Slowly Enterprises are feeling the winds of change. Open Source, SAAS, PAS, Cloud Computing... we are far beyond the security argument.
Recovered from Hacker News for Product Development: How lessons from a tradesman can help out a techie
As a follow-up of my previous post, about how we are adopting consumer-level products in an entrepreneur environment; we have a mirror trend to adopt the same personal device along the corporate IT policy.
At the end, it's same device. If we think about it from an efficiency point of view, we just need the same access policy, and we have all users/employees connected under one policy.
There are several benefits. Users are not going to try "another ways" to circumvent IT policy. They are accepted under a formal guideline.
By setting official policies on the use of mobile phones in the workplace, you can gain control over the devices with encryption, PIN requirements, and the option to remotely wipe data in case of a lost phone. Try to ban them, and you risk circumvention and security risks.
Intel adopted this trend, and ended up with 15,000 mobile devices hooked up to its e-mail system; nearly two-thirds of them were owned by employees. This was a big win for end users, for the budget, and for efficiency.
Source: ArsTechnica -The single best change your IT department could make—what is it?
There's a strong software and hardware trend to use the same consumer-level products in the enterprise environment. An entry level device can be easily applied in an office or a mid-range product can be bought to use at home (same price point and quality).
Today, reading the article "When Will Your Job Be Consumerized?" I’ve come to realize that my work is already consumerized.
Some years ago, I began naturally to integrate open source software and software-as-a-service. This first steps were oriented to empower the development, and the whole process were still in-house.
Open source has been maturing. In every IT area, you can find software vendors who work only to provide support services based on their own open sourced software; or partners who provide services based on a shared open sourced base package.
Nowadays, IT work is like a "shopping activity", choosing from 30-40 open sourced packages; and, as architect, choosing from the shelf the right features. Development is all about how to seamless integrate the different packages into one only view and design style. In the long term, vendors and the community use to provide frequent improved new versions, so the task in not only about configuration and integration; maintenance is the key for long term support.
To give you a practical example, we are building Professional Networks for specific vertical segments. So we use to match a CMS (Joomla) with a Template, a Directory, a Photo Gallery, a Forum, etc. All package areas are provided by several vendors with a long-term strategy.
At the end, I see an evolution in how software is developed. Each provider has the challenge to sell the best product. It has to be open source to be easily integrated. Software ecosystem is more flexible, and IT consumer has more choices to pick from.
Now, IPv4 is running out. The IPv4 Unallocated Address Number Pool is almost gone.... and the question is: Are we ready for IPv6?
You can check your current status: http://www.test-ipv6.com/
Or, try to navigate to IPv6 enabled sites:
All the cloud marketing is forcing a public review of all computing concepts... now it's time of... databases. SQL.
SQL language rules the current generation of databases. Since its birth (1970), it became the most widely used language for relational databases. We can fairly say SQL is well structured and with a solid foundation, very matured. Today, it's omnipresent. We are talking about MySQL, Oracle, SQLServer, etc. Everyone in the computing business has created at least some tables to model a system.
When I said SQL has a solid foundation, I mean the language is formally proved to be consistent (ACID properties), to guarantee transactions in order to preserve the information. The problem comes when we try to keep the consistency in a networked and distributed environment.
In a cloud fashion, there's a movement claiming for no more SQL, NoSQL. "NoSQL is a movement promoting a loosely defined class of non-relational data stores that break with a long history of relational databases.". So we have to forget the nice SQL place, and begin to think about Blobs (big large binary objects), data distribution, clustering, and redundancy.
 |
To name some actors, we have several categories:
|
Hype comes from vendor-oriented technology, trying to standardize a solution (as open source project... or not). Also, we are talking about young technologies, being developed along versions (missing features or performance issues are frequent). At the beginning, most of them were developed for a specific internal need, and further developed.
In our company, OQUMA, we have successfully implemented Jackrabbit as our core document management technology. The experience was smooth, and it's works pretty fine. Also, (very important) there's a wide ecosystem of companies working with it (Day Software, Nuxeo, Hippo, JBoss GateIn + EXO, Drools Guvnor, etc)
To be fair, SQL is always to be between us, because it's proved to be solid and solves the most frequent scenario. So, now the misleading term "nosql" is translated by the community mostly to "not only sql".
A quick note from the daily news, just to remember it before a laptop / netbook buying decision investing your full salary into a new gadget, this paper from SquareTrade Research has warranties data about malfunction rates:
| Manufacturer | Malfuction Rates |
| Asus | 15.6 % |
| Toshiba | 15.7 % |
| Sony | 16.8 % |
| Apple | 17.4 % |
| Dell | 18.3 % |
| Lenovo | 21.5 % |
| Acer | 23.3 % |
| Gateway | 23.5 % |
| HP | 25.6 % |
Source: SquareTrade Research: Nearly 1 in 3 Laptops fail over 3 years
Yesterday, I was talking with Marta Cruz, from Nextperience. This is the brief review about the chat (to don't forget it ;-) ):
I've been reading The Innovator's Dilemma, by Clayton M. Christensen. According to the author, it's very difficult for a traditional company to innovate its business. Several examples along history support the idea. E.g. Hard Disk Industry, Mechanical Excavator Industry, and Minimill Steel Technology.
In a legacy business, the value network is built for a purpose. It can not be changed to support a disruptive technology.
When a disruptive technology is taking its first step, it's going to be incomplete, not ready for prime time. The legacy customers are not going to see with good eyes the new idea. Management is not going to be supportive for wasted budget in a new field; refurbished ideas are going to win. The scenario is posed to support projects oriented to "update" old technologies.
So, new technologies are developed by new companies. The new company has no other choice to develop its new 
business (cutting the old ties). Even with imperfections, the company will find a market to survive. In the mean time, it will improve the innovation to better compete and win new market. At the end, it will surpass the old technology.
SaaS is growing based on new companies understanding how to adapt the software to be selling as a service. It's a paradigm shift. It's easier to say it, than to apply it. (Remembering the ASP Bluff from the .com era)
Traditional software companies have no good chances. They are fighting in a new arena with a legacy structure and narrowing revenues; trying to keep their traditional customers happy, reuse the current bolts, and cutting costs.
If we are standing in a new company with brand new ideas, let's cut the old ties. We have to forget the habits, and rethink the business for the new customer (I'd like the idea of a natural-born digital native). Let's deconstruct the products and services and rebuild them around the digital native.
Recently, Google added Cordys Process Factory as a Google App. Cordy's BPM OnDemand can be directly integrated with Google applications, like Google Docs.
In this way, we have the Google's Office Suite enabled with an integrated Business Process Management. For example, to better manage enterprise workflows and processes automation.
It's interesting how Cordys is enabling a new business around an online BPM, with Google's support. Not an easy task, since BPM is a difficult value proposition for the general public.
Cordys Process Factory is headed to compete with Microsoft traditional Office desktop suite and Microsoft Biztalk/ Microsoft Sharepoint.
First impression... the BPM-Office proposition is advanced and complex for the user. It's sound for a Google Apps enabled company, with deep process analysis, looking for automation. The Google Docs-Cordys match is well suited for a company already working with OnDemand systems, like Salesforce.com. The key is the consulting side. Who is going to model, develop, and support the processes based on Google Docs with Cordys Process Factory. From Cordys, the support is provided through a direct services, Partner Cloud, Professionals Cloud, and Community Support. Let's see if it becomes mainstream. |  |
Page 1 of 2
