We round out our discussion focusing upon Microsoft’s SharePoint offerings. Here are 6 takeaways from this series to date:

1. Microsoft has sold over $1 billion dollars in SharePoint 2007 (MOSS) licensing to date. This figure is not inclusive of 3rd party add-on solutions.
2. Microsoft creates a huge wake of awareness for all players. The choice of what to do with the awareness is up to you.
3. What Microsoft lacks in depth, it makes up for in breadth of offerings. Additionally, the SharePoint solution is really a platform to enable collaboration.
4. Review how SharePoint aligns with your current offerings. Seek clarification from your partners on how they intend to work with SharePoint’s presence.
5. If you have not yet begun seeding in various business-problem-solving solutions into your bag of tricks, this should serve as a wake-up call to do something - even if its retire early.
6. There are options, and if you are already seeding in solutions - choose your course carefully so that you do not disrupt your ’success engine’.

These 6 observations may or may not sway your judgment towards the raw potential this one technology has created. It is not fully baked nor mature, and it should not be thought of to solve every business problem. It has its own problems for sure.

However, this offering should engage the gears in your head - to at least consider what stance you will take.

Any clearly defined strategy has a strong potential of success so long as you approach it with honesty, passion, and commitment. Do you have to have SharePoint to be successful? Surely not.
However, I would submit those dealers who embrace what this offering represents, educates themselves - openly and honestly - on the benefits and drawbacks of SharePoint technology, and creates a differentiation strategy will prevail.

There is no silver bullet to save the day, but there are silver linings to be had. Whether SharePoint is your friend or foe get out your umbrella because we are in for a storm.

Read this series here.

Vista seems to have left a very bad taste in many people’s mouths… or at least this is what the media would have you believe. Sure, Microsoft’s licensing model is confusing, and since when did Microsoft’s licensing model every really make sense?

Let me start by saying that I swore I would never, ever, ever post something on Vista.

Why? Well, let me tell you I get so sick of hearing the back and forth on Microsoft and how bad Vista is… I swear it’s like watching the 6 o’clock news, and looking forward to who’s been shot, stabbed, or otherwise abused in life… Not that fun!

That being said, I am responsible for setting tactical and strategic technology policy within my company. We evaluated Vista when it was first released, and there was no compelling reason to upgrade; we would have incurred more cost, both in labor and upgrade costs, as well as not seen any significant impact to business.

As always, times change, and I am a firm believer in watching the bleeding edge very closely. My theory is that once the early adopters have lost a few fingers, it should be safe for me to move in.

So I watched, and I waited, and kept watching… and there was a lot of bad press on Vista, some genius negative TV ad campaign (which were really quite funny), and hte entire debacle over whether Microsoft 2.0 would be able to survive post-Billy and without Yahoo!’s advertising business unit…

Well, Microsoft isn’t the dominant enterprise operating system for a reason. I’m not saying 10 years from now Microsoft won’t go the way of Novell, but folks why is Vista receiving such bad press?

Maybe it’s just me (post service pack 1) along with my dual core processor and 4 GB of RAM, but come on…

I wouldn’t advocate just rushing out and purchasing Vista like you would a new iPhone, but if you are upgrading your hardware, don’t be bashful about the new stuff. Embrace the fact that XP is in its silver years and its days will pass into the west. Don’t resist change… Vista really doesn’t deserve all this bad press.

So there, I put my stake in the ground, and that’s all I have to say about that.

Image courtesy of MouseRunner.com

Ken Stewart’s blog, ChangeForge.com, focuses on the collision between the constantly changing worlds of business and technology. Ken is also the Director of Technology at Kearns Business Solutions.

Well, the technology and business world is a buzz with all of the latest prognostications on whose the loser and whose the winner. I must say, I’m a bit disappointed with Scoble’s “proof” on the matter - the stock market?

I’m not a big fan of Ballmer, I certainly agree Microsoft needs a web strategy, and Yahoo! is going to go in the tank if they don’t get a clue - but I just don’t agree with using the stock as an indicator of whose right and whose wrong. These are a bunch of analysts on Wall Street who freak out when the wind blows the wrong direction.

Who are we kidding here, that was just a merge that would’ve ended up like Time-Warner and AOL - a culture clash akin to Clash of the Titans!

I will say Scoble is on track with the real winner in all of this being Google, but does that really take a brain child. I think Ballmer was flat out stupid for considering the Yahoo! purchase in the first place. But, Scoble - buddy - I thought better of your cognitive resources than to start yipping right along with the wall street dogs my friend!

Why do you still use Microsoft Office? As you read this aloud, you may ask yourself why I’m asking such a silly question… Is it - really - a simple question?

My company currently uses Microsoft Office 2003 and 2007 Professional editions, and overall, there are some wonderful tools at our disposal. Never before the invention of spreadsheets, word processors, presentation and database tools did the computer ever do so much for the “normal user”. Computers, for the longest time, were the domain of geeks and propeller heads alike - those that understood computer speak.

Along came graphical user interfaces and office productivity software. Then over time technology came to resemble a usable form, a form that could empower end-users to be more efficient, do more with less, and generally help make information easier to obtain.

Today, we live in a world where the enterprise is dominated by Microsoft. In stepping back to review, they have some of the very features IT shops of any size like to see: integration from the front office to the back office, standardized roll-out toolsets, control and security options, and a well-adopted base of subscribers ensuring overall platform stability.

Specifically, Microsoft really has three core offerings to the enterprise: Desktop software, Office software, and backoffice software (e.g. servers, e-mail, database, etc.). Microsoft’s Office division is arguably one of the most profitable divisions within the company, and this is because they produce very powerful, if not overly-bloated, productivity tools like Word, Excel, etc. However, the cost to maintain this for an organization of any size can become a little harsh after you start seeing on-going costs, especially during major version upgrades.

For this reason, and many others revolving around Microsoft’s monopolistic profile in this segement, other somewhat strong players have begun to emerge slowly such as, OpenOffice and Google Docs. These are free to download and use (as of this writing), and offer very similar functions for many users.

However, the one big gotcha that always remains is the self-feeding loop Microsoft has established whereby I, as a user, must have Office to disseminate documents to my customers as they are using Office. If I were to switch away, I might not be able to see the document I receive from my customer very well or they may not be able to render my own document.

Transfering a document from one application format to another requires some very intricated filters that make it a 1-touch process for you and I. To be fair, these types of converstion filters just were not powerful enough to handle the transition - that is until lately.

OpenOffice was founded by a division of Sun Microsystems, and has been support through many generations of development. We are presently beginning field trials with the latest OpenOffice suite of software to facilitate expense reports, vacation requests and various other minor processes where we have found MS Office cost prohibitive in our standard configuration.

The benefits to us are it’s free and it can render Office documents fairly well (almost looking like their original fromat), and it can be used online and offline.

We also decided to begin beta testing the Google Docs software as well. Google Docs offers an online platform to manage your documents, but did not have a way to bring those documents to you when you couldn’t connect up to a wi-fi spot, that is until recently.

The Google Docs application has only undergone limited testing with our technology department itself. We found the integration quite easy, but a down side for us was that the import and re-export process for existing documnets has been plagued with formatting issues. Another thing you might want to be aware of is a clause not present in other productivity software suites:

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

11.2 You agree that this licence includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.

In an nutshell, this states your documents are now the property of Google. Going back, what was one of the major components enterprise clients require? Oh, that’s right control and security options! I wonder sometimes why we think Google is so much better than Microsoft with language like this floating through almost every one of their EULA’s.

In conclusion, for now Microsoft Office solutions wil continue to be our main stay because our clients require it, and because some of the back office integration with SharePoint, and just about every other program on the planet supports the Office products directly or indirectly. We cannot say the same for OpenOffice, but it is a compelling argument to load this on those users who do not need the advanced features provided in Office.

Google Docs, on the other hand, not only requires each person to have a login, separate from their network login, provides for the mass consumption of  your information at their discretion. That is a huge problem for me as the intellectual property possessed within our corporate documents outlines very key information to our on-going business.

Why are you still using Microsoft Office? Hopefully you have thought about it and know why. Chances are you are resigned to think that is your only recourse, but offerings such as OpenOffice are becoming much better aligned to the needs of the enterprise users and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future. It is most definitely worth a look as it can save you some dollars on your bottom line.

Do you ever just call up a customer and ask them questions about what would make them happy? Well, I did. I had been toying with the idea of beta testing a [tag]Mac[/tag] in our business to see where it would fit, but I couldn’t really decide where to put it.

I called one of our account managers about some problems with his [tag]mobile device[/tag] and the fact that he hated the [tag]BlackBerry[/tag]. One thing led to another, and he asked if we might ever consider putting a Mac in our environment. The light bulb went off.

I am a little on the tortured side, I admit. For those of you who don’t know me, I’m the kind of guy who is never satisfied with status quo. Don’t get me wrong, I like stability (because the keeps me in a job), but I really like looking towards the horizon and bringing innovations to the business to make my customers happy.

I wouldn’t classify my style of innovation ‘bleeding edge’, but it might be characterized as ‘the bludgeoned edge’. I have had my fair share of beatings on selecting a products that were in the growth phase, but I have also found that it is often the best way to be influential over the development of a product as well.

A whole slew of questions sprinted through my head, but a technically savvy sales rep might be just the personality disposition I actually need to give honest feedback and a real-world test - not some IT lab.

So, am I insane? Apple isn’t fully ready yet for the [tag]enterprise[/tag], and third party line of business applications are quite sparse… So BootCamp with Vista becomes a fall back, but is that really an Apple solution? Now I’m just hosting different types of hardware that might not fall under my standard maintenance plan creating exceptions that could cause additional helpdesk calls.

On the other hand, is there any validity to the fact that Macs need less support? I still find that hard to believe, but that’s what I hear at least.

I’m still struggling on the answer to this question, and I would really love some help from [tag]Apple[/tag] on enterprise standardization tools. In this case, my choice seems to be between innovation or stability…

That’s a tough choice for me, and one that might likely drive me insane…

I got some interesting feedback from my recent post, Can Apple Take Over the Enterprise? Kontra, over at CounterNotions, seems to think there are no significant challengers to Apples huge marketshare gains in the recent months:

Who then can challenge Apple?Not Palm or Motorola (extremely weak and rudderless leadership); not RIM (no OS level hw/sw integration, little UI and very limited consumer market expertise)…

Our company has used Windows Mobile devices for several years, and has recently launched a BlackBerry Enterprise Server (BES) offering geared towards our Sales personnel. I have found the UI for the BlackBerry to be better as a phone, but less rich as a PDA. We now run a blended strategy of both BES and ActiveSync solutions. It has been our observation that less technically-inclined individuals prefer the BlackBerry solution, whereas technically-inclined people tend to prefer the gadgets offered by a Windows Mobile device.

The BES solution offers stability, granular security control, and a superior phone experience to that of Windows Mobile devices. However, The Windows Mobile ActiveSync (same platform Apple is basing their Enterprise Roadmap upon) option is less costly and natively supports Outlook/PDA integration on the fly (without use of 3rd party solutions).

While I have not personally used the iPhone, if the Touch is any indication of how well a UI can perform, the phone must be a wonderful marriage of form and function. BlackBerry and Windows Mobile alike have met the needs of their customers, but have not followed a basic tenant, “technology should improve the lives of those it touches.”

The iPhone is realistically the device to match this tenant, but Apple has hooked their wagon to that of Microsoft, an arch-rival in the desktop arena. Add to this, ActiveSync is not perceived as being an enterprise-class solution by many in the circles I travel, but it has its place in the SMB. This will help Apple continue to gain marketshare, but not enough to oust RIM in OS version 2.0.

RIM hasn’t done itself any favors with its recent patent infringement suits and NOC outages. Microsoft and Apple were both quick to point out their solution did not have such weaknesses. Needless to say, RIM enjoys a dominant spot in the enterprise for a reason, it is a solid performer and is perceived to be much more secure (from this writers perspective this has been mostly true).

It was a bold move for Apple to forge into an extremely competitive space, and they will need to strategically innovate to continue their growth. For now, Apple is beholden to Microsoft and AT&T, but is seemingly biding its time, waiting for a choice opportunity to strike.

I predict Apple will continue to gain marketshare and will be able to better negotiate deals with vendor/partners once they have established themselves as a dominant player. The next strategic step for Apple and RIM might be to port the Blackberry agent across to the iPhone, just like RIM did with Windows Mobile; that might serve Apple’s need to push a superior hardware model while protecting RIM’s base of licensees. Could that pave the way for a merger or acquisition? Hmm… that’s definitely worth chewing on!

For those of you in the “copier dealer” channel (although I’m loath to use this term) you are probably wrestling with the realities of Document Management Systems (DMS). In a recent article in ImageSource titled Top 10 Industry Trends, authored by John Mancini, the President of AIIM.

In this article John outlines what he believes to be the top 10 drivers within the DMS space… Being in the business of documents, I found the article compelling.  Not surprisingly, taking the number 1 spot was the momentum SharePoint is garnering. John goes on to say:

1. The entry of Microsoft SharePoint as a serious player in the document and records infrastructure marketplace.  This is one of the most important developments in evangelizing these technologies that we have ever seen. Suppliers and consultants will debate what MOSS can do and what it can’t.  But it won’t matter; it will spread like kudzu through the end user community.

John could not be more dead on with this. With the advent of SharePoint 3.0, whether it be the enterprise or SMB offering, Microsoft has taken root in the document space. We use it daily for both an Intranet solution as well as for dashboarding and workflow. Microsoft has once again bundled a core offering into the OS; since it is free to get started, meets some entry needs for the SMB, and is extremely compatible with the predominant desktop OS and Office suites it is indeed “spread[ing] like kudzu” (John must’ve been to South Carolina recently)!

While this solution is great for “evangelizing” the DMS/CMS market, I have quickly discovered it is not a very good DMS solution. Don’t mistake the fact that it has some wonderful collaborative tools and is extremely solid in ad hoc workflow solutions. However, SharePoint offerings are not true DMS’s in and of themselves.

Education is a tough thing here because many people don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to store a document within a database, as part of the SQL table record. It took me seeing what happens when you hit your first 20,000 documents stored - or worse have a client hit 3,000,000 pages 3 years early!

The performance takes a huge hit, and backups are a nightmare simply because you are handling 1 huge file instead of incrementally dealing with each file as needed. Think about your entire customer base calling you on Monday morning demanding a service call! You’re service team would crumble.

In closing, SharePoint will give your dealership the opportunity to talk to more customers about DMS, but if you don’t get there first and have an education strategy for them - you are the one that will get schooled.

My suggestion is to partner or acquire talent that can bring SharePoint knowledge into your company. It’s a technology that has its place - so you can either learn to use it to your advantage or see how much longer selling copiers with Paperport will last…

Tomorrow we discuss the entry of “alternative” delivery systems… what does that even mean?

At a recent Apple March 6 Event, Steve Jobs and some of his team outlined both the iPhone Enterprise Beta Program and iPhone Software Development Kit (SDK). While the long awaited SDK has been eagerly devoured by developers across the industry, I was keenly watching the Enterprise Roadmap.

In a nutshell, this allows the iPhone to connect to a Microsoft Exchange Server using ActiveSync. Thus, the end-user can receive “pushed” e-mail, calendar events, and contacts. This one area signals a storm that is long overdue in the world of technology, the introduction of a truly disruptive technology such as the iPhone & iPod Touch.

For a long time, Microsoft has catered to the goliath of enterprise business, giving this audience just enough of what they needed to hook them into an ever growing web of Microsoft products. They quickly understood that businesses wanted integration across their networks, to bring a common user interface (UI) to everyone. Why spend a lot of time and money on integrating software platforms when you have at least a promise of integration with a suite of solutions by one provider.

Microsoft leveraged their dominance in the desktop market to grow into the office suite, back office products, and even the mobile market.

Apple on the other hand had floundered without Steve Jobs at the helm, and has been playing catch-up for quite some time upon his return. However, by “the 4th quarter of 2007, the iPhone surged to a 28% share of the US converged device market…” (TechCrunch). With the veritable flop of Vista (to date), the surge of adoption of the iPhone and iPod products, and the launch of the iPhone Roadmap Apple stands poised to ride a cresting wave of unfounded end-user adoption…

Even though many people are making a big deal out of the iPhone, there are some other key things that hold true adoption of the Apple offerings back, and those are 3rd party application integration. Sure you can run Office 2008 on a Mac, but does it really work? Does it really play as well with the OS as it might on Vista?

Enter virtualization technologies… and I’m not just talking about Bootcamp or parallel here people; there are revolutionary new offerings whereby applications themselves can be pushed to the desktop for an extremely rich user experience while allowing IT an easier path to management.

And let’s not forget SaaS (Software as a Service). The ability to have an almost desktop-like experience is quickly replacing the “old” model of licensing and extending the enterprise across work and home computers securely. IT staffs are scrambling to handle more diverse fleets of hardware and software every day, and the resurgence of centralization (e.g. virtualization and thin/web clients) is gaining some tremendous ground and attention.

All these things play to Apple’s advantage, as the underdog. However, these are just as easily capitalized on by others as well. So what is the catalyst that will tip Apple over the edge to gain true marketshare? Giving customers what they want how they want it… see Starbucks!

I’m going on record! I predict that IF apple continues on its iPhone Roadmap, continues to develop disruptive technologies (as they have proven they can do), and can keep giving customers what they need and want, in 5 years Apple will have between 25% - 45% marketshare in the business desktop/notebook space.

 Yes, Apple can take over the enterprise! Next, can Apple unseat RIM BlackBerry?