Comments for Big Men On Content http://bigmenoncontent.com Opinions and discussions on content management by two of the biggest guys in the business.(measured by weight not volume) Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:29:40 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part II – How SharePoint Is Capturing ECM by Lee Dallas http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/03/02/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-ii-how-sharepoint-is-capturing-ecm/#comment-369 Lee Dallas Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:29:40 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=891#comment-369 Mr. Arnold's perpectives on the topic are well worth your time http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/2010/03/07/microsoft-sharepoint-the-cms-killer/ Mr. Arnold’s perpectives on the topic are well worth your time

http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/2010/03/07/microsoft-sharepoint-the-cms-killer/

]]> Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part II – How SharePoint Is Capturing ECM by Web Content Management in SharePoint 2010; Windows 7 Sells 90 Million Copies; Apple’s HTC Suit Aimed at Microsoft - SharePoint Daily - Bamboo Nation http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/03/02/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-ii-how-sharepoint-is-capturing-ecm/#comment-368 Web Content Management in SharePoint 2010; Windows 7 Sells 90 Million Copies; Apple’s HTC Suit Aimed at Microsoft - SharePoint Daily - Bamboo Nation Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:48:58 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=891#comment-368 [...] the BlogosphereThe Problem With “E” in ECM – Part II – How SharePoint Is Capturing ECM (Big Men on Content)This is the second installment of “The Problem With ‘E’ in [...] [...] the BlogosphereThe Problem With “E” in ECM – Part II – How SharePoint Is Capturing ECM (Big Men on Content)This is the second installment of “The Problem With ‘E’ in [...]

]]> Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part II – How SharePoint Is Capturing ECM by One interface to rule them all? « Observing Content Management http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/03/02/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-ii-how-sharepoint-is-capturing-ecm/#comment-367 One interface to rule them all? « Observing Content Management Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:34:56 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=891#comment-367 [...] would be interesting to hypothesize how this change would affect the way in which SharePoint has taken the ECM market. Whilst it is true that the UI is not the main reason why SharePoint has made this move it is still [...] [...] would be interesting to hypothesize how this change would affect the way in which SharePoint has taken the ECM market. Whilst it is true that the UI is not the main reason why SharePoint has made this move it is still [...]

]]> Comment on EMC Shifts to Web Experience Management with Fatwire by EMC Admits it Needs Help, Partners with FatWire « Word of Pie http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/02/16/emc-shifts-to-web-experience-management-with-fatwire/#comment-366 EMC Admits it Needs Help, Partners with FatWire « Word of Pie Tue, 16 Feb 2010 21:18:12 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=859#comment-366 [...] Dallas has some good thoughts on this announcement, as does Barb Mosher over at CMS Wire.  Lee tackles the philosophical side of this partnership [...] [...] Dallas has some good thoughts on this announcement, as does Barb Mosher over at CMS Wire.  Lee tackles the philosophical side of this partnership [...]

]]> Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part I by Marko Sillanpää http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/02/10/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-i/#comment-365 Marko Sillanpää Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:51:27 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=857#comment-365 CMIS is just the latest iteration of the same concept (ODMA, WebDAV, VeniceBridge). The problem as I see it adoption. What’s weird is that companies, and ultimately developers, ignore these wrapper technologies. What’s really bad is that some “hard-core” developers actually ignore them and build their own wrapper technologies. In all the cases where I’ve seen in house wrappers, I’ve never seen one reused. Developers need to look back historically at ODBC. Once people started developing to ODBC, database became much easier to work with both in code and in business. For CMIS to really take hold developer, both in the ISV community and corporate world, need to make the first step and start working with it. The problem I see it is that we have lots of Documentum, SharePoint, Alfresco, and FileNet developers and very few content management developers. CMIS is just the latest iteration of the same concept (ODMA, WebDAV, VeniceBridge). The problem as I see it adoption. What’s weird is that companies, and ultimately developers, ignore these wrapper technologies. What’s really bad is that some “hard-core” developers actually ignore them and build their own wrapper technologies. In all the cases where I’ve seen in house wrappers, I’ve never seen one reused.

Developers need to look back historically at ODBC. Once people started developing to ODBC, database became much easier to work with both in code and in business.

For CMIS to really take hold developer, both in the ISV community and corporate world, need to make the first step and start working with it. The problem I see it is that we have lots of Documentum, SharePoint, Alfresco, and FileNet developers and very few content management developers.

]]> Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part I by Marko Sillanpää http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/02/10/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-i/#comment-364 Marko Sillanpää Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:37:06 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=857#comment-364 At 5:30 Eastern on Friday, February 12, 2010, I claim to be the first person to use the term CCM (Cloud Content Management). Sorry Lee you had your chance. At 5:30 Eastern on Friday, February 12, 2010, I claim to be the first person to use the term CCM (Cloud Content Management). Sorry Lee you had your chance.

]]> Comment on 8 Dimensions for CMS Technical Evaluation by Lee Dallas http://bigmenoncontent.com/2009/11/03/8-dimensions-of-cms-technical-evaluation/#comment-363 Lee Dallas Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:15:46 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=641#comment-363 thanks Neil for the comment - sorry for taking so long to reply but I have been pondering the idea of whether or not SMB's should evaluate on different criteria and I think I finally have something meaningful to say - but unfortunately you are going to have to wait a little longer until finishing that post comes up in the queue :) Cheers thanks Neil for the comment -

sorry for taking so long to reply but I have been pondering the idea of whether or not SMB’s should evaluate on different criteria and I think I finally have something meaningful to say – but unfortunately you are going to have to wait a little longer until finishing that post comes up in the queue :)

Cheers

]]> Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part I by Lee Dallas http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/02/10/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-i/#comment-362 Lee Dallas Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:10:54 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=857#comment-362 Thanks for the comment Ian (that was my favorite line too ;) CMIS is a great concept and has the potential for changing how we architect systems and it actually contributes to the demise more than slows it. CMIS is a leveler. It reduces competitive advantage and I agree it further commoditizes the underlying infrastructure and encourages designers to think in terms of "enough" ECM rather than "as much as I can use" ECM. The idea of something other than library services being the core of ECM is not itself new. Autonomy with IDOL and others have tried to cast search as content management before. I do think BPM can be more successful in achieving some of the goals of ECM than monolithic architectures were. What is the dominant gene then? BPM spans structured and non-structured so in theory its more process than content. The shift certainly supports the value of recent acquisitions of Lombardi and Savvion. Thanks for the comment Ian (that was my favorite line too ;)

CMIS is a great concept and has the potential for changing how we architect systems and it actually contributes to the demise more than slows it. CMIS is a leveler. It reduces competitive advantage and I agree it further commoditizes the underlying infrastructure and encourages designers to think in terms of “enough” ECM rather than “as much as I can use” ECM. The idea of something other than library services being the core of ECM is not itself new.

Autonomy with IDOL and others have tried to cast search as content management before. I do think BPM can be more successful in achieving some of the goals of ECM than monolithic architectures were. What is the dominant gene then? BPM spans structured and non-structured so in theory its more process than content. The shift certainly supports the value of recent acquisitions of Lombardi and Savvion.

]]> Comment on The Problem With “E” in ECM – Part I by iantruscott http://bigmenoncontent.com/2010/02/10/the-problem-with-e-in-ecm-part-i/#comment-361 iantruscott Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:12:06 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=857#comment-361 Excellent article Lee, I really like "The problem with ECM is that it is too big to buy but too small to dream about" - I think you've really hit the nail on the head and I look forward to the SharePoint follow up. One thing, I've been pondering is CMIS. Is there something between your short and long views - the thinking that we'll find glue for those "commodotized sub components" and that the ECM ideal could become interconnected content repositories based on business process - rather than just all in one bigness? Cheers, Ian Excellent article Lee, I really like “The problem with ECM is that it is too big to buy but too small to dream about” – I think you’ve really hit the nail on the head and I look forward to the SharePoint follow up.

One thing, I’ve been pondering is CMIS. Is there something between your short and long views – the thinking that we’ll find glue for those “commodotized sub components” and that the ECM ideal could become interconnected content repositories based on business process – rather than just all in one bigness?

Cheers,

Ian

]]> Comment on 8 Dimensions for CMS Technical Evaluation by neillancia http://bigmenoncontent.com/2009/11/03/8-dimensions-of-cms-technical-evaluation/#comment-356 neillancia Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:59:17 +0000 http://bigmenoncontent.com/?p=641#comment-356 I think you're spot-on regarding the evaluation requirements for an enterprise level CMS buyer. How nice would it be if marketing directors used your evaluation criterion and involved their own internal teams instead of relying on prolonged engagements with outside consultants. Think of how much time they'd save! Have you ever considered creating a list of criteria that SMBs should use when making such a decision? I hope you'd agree that the list would be quite different. NEIL Neil Lancia Preation I think you’re spot-on regarding the evaluation requirements for an enterprise level CMS buyer. How nice would it be if marketing directors used your evaluation criterion and involved their own internal teams instead of relying on prolonged engagements with outside consultants. Think of how much time they’d save!

Have you ever considered creating a list of criteria that SMBs should use when making such a decision? I hope you’d agree that the list would be quite different.

NEIL

Neil Lancia
Preation

]]>