting on the functionality of its software to counter Google. “Looking at their software, it’s incredibly basic,” said Mr Capossela. “It isn’t good enough for a 50-person company.”
He also said Google, which has been building a sales force to improve relations with business customers, had a long way to go before being taken seriously as a business software supplier.
“The reality is, it takes a very long time to build the credibility with [chief information officers],” he said.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008
At CeBIT Tech Show, a Green Undercurrent - Forbes.com
At CeBIT Tech Show, a Green Undercurrent - Forbes.com
HANOVER, Germany - Amid the sharp displays and booths offering up the latest gadgets and gizmos at the annual CeBIT trade and technology fair, the key undercurrent is the greening of the industry.
HANOVER, Germany - Amid the sharp displays and booths offering up the latest gadgets and gizmos at the annual CeBIT trade and technology fair, the key undercurrent is the greening of the industry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)