Duffbert's Random Musings

1 - I'll add a vote for insanity, Ben. I know that's where I'm coming from.

2 - Or maybe Microsoft finally realized that they really can't just rip Notes out and even if they can move email to Exchange, they can't convert all the apps. So from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, they think "okay, leave the data in the nsf with everything it provides, we can't compete there, but our dev tools rock and Notes developers might prefer them to the Eclipse rich client toolkit so let's make sure they're making an informed choice."

That's how I read it and I'm no Miscrosoft apologist. I don't see any short term ROI, but to me it makes sense long term. And if it helps to light a fire under the Lotus dev tools marketing folks, I say 'Go Gary!'. Perhaps Lotus should try investing in a few more folks to reach out to Notes developers. Or is the problem that they have too many: "a major trimming of personnel is needed to make the company lean and responsive".

3 - Wow. Those MS blogs that you linked are downright angsty. Their points are worth looking into, but I almost can't see the point through all the bile and venom coming out on those pages.
It also seems like both of them have the same underlying point, "I want more money." They both are a lot more concerned about stock price and cash handling than the quality of the technology.

I'd love to see a blog that has critiques of Microsoft's internal culture, but based a bit more on the quality of the work in the trenches, not the quality of management's financial policy.

4 - It is my understanding that what Microsoft calls Evangelists, most other companies call system engineers.

5 - I'd like to think that IBM is more professional than that, though I've had many a conversation with that particular partner since their presentation at the MS conference. It's a delicate dance.

6 - I think you are being a bit unfair. Nobody ever claimed that there was no expectation of return on investment. The claim is that the return is an intangible based on good will rather than a specific sales target.

Ask yourself this: I run a software company, and am plenty busy, but I spend hours every day helping people on forums. I answer questions that have nothing to do with rich text. I help people find ways to avoid using our software when that seems appropriate. I give people valuable information that I could, in theory at least, charge them for. Do I do this out of the goodness of my heart? Possibly. Am I insane? Possibly. Is it possible that the good will and credibility I earn pays off later when people trust me when I really do recommend my software? The well over a million client seats sold for Midas without any advertising would argue that I am doing something right.

So, much as I am not sure I want to defend Microsoft, isn't is conceivable that they simply want to engender "good will" and encourage warm feelings towards a corporation that has gotten pretty bad reviews recently. Customers feeling good about Microsoft is worth something, even if they don't run out and buy Exchange right now. They also might not run out so readily to buy Linux.

Just a thought, you know.

7 - Yeah - MS are consolidating lock-in on the .net tools by supporting them - not necessarily supporting the Domino stuff. Anything to keep the developers off java.

Its odd that IBM should exclude MS as a partner, whilst giving a beacon to another Partner who presented at an MS event and stated that IBM were difficult to do business with. (No Names, No Law Suits) So I dont think IBM are looking down their list of partners and putting black marks next to the vocal ones.. Yet..

---* Bill

8 - Interesting points... Definitely food for thought as I muse on this.

Thanks!

9 - Let me take a shot at it:

IBM is focused on product integration with the Java platform. Aside from the DB2 .Net CLR routines, I cannot really think of any other "help" that comes from Big Blue in terms of integrating application/database platforms with .Net. I think Microsoft realizes there are a lot of companies that drink the blue kool-aid without a second thought. So while Microsoft may see a slim opportunity to convert them to their "collaboration technologies" (whatever those may be) they see a huge potential loss if those same companies opt for a pure J2EE development direction for mission critical transactional applications.

We may use Notes, but that doesn't mean we could not benefit from C++ apps on our desktops or facing the web that work really well with SQL server.

As for IBM's decision - I see several reasons that support it. My only concern is that this sets a precedent for partners to be excluded in the future who also happen to have very close relationships with competing vendors.