Ferris on SharePoint and ECM

Much activity around an opinion of David Via of Ferris about SharePoint and it’s Enterprise Content Management capabilities. I haven’t categorised it as Market Analysis because it is nothing more than an opinion with some unsubstantiated arguments. It is funny to see however how fast this is picked up by the IBM community as a (little) stick to hit with.

I think Bil Simer commented best to it. I hope people read his blog, because it seperates the facts from the FUD. There is more and far better market analysis out there on Microsoft Collaboration vision and platform comparing it to the other peers in the market. Check out my Market Analysis category to find the details with links to the actual reports.

For perhaps a more balanced view on the Enterprise Content Management market than Ferris’, take a look at Gartner ’s reports on this topic. The report Basic Content Services Will Give You Better Content Management Choices gives some highlights and links to other (paid) content. It addresses the question what is Enterprise Content Management to start with …

Peter de Haas
Peter de Haas

Peter is gepassioneerd door de grenzeloze mogelijkheden van technologische vooruitgang. Met meer dan 35 jaar ervaring in de IT heeft hij talloze ontwikkelingen zien opkomen en hun impact op organisaties en mensen meegemaakt. Met een scherp oog voor het identificeren van oplossingen waar anderen alleen problemen zien, is hij een ware expert in digitale transformaties.
Peter helpt individuen, teams en organisaties bij het ontwikkelen van nieuwe vaardigheden en het implementeren van baanbrekende oplossingen. Zijn inzichten en ervaringen maken hem een gewaardeerde bron voor iedereen die de nieuwste technologische trends wil begrijpen en toepassen.

Artikelen: 3822

8 reacties

  1. “It is funny to see however how fast this is picked up by the IBM community as a (little) stick to hit with.” I’ll remind you of that next time you post a link to something anti-IBM. 😉

  2. Oh please. And isn’t it Gartner who says that “However, enterprises needing document management (DM) should look elsewhere as the functionality has declined below acceptable levels. SPS 2003 is not a true DM system.”? (Report P-22-0110)

  3. the “oh please” was meant in this context, btw: You quote Ferris other times when it is useful. The Exchange team has at least one Ferris report prominently displayed on the competitive pages of microsoft.com/exchange. And now you try to paint them as pseudo-analysts? How strange.
    http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?cp=1252&FORM=FREESS&q=ferris&q1=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.peterdehaas.com
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22ferris+research%22+site%3Amicrosoft.com

  4. @ Alan
    It’s not so much posting somthing anti MS or anti IBM.
    It’s the fact that ot is all very much out of context more or less a snap shot.
    It’s useful in these types of “discussions” thats it. And yes you are right, I play the card myself as well sometimes 😉

  5. @ Ed
    You’re right in statingGartner’s view on this. I don’t know the exact report you’re quoting, will look.
    As far as I know MS is not making any claims to be “the” ECM vendor.
    I do see a lot of recognition from Gartner and other analysts such as Forrester for MS’growing capabilities in this field. Look for example to the report I am quoting in the post.
    As for Ferrs. I do take them seriously. However I state here that this is just an opinion in a blog in stead of a thorough report There are some prices quoted which create the wrong perception for exaple yourself and other pick this up. The prices quote are in no relation to the actual license pricing, nor are thay thoroughly explained or put in any competitive context.
    I assume Ferris willl create a more thorough report around this matter instead of a snapshot on a blog

  6. “Little” ? Exposing the confusion and FUD surrounding Sharepoint ?
    [Lets hope they dont start digging deeper and expose Sharepoints dirty little secret – javascript. The only non-compiled/interpreted language in the world where you allow the end-user to step through and change values with a debugger. Secure ? Not a chance..]
    Okay. Here’s some bigger sticks:
    * Balmer as CEO. Clearly unsuitable (chair throwing), clearly overwhelmed (12,000 man years wasted on Vista before the “reset”) and clearly underperforming – just like the MS share price. Stagnant since – well, since Balmer took charge. Time for a “Balmer Reset” Perhaps ?
    * Vista. WTF? 12,000 man years wasted, and the guy responsible is still at his desk ? (and reportedly got a 20m DOLLAR bonus this year?) Why ? So the project that was supposed to deliver some time ago, has just been “reset” last year and starts again. Can Microsoft ever deliver a large project again ? Tiger (OS/x) on Intel is going to get there before Vista. Hell, Linux adoption on the desktop is going to get there before Vista. And what were the compelling features again ? Oh – yeah – MS were going in league with the RIAA and locking us out of our own computers (DRM) ? Should MS be worried that it cant deliver half of its own revenue stream ? It should be.
    * Groove. Cool Product. Purchased by Microsoft. Sank without trace in the office 12 “Look how many features we can stuff into Word” proposals. Still, MS now has Ray “I invented Notes and left before it got *really* big” Ozzie. A genius who left Lotus/IBM because he cant stand red-tape. Now Ozzie is drowning in Redmond Red Tape. Is Ozzie worried ?
    * Office 2003 adoption. Whats the MS figure ? The market rumours say 15%. Thats 15% of half of your main revenue stream upgrading to the latest version of office. 85% are still on old versions. Office represents the other half of MS’s revenue stream. Is MS worried ? It should be.
    * Mini-Microsoft. He’s exposed the stack rankings and all its idiocy. He’s exposed the layers and layers of incompetent MS Middle management. He’s exposed the gulf between the marketing message that you put out, and the reality of being on campus. And he’s exposed that folks in Redmond think Balmers a fool too. Is MS Worried – Ah – no. They’ve shuffled the chairs – but not thrown any.
    * X-Box-360. Cool cool box. But X-Box have lost – some say – 4 BILLION dollars so far, and X-Box 360 scheduled to lose another 2 BILLION dollars. How many times could MS have flown a man to the moon for the cost of this little toy ? And whats its corporate value ? I think there is a huge value – as a Linux “utility” computing device. (You can even get Domino 6 running on Linux on the *old* X-box!) Ironic really – MS *paying* for the adoption of Linux… And paying for removing PC sales from its main customers such as Dell, HP, etc.. Clear, visionary thinking ? Planning for the future ? Eh. No. Is MS Worried ?
    Sorry – have to be somewhere in 10 minutes, else I’d keep going with my “Bigger” sticks…
    Still, you did ask.
    (and as Alan and Ed have already pointed out – as you have been chief purveyor of FUD in the past, dont be surprised when it happens to you.)
    Remember – what goes around – comes around..
    🙂
    Have fun
    —* Bill
    http://www.billbuchan.com

  7. Bill,
    I have no problem with you commenting, however, please try and stick to the topic at least a little bit. Anyway I am glad you are not on IBM’s marketing team 🙂
    Your views on MS, it’s products, it’s management, etc is very clear
    The figures you quote are not exactly that spot on.
    For more exact figures on Office 2003 try this :
    Gartner Group :
    Windows XP and Office 2003 Gain Momentum in Gartner’s 2004 Client OS Survey
    31 March 2005
    I can not quote the report because of copyright, but you are way off.
    But … I did ask for it. Thank for commenting

Reacties zijn gesloten.