I've just added Chris Byrne's "Fighting FUD" graphic link to my blog. It's over there... on the right. The blue and yellow. It will take you to the Fighting FUD category in his blog. I should have added it a couple of days ago when I wrote my response to the latest Dan Lyons FUD. I'm doing it today in response to an eWeek article that Chris Miller has already posted about. I actually wrote an email to the author of that article, Lisa Vaas, yesterday. Here's what I wrote:
Your article "IBM Adds Prefab Blogging to Workplace Designer" included a paragraph that noted that IBM's "struggle to maintain its place in the market..." You based that on the recently released IDC and Gartner reports on market share. Those reports were for 2004.
In an eWeek article covering IBM announcements on June 14 of this year, Dennis Callahan wrote the following:
"In the meantime, demand has surged for Notes and Domino, with the flagship platform enjoying 17 percent revenue growth over the last two quarters."
That 17% revenue growth referred to Q4 of 2004 and Q1 of 2005. This is newer information than the IDC and Gartner reports, and it is something that you should have included in your article.
I did receive a response from Ms. Vaas, but I did not ask for permission to publish it, so I won't. I'll just say that it was neutral in tone. With luck, a small victory in the fight against FUD.
1. Chris Miller08/25/2005 11:42:11 PM
Nicely done, I was writing one this evening.
2. Peter de Haas08/26/2005 05:01:21 AM
I do agree that al the marketshare figures flying around can be confusing and although some people (remark is in general, I am not refering to the authors of the article above as I haven't read all the details yet) may mix up the figures a bit the fact that stands out that Microsoft's marketshare is bigger than Lotus' and also looking things such as CAGR which is double digit for Microsoft vs single digit for Lotus.
Let's say I look forward to Ed Brill's slide in his "the boss loves .." presentation next Lotusphere as I assume he will stickto the same sources for the actual thruth according to IBM ?
3. Ben Poole08/26/2005 06:40:34 AM
Whilst I applaud those out there who take on all this FUD and fight it, I can't help but feel IBM should be stepping up to the plate more. Is their business really so big that they don't feel the need to defend it, vocally, EVER?
Either way, you should invoice 'em
4. Richard Schwartz08/26/2005 12:18:54 PM
@Peter: Points well taken. Re CAGR.... the way product life-cycles work in a mature segment of our business (and I think we can probably all agree that messaging is mature, while some aspects of collaboration are mature and others are clearly not), I believe that one needs to see not merely a continuing trend, but an accelerating trend over several years before one can draw any truly relevant conclusions about momentum in the market. Personally, I think the market is very happy having two very strong competitors pushing each other to innovate, and I also think that barriers to success at the enterprise level remain high enough that it is quite unlikely that other competitors are going to make significant inroads for some time to come. So, I'm not really anticipating the imminent demise of Notes/Domino or Exchange, regardless what anybody's market research may say about the numbers today, six months ago, or six years from now.
@Ben: I agree, sort of. Ideally IBM should be ahead of the game, rather than reacting to each story after the fact; but they have indeed been ahead of the game. Some reporters miss facts -- even if they've been given clearly by IBM and published by other writers in the same magazine! And some others have clear bias and no amount of proactive release of upbeat figures will prevent them from prophesying doom and gloom. On the reaction side, there are a lot of good reasons why IBM isn't going to react as quickly to every story as we can. There are people there who do a great job of it when they can, but their resources are limited... and I'd be happy to invoice them if they ever wanted to recruit me
5. Bob Balaban08/26/2005 09:16:24 PM
Keep on keepin' 'em honest, Rich!