1. Chris Whisonant12/08/2005 10:33:37 AM
I noticed that last week too. Curious, don't you think?
2. Peter de Haas12/09/2005 07:13:27 AM
Is this the old marketshare discussion again. are we again to quote various reports, or is this concerning a specific Gartner report.
I recall we have had some discussions on your blog as well about marketshare information annually quoted by Ed in his "the boss loves .." presentation.
If you want I can dig the infrmation up and point you to the right reports ...
I am not quote sure if there is actually a Gartner report on the Marketshare, but am prepared to search for it (will do anyway)
3. Bob12/09/2005 01:48:28 PM
Also, to be clear. Charles is the guy who posted the video. He's not the person speaking. I don't know who Charles is (a Channel 9 guy?). As such I'm not sure he knows who Ed Brill is. And as we know, a posted question in a blog doesn't necessarily get answered.
Speaking of questions -- Richard: your blog renders strangely in both Firefox and IE. Lots of flicker. And the text editor for comments jump up and down as I type (in IE). Any idea what's happening here?
4. Richard Schwartz12/09/2005 02:32:48 PM
@Bob: Thanks for the clarification, Charles' post made the claim that Gartner says more than half of business mailboxes run on Exchange. He may only be quoting someone else quoting (or mis-quoting) Gartner, but he did post the claim. It's fair to ask him for background. If he doens't know the answer himself, he surely knows who it is that he got the information from. And if Ed posted a quote from an IBM colleague that cited an analyst report, and someone questioned him on the validity, I'd just as much expect him to go to his source for the answer.
As far as the browser is concerned, I have no problems -- or specific reports of them in Firefox. What version of Firefox are you using, and what are you seeing that is strange?
I have had plenty of reports of problems in IE. I just checked it out in IE for the first time in a while, and yes... it's incredibly annoying.
It's a CSS thing, I'm sure, but I'm afraid I don't know nearly enough about CSS to figure it out. If anyone wants to look at the CSS and give me some hints, they're welcome to do so.
I'm hoping that IE 7 is better, but I haven't tried the beta yet.
5. John Westworth12/10/2005 09:10:00 AM
I think he got this wrong and was referring to the wrong report. It may have been the IDC report he was referring to.
IDC 2003 - MS=47% IBM=43%
IDC 2004 - MS=51% IBM=40%
Or it could have been the Radicatti Report of 2004
MS=115 million Seats IBM=83 Million
Or the Ferris Research Report
The Gartner Report shows
2003 MS = 45.5% 14% Growth
2003 IBM = 47.1% 4.2% Growth
2004 MS = 48% 15.7% Growth
2004 IBM = 45.2% 5.4% Growth
I also believe there's a newer Gartner report entitled "Focus on Business issues .. .. .." In which the stats appear to be MS 49% IBM 37% with IBM losing between 2 and 3% per year.
Sorry for the confusion - hope that this clears it up.
6. Richard Schwartz12/10/2005 10:16:51 AM
@John: Thanks for clearing up that misunderstanding.
7. Peter de Haas12/11/2005 08:46:24 AM
Yes, thanks John, You beat me to it
8. Ed Brill12/11/2005 10:42:05 AM
One of the reasons we have copyright laws in this world is that taking these numbers out of the reports they come from, without any additional context, is quite dangerous.
First, it's still the case that there is NO Gartner report that says that MS has over half the market. This makes the person who posted to Channel9, as well as the person speaking in the video, liars (OK, that might be a little strong, they are just exaggerating!).
http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/almost-everybody-uses-exchange-they-just-dont-know-it I'm sure Microsoft has a process in place when employees misrepresent information?
Second, quoting Radicati is a useless exercise at best, given their "sickos" mentality about the Lotus market. Suggest that we stick to Gartner and IDC here.
Third, the newer Gartner report that John refers to actually indicates that few Domino shops are migrating away, and that those that are do so for political and emotional reasons only. This suggests that there's no technical reason for doing so, and the report is in fact quite critical of MS's alternatives in this space. I'll be writing about the Gartner report soon, to the best that I can given copyright.
9. Peter de Haas12/11/2005 11:52:05 AM
Yes copyright is something to be respected I agree. However, what's the use of having this discussion if we can only refer to report names. The context is very important so you are defenitly right n that.
I also agree that 48% is not more than 50%. But boy is it close.
You are also right on the most recent Gartner report. Few are migrating but Gartner does mention a double digit percentage of movers. It's not 2009 yet ...
10. Richard Schwartz12/11/2005 12:05:29 PM
Thanks Ed, as well.
re unfortunately u
A couple of observations of my own:
The Radicati numbers, along with Radicati's lack of credibility in this space have been adequately discussed previously and can be dismissed.
The Ferris numbers, which John unfortunately did not put a date on, are too far off from the IDC and Gartner numbers. They, too, can be dismissed.
Having not seen the latest Gartner report, it is difficult to say exactly what the case is, but there's one important point I want to make. There are two sorts of "growth" or "loss" that people are referring to. The 2003 and 2004 numbers show that both IBM and Microsoft are experiencing growth. That's growth of the installed base. The remark that IBM is "losing between 2 and 3% per year" presumably refers to market share, not installed base. I.e., Microsoft has been growing their base faster than IBM -- almost certainly in the SMB sector -- where there is no question that Exchange is dominant, but IBM is not losing their base. Microsoft may indeed be taking a bigger piece of the expanding pie, but IBM's piece is also bigger than it was. IBM's Lotus groups has posted double-digit growth for the past three or four quarters. And why should we believe that? Because that's from the audited financials of a public company, not from proprietary market research data. It's also what really counts in the end, because it's whether or not the money is increasing, not whether the seat count is increasing, that determines whether IBM remains positioned to compete aggressively in what is still a growing market.
11. John Westworth12/11/2005 01:15:09 PM
Can we agree that there's no definitive answer on market share ?
Ed, how would you like this Channel 9 thing resolved ?
12. Ed Brill12/11/2005 01:43:16 PM
@9 Peter, and feel free to e-mail me or here if I am wrong, but i see absolutely nothing in the Gartner report about a double-digit percentage of movers. They say something about a single digit change in market share, but Richard has that point nailed in @10 ... it's changes in the complexion of the market, and any migrations are only apiece of that. If you refer to their projection for the future, well, it's a projetion, and as you say, it's not 2009 yet. Again, Richard is correct, we've had double digit growth in the Notes business (Gartner says only "Lotus software" but I can be more specific) for four quarters in a row and six of the last seven. It's hard to quarrel with that.
And there's a huge difference between 48% and 51% in a market where the numbers have not changed dramatically for years. This is not like Office vs. SmartSuite and Wordperfect, IE vs. Netscape, or all those other markets where MS steamrolled over the competition. There must be a reason that the same tactics have NOT worked in this market space, despite MS's presence for almost ten years now, and it's not just the awesomeness of my sales force. It's the strength of the technology, the partner ecosystem, and the ROI.
@11 John - You're asking the wrong person, since I would want a retraction from the engineer speaking in the Channel9 video.
13. Bob12/11/2005 07:21:04 PM
@4 Richard: Firefox. 1.5. There's some jumping in the sidebars when they are initially rendered. In IE6, it's much, much more jumpy. Ridiculously so. You don't want folks claiming that you built your website just for Firefox do you?
14. Richard Schwartz12/11/2005 07:47:23 PM
@Bob: If people claim I built the site for Firefox, what I'll reply is that I'm a proud user of Firefox and only a reluctant user of IE by occasional necessity
Seriously, there's clearly something fundamentally wrong (or IE-incompatible) about the way the column layout is being handled here, and it's unlikely to be fixed with a minor tweak. What I'll probably do is a complete refresh of the CSS, starting with the CSS from some other Blogsphere user as an example. Doubt I'll get to it for a few weeks, though. Until then, all I can do is apologize for the jumpiness.
15. Bob12/12/2005 05:42:33 PM
@Richard: I was just joking about Firefox-only. I'm no CSS expert either.
16. Ed Brill12/13/2005 06:21:01 PM
@11 John - I saw your comment on the Channel9 thread - but you didn't exactly answer the question. I tried to get my channel9 password today to post another comment but despite waiting six hours, I still don't have my password back.
17. Peter de Haas12/13/2005 06:25:25 PM
I use IE and the screen is blinking all over the place ...
The report I was referring to is the one also featured on your blog today : http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=g_search&id=487276
This report indicted a potential (it is a prediction) of a double digit number of movers. Furthermore you have given your analysis of this report on your blog.
I very much agree with your view that the marketshare discussion is entirely different in this case than it was around Netscape vs IE or Smartsuite avs MS Office. It is also no longer about Lotus Notes vs Exchange (although many marketshare comparisons are still around these buckets).
It is in fact a platform discussion and no matter how you feel like positioning the Microsoft platform is is very much recognised by the industry as one of the leading platforms alongside Lotus Notes.
Sure there was a period in which Microsoft attempted to create their version of a collaborarion platform in Exchange and we all know where that ended (checkerboard / graveyard slide ) But for a couple of years now Microsoft truely has a strong collaboration offering which is also rapicly innovating.
There are a number of recent analyst reports by Gartner, IDC and Forrester that analyse the collaboration platforms of the various companies and these all show strong recognition for the Microsoft platform.
I would say the recently published article around Protor & Gamble is a good example of this :
My question is how can we measure the marketshare of this. It will be more difficult, because things are bucketed differently
18. Ed Brill12/13/2005 06:45:35 PM
Wish I could say more about the Proctor&Gamble situation -- but that decision was made years ago and was more about their outsourcer than about the technology they used.
The Gartner report re: double-digits, they predict (unusually, without offering a probability) that Lotus will decline in market share a few points per year for several years. With double-digit revenue growth this year, how could they possibly be right?
19. Peter de Haas12/13/2005 06:58:35 PM
Ed, I am merely answering your question and refer to what is in the report. They predict a decline and your right without a propability. Some way however they came up with this rather high percentage.
"With double-digit revenue growth this year, how could they possibly be right?"
Can it be that the competition grows even faster ? That must be it I guess. A
l this growth you mention most ikely is not yet reflected in the current reports, nor is the competitions'
There are many ways of measuring marketshare. Revenue is one, number of seats is another. They are all trending the same way ...
20. Ed Brill12/13/2005 07:32:13 PM
but that isn't what IDC said earlier this year --
"IBM's 2Q05 performance gives credence to its contention that it is bullish about "gaining market share in the collaborative software ...category,"
21. Smiler12/14/2005 02:55:50 AM
Not intending an ad-hominum attack or anything... but (!) it IS worth disclosing where your allegiences lie in this debate over "lies, damed lies and statistics".
John is of course a Microsoft employee tasked with messaging & collaboration migrations.
Don't you think you should offer full disclosure on this John - better that than be accused of what Radicati were up to on Ed's blog a while ago...
22. Peter de Haas12/14/2005 06:35:45 AM
Not sure what you are implying. The figures quoted by John are accurate ...
Lies hasnothing to do with this. The further discussion has adequatly drilled down on this I would say ...