Ed Brill

Interesting questions Ed...

My first experience of Domino/Notes was back in 1995 when I'd just joined an IBM Hardware BP as a graduate. We assisted with the implemention of Notes 3 on RS/6000 for a major 40,000 user company in the UK.

Therefore when IBM bought Lotus later that year it simply brought the two partner vendors under the same banner from my point of view. Since then, I've worked with Lotus as an IBM SWG brand or pillar, and so its always been a matter of the best of the Lotus heritage along with the values of Big Blue - a perfect combination.

As for my customers and the rest of the market, I don't see anybody being outwardly anti-IBM and thus still treating Lotus as an independent company. However, a lot of folks, especially in SMB, simply don't understand what IBM is or what it stands for. They know and understand what Microsoft, Apple or Google means to their business, but often just can't get a feel for why IBM is relevant to their businesses.

This goes back to a comment on the previous post - IBM needs to understand customers as consumers and to sell to them as such. A purchaser in an SMB will be more used to buying computer paper from Staples or laptops from the Apple Store than they will negotiating Passport Advantage renewals with an IBM rep. Tell them what the product is, what it looks like, where to buy it, and make it as easy as possible - that's the answer...

Without knowing more, it sounds like a MBO looms at Lotus(or maybe just take it back private), or some other people are looking at new alternatives.

It is very sad, yet telling, that in a few hours you were enlightened after how many years within the company? This is part of the problem with much of the corporations today, the above the line discussions and the below the line discussions.

The average joe in a company has no real clue about the direction of the company until long after it gets there. Sure you hear the CEO say something and read about this plan or that but it's so far removed from the relaity of the direction people lose faith.

In an era of social networking, perhaps this is a sign that IBM understands it and wants to break down that barrier.

That or you are being groomed for some executive position finally and that is good news too.

IBM still means for me a very large company with almost unlimited resources at my disposal(well as much as one can get from the outside) and as you point out an end to end player.

It's stability, it's well known, but at the same time it's really impersonal.

And that's what I miss, and it was a main reason I left Lotus when IBM took over, I could not see being part of such an impersonal universe when Lotus always meant collaboration, sharing and openness in my mind, and I think in the minds of those on the outside.

IBM sold off the PC hardware which also had a huge following. So the question is not really for us, but for you and IBM....just what are you thinking and maybe if you tell us we can help you too.

I first worked with Lotus, at an IBM hardware customer, in 1993. Been working as admin mostly since with it, off and on, sometimes more, sometimes less.

It still felt kinda like Lotus was the red haired stepchild of the IBM world, and other IBM groups helping to replace it at other companies, probably didn't help.

It was really good to hear in that press release that Lotus was an important pillar (or wasn't the wording even strong... flag ship?) in the IBM Software world.

I think IBM is important to us, because without it Lotus would have probably not survived. It might have been bought by someone else.

What IBM stands for to customers in general? Good question... big blue, first PC maker, who doesn't make PCs anymore... not sure

I will try to behave and not tell what IBM means to me as a Lotus customer but I am surprised that you bring this up.

I tend to think more about products and people, the company or a brand became less important to me. Unfortunately especially the people part is fragile one.

My attitude toward IBM is very conflicted. I recognize they are a leader in technology and have made huge strides in semiconductors, processors and hardware. They make systems that "just run" and scale out to support hundreds of thousands of users. I use an IBM BladeCenter, and IBM SAN, and an AS/400. It's amazing stuff, if a little too over-engineered and under-documented at times.

When you talk about Lotus in relation to IBM my attitude shifts sharply. As far as I'm concerned Lotus is its own operating division with its own customers and therefore its own priorities (which should be driven by customers). However, through the years I have been told that certain things weren't done in newer releases of Notes and Domino because of IBM's priorities because it conflicted with other IBM product placement. I don't know if this was an attempt to be inclusive and show that Lotus was no longer and independent company, but in my mind it created the perception of IBM as an evil overlord holding Lotus back. Couple this with my belief that IBM couldn't successfully market anything to anyone and I feel IBM has simply been using Lotus as a cash cow. There has been investment lately, but given the utter lack of quality throughout the 8.x releases and the continued missing of the proverbial boat with regards to customer demand for features I still see it as a half-hearted effort done out of desperation.

It's also a matter of touch. I have Lotus products in my face every day. I never see the IBM stuff unless I go into the computer room. Thankfully IBM hardware is rock solid so I don't have to, but it also means that I'm not thinking about IBM as often as I am Lotus (which isn't always a good thing, either).

Another aspect of touch is IBM (and Lotus') field relationships. In my opinion there just aren't enough IBM or Lotus people in the field. I've beaten the marrow out of that horse's bones so I'll leave it alone, but I do think it would make a lot of sense if IBM and Lotus had a stronger presence in mid-tier and growing markets.

As a "1-month-ex-IBMer" here is my take. IBM by the very definition of its name is a company based on creating machines for the business world. That name has huge recognition on the street, but ask anyone what IBM does, and the answer will 99% of the time be "they are a big computer company". The average person has no idea IBM makes software or has global financing. If they do happen to know that IBM makes software, they certainly don't know the intricacies of the 5 brands. If they do know one brand (DB2, or Lotus, or...) they probably only know one or two products in that brand. (Microsoft and Google both have multiple divisions inside the company, but only analysts know that or care. To the public, they are simply Microsoft and Google) But the average person is not IBM's target, and that is the problem. IBM still thinks "business", while the world is moving to "consumer". I know this is an old topic, but nothing about IBM touches the daily lives of the consumer. For example...

I wake up in the morning to the alarm on my Apple iTouch or RIM Blackberry. When I walk downstairs and fire up my computer, it is now an Apple. Even if it was still a ThinkPad, that would be Lenovo now not IBM. I think (no facts here) that for most "home users" the PC under their desk is a Dell, Compaq, or no-name from their local computer store or Best Buy. (short version, using a computer does not instantly provide IBM recognition). While using my computer, no part of my day requires me to use anything that makes me think of IBM. The OS? Nope. Checking my business email or calendar? Unfortunately no. ;-( Checking my personal email or calendar? No. Firing up my chat client? No. Logging onto my social networks? No. Smaller actions like looking at weather, stocks, maps, movie times, photos, videos, blogs, bookmarks, file sharing? No all around. While IBM makes the chips for all the gaming systems, the recognition still goes to Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo. My music player? Apple. etc, etc, etc. I'm NOT IBM-bashing, just pointing out that at no time during my day, does IBM fulfill a personal need of mine.

Do I wish my company was using Notes, Sametime, Connections, and Symphony? Of course! Unfortunately they know little or nothing about these products, and we're an IBM BP. Grant it, in a limited way for integrating with Connections, but that brings up a good point. No one from IBM has approached us suggesting that we add Sametime awareness integration or build a Notes 8 sidebar app. I digress, we can talk about that in another post.

So to conclude "What do you think IBM means to those unaffiliated with the Lotus brand, or outside the IT industry altogether?", I guess my answer is little more that "big computer company" because IBM has provided no reason for them to think anything else. I hope Blue House can change that, and provide a reason why I need IBM during my day.

I think most people I know would think "that's for really big business" when they hear IBM. All those "On Demand" commercials meant nothing to most people, in my opinion. Who in the world was IBM trying to market to? I always think of Comcast's "On Demand" and how that allows me to watch movies or TV shows when I want to. I still have no idea what IBM's On Demand stuff is about.

What IBM means to me in regards to Lotus related products has changed over the last few years. I first started doing development work for the Notes client in 2003 and attended my first Lotusphere in 2004. I left there thinking that IBM was killing Lotus and didn't understand this amazing product they had and what all it could mean for them. In the last year or two it seems IBM has finally woken up and I think that IBM is, and will continue, to do things for the Lotus brand of products that probably wouldn't have been possible without IBM.

As a developer, however, I sometimes feel like Charles does because for some reason IBM can't make time to give me an effing LotusScript class browser. Is there a development feature more developers want then this?

Funny, to me, what if IBM really desn't care how their are seen as long as they are used?

As was pointed out, aside from POS and Lotu what ouches people daily?

You could argue, Portal, Websphere apps Rational devlopment, b2 front ends butmst people just see a brower now.

Perhaps if IBM spent some time creating white market software solution(based on existing softwre) but allowing for rebranding of it ENTIRELY, they might be happier, andmake mre reveue.

It works or supermakrets, MVO (mobile virtual operators, like Virgin who does this with many things).

The first thing customers want off of Quickr is the IBM logo, or off the blog template o anything. We want customize/personalization, you will sell it more is my thoughts.

I know how to do this asdo most of us, but has IBM ever created a new division, like GM did with Saturn,to resell a "new" product which was really made up of the other software and WITHOUT an IBM logo?

Websphere was the right idea, although something not so cumbersome would be useful. Don't scare people off from the start. We still have a long way to go for the ease of install/admin especially in the consumer friendly Quickr.

Want IBM to be seen rheard, then change the ship around an aim at conumers otherwise don't complain, you re wher you needto be in the corp. world and if not, it's not because of advertising or marketing.

I thought of a few more...

- An office suite, which IBM is doing good things around with Symphony. I hope it gets seamlessly tied to the web.

- Web conferencing, which IBM is doing good things around with Unyte (but how many people choose this over webex or gotomeeting other that already Lotus faithful)

- VOIP, but people immediately think Skype.

Something is popular when it becomes a verb. Google it. Tivo'd it. I'll Skype you. I'll tweet it. Lotus has a great one with "I'll Sametime you", but it needs to be played up all the time, so people that don't know, start asking "What is Sametime?"

My first experience with IBM and Notes was in college at U of I. Interestingly, I ran into a retired IBM SE out in Gillette, WY last month who used to support the IBM 360/75 that ran the Computer Science school's work (and heated the building.)He kept the worlds fastest card reader (75-77) going for us, among other things, so we could speak volumes of fortran, algol, pl/1 and assembler to it, and avoid the dreaded "SOMETHING TERRIBLE HAS HAPPENED" message. Notes, back then was running in neon orange on Plato and was mostly used to annotate bugs and share solutions, Nobody had coined groupware back then. { Link } and { Link }

But like most people who follow this blog, Notes has been the human interface of IBM for many years. I have know a few IBM'rs (and even was one for 2 years), but many more Lotii.

today I got an email from IBM inviting me to access the SME zone. It turns out that SME stands for "Subject Matter Expert" in the IBM world. For those working with Small to Medium Enterprises this gives the impression that IBM didn't even know they were overloading an acronym.

IBM's broad hardware, software, services and financial practices improve the value of the company as a whole. But it seriously hurts the success of some individual divisions. The software group suffers because of hardware and services. But then, high availability clustering and Linux versions of Domino and Websphere probably don't help the iSeries or pSeries guys either.

Lotus was a "cool" company with a "cool" product. Then IBM swallowed it up and it seemed more interested in seats and revenue than the continued development of the Notes product. They were responsible for sending confused messages on its future. Amongst Notes users this probably strengthened loyalty to the Lotus brand and weakened perception of the IBM brand.

IBM is seen as irrelevant to most end users and to most IT professionals in smaller companies. They target their advertising at the boardroom and not the user. They are large and cumbersome. They are difficult to do business with – they certainly made it harder to buy the Notes product.

I think for most Lotus Notes customers/IT professionals Lotus will always be the stronger brand – I am still a "Certified Lotus Professional" not an “IBM Certified…”. IBM is just the company that bought Lotus.

I think that Notes 8, Quickr, SameTime et al will start to turn this around. Notes can become “cool” again. Some of that should rub off on IBM, but for us long time Notes fans we still haven’t quite forgiven IBM.

Not sure I have a grasp on the question, but I will take a crack at it.

I don't think customers much care on the surface whether there is a IBM Software Group. And for me to think that there is internal back biting is just a "turn off" to the whole IBM brand.

When I think of the old Lotus, I think of this awesome "collaboration effort", where everyone got along and worked together, the technology was the focus, not a brand.

Lotus Notes allowed my company to interact in ways never possible before. It made my company better, since applications were developed faster, we were able to write applications that bailed our management out of trouble, it was understood that Lotus Notes was a tool that was used for fixing short term issues. Quick, Quality and Value!

My management from 1993 to 1999 loved Lotus Notes, we had unlimited funding for the product, we needed a server, or license it was just purchased.

When IBM took over that was lost, IBM did exactly what they said they would not do. The concept of Lotus, was lost, it became a migration path to Websphere and DB2.

Limits were placed on what the Lotus brand could do, features were limited, the nature progression of the product was halted, because it would interfere with Websphere and DB2 sales. (Garnet anyone?)

I know the product improved due to the resources of IBM, but Lotus began to be forced into IBM's highly defined product line.

Customers recognized this, the managers that had invested into supporting the Lotus brand were hung out to dry, abandoned while IBM tried to put together a business direction, and migration strategy.

IBM, Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, from my point of view, they are all businesses with one thing in mind, locking me into buying their products.

Apple on the other hand, doesn't make this so evident. They sell products because their technology is superior, fits into my life style and provides me with value.

I think I understand the direction IBM seems to be taking, IBM is a one stop shop, we are better than Microsoft, because we will grow with your company, and not require you to "rip and replace". But that one stop shop concept is just a veiled "lock in", and I think customers recognize it as that and this pushes them to "Open Source", since there isn't any long term relationship required.

Microsoft is so good at selling a single product that is so tied to all the other products, management has no clue that they will need to continue buying from Microsoft until it is too late to confess, that they were suckered into spending endless amounts of cash, on a inferior technology.

So... Split it up, go back to being Lotus, if functionallity overlaps, great!, That is just more choice for the customer. Tell the customer, we are IBM, we consist of a family of products to meet your needs, Rational, DB2, Lotus, Websphere, Hardware, and Services.

IBM Software integrates with all vendors and platforms including SAP, Microsoft, Open Source, etc.

And allow Lotus to become Lotus again, take on the personality of Lotus, not IBM. Focus on technology that provides value to its customers. The relationship to IBM should become secondary to providing value to the customer.

Don Strawsburg

P.S.

And give away the Mail client, and offer a cheap mail server access package for home users or connect to theirs.

Put Notes on home computers, they will push for it at work. Just like MS Outlook Express.

I had a think about this before replying. As a contract consultant I have a different view. Sometimes I'm a Lotus customer, sometimes IBM and other times (more recently), Microsoft.

I have tried to determine what Lotus means to me before I can determine what IBM means in relationship to it. So for Lotus I have one identification.

"Pinball Wizard"

For IBM?

"Extreme pain".

That about sums it up. I'm aware I'm not typical, but I am by no means alone.

Hi Ed,

I will answer the question from my perspective as I think that's what you are looking for, vs from the perspective of my customers and potential customers. Please note, we are an IBM Business Partner, specializing in Lotus products, so we know the relationship between the entities.

I was a Lotus BP before they bought IBM. We have used IBM hardware exclusively prior to the acquisition. I knew about the failed acquisitions and was very happy when I heard IBM closed the deal.

Similar to Stuart above, it brought 2 existing partners together and drove up additional value to me. We learned about IBM Global Finance and used them in early days. We learned about IBM Global Services and how they are the biggest threat to IBM/Lotus BP's by far. Microsoft and MS partners are no threat in comparison to IGS.

Unlike Alan's current situation, I wake up to my DominoBerry (A nice yellow BlackBerry Curve) I check my Notes mail and I am now using TwitNotes and TwitterBerry in addition to Sametime. We switched this year from Smart Suite to a combination of Open Office and Symphony, when Symphony catches up fully, we will standardize on that. All of this is done on my IBM Thinkpad Z60m, soon to be a cool Lenovo x300 which is when I will also probably take a 3rd attemppt at Linux for daily use. I have approx $2M worth of IBM Blade and some non-Blade servers, SANs, Rack LCD's, Rack keyboards, Racks, Rack Cooling and I even have an IBM paper shredder. I think technically I bleed blue (I wish) but I bruise up really good in Yellow. We are also working closely with the Foundations team on a cool project that I am unable to disclose more than that on.

So, even though we are an IBM Partner, we are also a good sized customer. We consider ourselves an IBM Partner and an IBM customer.

IBM to me means an incredibly diverse organization that as you said, can do end-to-end, I have met enough people within IBM that I can pretty easily find a resource that I need to do pretty much anything, and do it anywhere.

That's MY perspective. I think the others that have responded probably wrap up the general opinion on IBM and even Lotus.

It really is time to give someone else an opportunity to do IBM's marketing, the current and past method is not working. And no, I couldn't do better myself, but there are lots of others that could.

--Pete

As a Notes developer I view myself more as a "Lotus Notes" customer than a "Lotus" customer. I have rarely worked with companies that have a significant investment in other IBM technologies (except Lotus Sametime). So for me the greatest frustration has come from IBM's constant efforts to steer its customers away from Lotus Notes to other IBM products (DB2, Websphere, Workplace, Connections, QUICKR). I don't see this working. Yes, they are steering them away from Notes, but not to other IBM products. There have been some great improvements to the user interface with Notes 8.0 and some welcome improvements to server administration. But Notes development is totally outdated. I very much doubt that the old Lotus/IRIS combination would have allowed this to happen. e.g. The lack of an eclipse editor for LotusScript in Notes 8.5 (after all the cheering at LotusSphere) shows to me that many at IBM still don't get it. Who are the invisible people at IBM responsible for these aspects of Notes development? Outside of yourself and Mary Beth Raven I know of very few people at IBM and almost nothing of what IBM have planned for the product. One thing IBM seems to be good at is keeping secrets.

@11 Alan, I can attest that SME = Subject Matter Expert is not exclusively an IBM usage. I've heard it here at HP, and elsewhere in the industry. It may be a USA thing. From a little article in Wikipedia { Link } I'm inferring (perhaps incorrectly) that the term came from the Six Sigma methodology.

Although I am an IBMer, there are still lots and lots of parts to the business that I don't understand or know about, and I've spent time in Lotus and in our hardware group. I think IBM does not strive to build consumer awareness in the same way that Microsoft, Apple, Google, or even Coca-Cola do. Rather, we're moving into high-value, high-innovation plays -- the back-office. "We're everywhere, but you don't know it" kind of thing, just like Cisco, 3M, DuPont, Tyco, United Technologies, etc. Lotus just happens to be the most visible IBM brand to end-users/consumers, just as Linksys is for Cisco.

From Wikipedia "in 2007 IBM ranked second in the list of largest software companies in the world." I wonder how many people know that? (or does it even matter?)

Lotus does get a good amount or airtime on that page by the way.

@19 - Cisco runs primetime TV ads for telepresence. 3M does lots of promotions of its individual products, as does DuPont (who are known as a paint company by most consumers.)

If IBM is trying to be like 3M, DuPont, Proctor & Gamble, etc.... then they should start promotion of individual products.

My comment was getting a bit lengthy, so I made a blog entry out of it:

{ Link }

Keep up the good work, Ed. It takes guts to ask questions like this.

-- Ferdy

@19 - I agree that Lotus is the most visible IBM brand to end-users/consumers, but nowhere to the extent that Linksys is to Cisco. Linksys is seen on shelves at Best Buy.

And Cisco didn't try to create some new "better product" to replace the Linksys line after they acquired them.

They have done some good things to Lotus, such as promoting certain types of openness (ODF, etc.) They have huge amounts of resources to put into the product line.

Once I explain to somebody that Lotus is still around ("You mean that spreadsheet from the 90's?") because IBM acquired them, their eyes open a bit.

IBM does add some "street cred" to Lotus as a serious brand of business software. If IBM is behind it, and running it, and moving it forward, and selling the hell out of it, people know that it's got to be good for something.

The problem is that Joe Everyuser doesn't know that Lotus is still around, let alone the products.

Fix that, and throw in an *occasional* BASF-style tagline ("IBM: We make the software you use better") and you've got a winner.

@21 - Don't forget DuPont StainMaster!

Ironically every few months Cisco is thinking about dumping the Linksys brand because in some areas it gets too much attention.

Employer.

A New Zealand perspective:

My impression of IBM is that they achieve very little, want little to do with us and when they do, it tends to revolve around large expense accounts, boozing/smoozing with no care for the people that actually get the job done or the products they "sell".

When I read this blog, Alan's, MBR etc and see the passion and drive that does exist within IBM it ultimately feels like a bitter reminder of what we're missing down here. And I end up wondering why I remain so loyal? I believe that I do a better job of selling the IBM brand into our company than they ever have.

I don't attend many IBM events because I intently dislike the "IBM Gorilla suit culture" that exists at them and I'm an intravert and these things are tough OK!. When I do get the nerve to actually attend and talk to people, I feel like I'm not alone in my general disdain for IBM and I believe this is why so many companies and government departments continue a steady migration path off of Lotus Notes.

All of this said, the one person that I interact with on a semi-regular basis within IBM who I have any respect for is a great guy (he helps with our hosted server environment). He goes the extra mile and on numerous occasions has dug us out of the shite when it wasn't his responsibility to do so. Now I learn he is for the chop due to underachievement. Bullshit - he's for the chop because he works more for his customers than IBM.

IBMs biggest problem is a people problem. They need to hire people who can connect with the "common man" and make them feel that they care. I've never encountered such a person from the New Zealand contingent during the 8 odd years that I've slogged my guts out making Lotus Notes a valuable business tool within our organisation. I can think of only one word for that; disgraceful.

This impression has been formed over the 11 years that I've worked in IT with IBM a key business partner.

I've not done any huge research here, but just a few quick observations. Does anyone refer to Webex as Cisco Webex now? (the web site does have a small logo). Does anyone refer to Youtube as Google Youtube? Then there is Microsoft Office Groove 2007, or IBM Lotus Sametime Unyte. Perhaps when IBM or MS acquires a company, they should leave the name and branding alone. Then again, perhaps they should not. Just thinking outloud.

I've been offline the last eight hours on a driving trip.. there are some great comments here and it will take me a while to digest and respond to them. Thank you all for sharing.

I do want to hit one directly right away though: @2 Keith said.... "it sounds like a MBO looms at Lotus(or maybe just take it back private), or some other people are looking at new alternatives. ... That or you are being groomed for some executive position finally and that is good news too."

I assure you there is no buyout, selloff, or taking "Lotus" back private going on -- I'm not sure I'm supposed to say that but just wanted to make sure that you didn't inadvertently sow the seeds of FUD. It doesn't even technically or organizationally make sense at this point -- so many Lotus products are integrated with other IBM software that no one brand in software group stands alone. It's really quite the opposite, with all the acquisitions in the Palmisano era.

So maybe it's the other thought :-)

@28 - Hope so! An IBM Blogger getting promoted! What would Volker say? :-D

As long as you still touch Lotus that would be a Good Thing (tm).

What Don @14 said.

I started working with Notes 2.0 as a BP, and haven't stopped since. I regard myself very much as a Lotus parter/customer. While I welcome the resource depth and reputation IBM brought with it to the acquisition, and Lou Gerstner's enthusiasm for Notes was very encouraging, it quickly became clear that IBM as a whole didn't get it. Over the following few years the lights in the Lotus community dimmed, and killing Garnet in favour of migration to Websphere/Workplace just about put them out altogether. That whole branding debacle has been discussed ad nauseam already, so I won't elaborate, but IBM's treatment of the Lotus brand over the first decade of its ownership still leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth, and a legacy of suspicion that is hard to shake.

Having said all that, the last few years have been a very different story. With leadership from you, Ed, as well as (of course) Mike Rhodin, and the consequent additional funding, Mary-Beth's great work, and Bob Picciano shaping up well, it looks as though IBM is finally treating Lotus the right way.

I still bleed Yellow, though, rather than Blue.

: )

AB

Lotus did have a cool product. I think the market has caught up and a lot of the "coolness" of the product has been lost in the "not-so-cool" big IBM marketing machine.

I'm not sure IBM being the parent is the problem. Personally I don't particularly care who the parent is but I think people are confused by organisations who try and do too much.

Is it:

Notes

Lotus Notes

IBM Notes

IBM Lotus Notes ???

Notes is probably not a name for the next generation. Innovation in the product needs to be complimented by innovative marketing....

Just my $0.02

interesting questions.

1) affiliated with the lotus brand.

I've work for Lotus, IBM and IBM Business Partners. I have friends that have worked for Lotus before IBM and they are still there now - working and dealing with big companies can have its rewards as well as its frustrations.

Notes was Lotus flagship product for email and application development but at IBM it was not (that maybe changing). Notes, at Lotus, was the cool product and a serious technology for intranet/lob applications. At IBM it wasn't a serious product for applications - just email. Lotus (the brand) is becoming cool again with some of the newer products and Notes/Domino is getting there with the 8 release features and soon 8.5 - but will be be considered a serious choice for intranet/lob applications again ? The number technology choices for those type of applications has increased, so has the development tools and the requirements.

I do find it odd that sales targets are set in such a way that the sales folks would rather let a competitors product into an account than a product from a different brand of their own company. I do understand how the IBM services would recommend other technology - if its a better fit for a customer then the customer wins - which is the way it should be. However, how much internal sales is done to promote Lotus products if parts of IBM hate the product and other parts try to displace it. Have they got all the information to make the best informed decision or is it a preconceived idea of Notes circa v4.5 - much like some IT professionals outside of this community.

Notes/Domino isn't a silver bullet (i'm talking applications here). In fact no technology is. It is a sweet spot for some solutions and that message is something that should be uniform across IBM.

2) unaffilated with the lotus brand.

Recognition. IBM is recognized, even if it is for big computer company (and sponsoring some selected sporting events). Lotus on the other hand is not recognized by the man on the streets. When I speak to product managers in global pharma companies about what we will use to build their web application, Lotus and Domino gets the blank look. I usually follow by saying IBM software, which doesn't. I can't imagine trying to get the same level of comfort with a client in explaining a LAMP stack.

It would be nice to have that same level of recognition for Lotus. If I look at the pharma companies and how the promote the individual brands it's very different. Do you buy the drug because of the brand or because a certain pharma company makes it. They advertise the brands on TV rather than the company. Recognition, for the unaffiliated, is with the brand not the company.

I think that the whole Lotus team (and community) have done a fantastic job and I'm looking forward to seeing what transpires in the coming years - keep up the good work.

It would be interesting to see the response if the same question was posted outside of this community. Have you thought of posting on linkedin ?

After reading the posts for a long time, there are two things, that pop up all the time. People bleed yellow and have negative or neutral feeling towards IBM. Which is nothing new and it is consistent with my impression. Having worked with quite a few IBM/Lotus employees, I think there are even inside IBM two kinds of people, those who bleed yellow and those who don't bleed at all and the first group is still working for Lotus. The others work for IBM. Even when talking marketing with IBMers, most of the time it is fullfilling some plan and no exitement for the product at all. The target is the plan and not a satisfied customer. Big company problem. That explains those terrible adds. Somewhere somebody in the IBM Management does not like the fact, that the IBM brand's recogintion value is way down, I think 56 (MS is number 2 after google). And now they try to push this up (with a plan and a budget but lacking some taste), instead of pushing the products. This all shows the lack of identification with the whole company and especially with its products. Numbers count, not common sense. Therefore it is no wonder, that most of us customers want to know about Lotus stuff and don't care a lot about IBM, because the exitment comes from the Lotus geeks inside your company and not IBM as a company. It's people.

In a recent post from Alan, Nathan Freeman used the word arrogance in connection with marketing. Unfortunately I have to agree, when I talk about IBM. Recent experiences showed it again, when I was treated like an ..... by IBMers but had constructiv and good discussions with Lotus guys. But they do not count anymore.

Therefore I am somewhat fed up with IBM but I still like Lotus.

I work at a IBM Business Partner and truthfully I don't think my customers think about IBM as whole, they think about the pieces of hardware and software that they use in their business.

I would relate this to something like a Chevy(Chevrolet) guy or gal caring about what the Cadillac division is doing. They may hear or read something cool, but just smile and go on because it's just not pertinent in their day to day activities.

I still say that from my perspective, the two most exciting and dynamic groups to work with, either from IBM or from the customer side of the business is the the Lotus and System i (AS/400) crowds.

IBM is a huge company with lots of products and services, and to think that they will generate excitement about all of them is just crazy. The bulk of these products aren't just very interesting to talk about with the general public, but if you have a need for one, then you have an interest. I would suggest that IBM take a closer look at what products do get the buzz and get the user communities excited and enthused and push them more, in the end it helps the company as a whole.

Back as an admin and designer in 1993 with yes a cool product called Lotus-Notes Server.

Then IBM came to save Lotus against what Microsoft wantd it to be: nothing.

The funny stuff: all IBM guys I do know in France are from Lotus-France (development of course, Not the car factory).

And even when someone said: uh uh Notes is dead (Microsoft and IBM), now WebSphere is here (wasn't it during a LotuSphere event?), I kind of laugh and say, wait and see...

So Notes is Back "Kill Bill Volume 8", but the danger is still there, xPages work only for Web, but guys Lotus-Notes client is far better than a web browser!. The danger I see is that all the old team from Lotus will leave one day the boat and then, that will be terrible. I like Eclipse, but man with a powerful laptop, Lotus-Notes 4/5/6 and even 7 is 1000% faster after the setup is done than Notes 8 under Eclipse.......

I stopped reading at Alan's post b/c it was so on point and had to digest it before continuing.

Anway what IBM means to me relative to Lotus? IBM is the company that bought Lotus at probably the lowest point Lotus could as an entity unto itself. The 123 cash cow was all but dried up and do you really think Lotus in and of itself would have lasted this long had it stood on it's own? I know it's a great past time to say how much IBM marketing sucks and how one side is canablizing the other, but quite honestly had it not been for IBM buying Lotus we wouldn't be at this point 10+ years later talking about Notes/Domino at least having equal market share to Outlook/Exchange.

I have been a Lotus developer and administrator since R3.0. I have a yellow "I AM" sign here at my desk. The company I work for is really two companies of near equal size that merged 4 years ago. They have Exchange and we have Domino. Sitting beside the "I AM" sign is a book just given to me today. It is titled "Mastering Microsoft Exchange Server 2003."

For some reason the CFO just decided we should be on his mail system, Exchange. I have been asking myself why? How could this happen given how much better the Lotus family of software is and especially how much more my half of the company has done with Lotus software than the other half of the company has done with Exchange, SharePoint, etc. As I explore this question, here is what I have found:

You are spending too much effort marketing to us, the technical people who already know the value of the products. IBM, Lotus, whatever. We really don't care about the brand name We work with the products so we know what they can do.

You don't spend enough effort marketing to the people who don't know IBM. Why did my CFO choose Exchange? Because he doesn't think Notes is very widely used, especially here in the U.S. He doesn't believe me when I say Domino has the same market share as Exchange. He really doesn't care if a bank in China just bought 300,000 licenses. He doesn't care about all the technical geek-speak stuff that makes Lotus Notes a far superior product. He sees IBM as this little niche in the software world, while Microsoft is ubiquitous. It is all about branding and name recognition. Many of our employees are that way too. Their only exposure to IBM is what they do with Lotus Notes at work. That is it. All you are to them is work-related email and a few databases and IM to other people at work. Our company's products run on software written in .net by our software developers who programmed in .net in college. They don't see Notes designer clients in college. Big mistake. The youth drive the adoption of technology more than you might think.

IBM has to become ubiquitous. People have to use your products for personal use as well as work. It has to become part of their everyday lives. If they did that, they would become more familiar with it. They would find all those cool features hidden in the Notes client that they don't have time to find at work. I spend huge amounts of time listening to users say "I wish Notes could do [whatever]" to which I usually reply "sure it can. Just click here..." Another reason my CFO chose to move to Outlook is "Notes takes too much training." Well, so does Outlook. But people are getting that training on their own time at home.

IBM is not the first company to take a great computer product and target too narrow an audience. Another one I can think of is Burroughs/Unisys with their BTOS operating system of the 1980's. It was everything that DOS was and more. But they focused on banking and government. And it died.

Quit wasting your time blogging with us techie geeks. We're convinced. Take it to the masses. Become visible to us every day at home, where we shop, where we play and where we learn. Imagine what kids would do if they had the Notes designer client on their computer at home. RSS feeds, IM to all their friends, using personal journals, keeping all their friends contact information in names.nsf, saving photo albums in a Notes database, replicating cool applications to each other, creating games that run within the Notes client. I guarantee you long-term success with the IBM brand if you would only start thinking outside the corporate box.

@37 - "He sees IBM as this little niche in the software world, while Microsoft is ubiquitous."

Interesting, IBM develops and sells more software products that run on Windows than Microsoft does. I assume you mean "he sees IBM Lotus Notes as this little niche" not IBM Software Group in general ?

@38 - Doubt it. He's a CFO. What exposure to IBM software do you think he has? Does he use DB2 or Rational everday?

@36: ...but quite honestly had it not been for IBM buying Lotus we wouldn't be at this point 10+ years later talking about Notes/Domino at least having equal market share to Outlook/Exchange.

Mike, I often wished Microsoft or even better Apple would have bought Lotus. Imagine their marketing talents with such a great product.

IBM is seen as a dinosaur unable to think about the *users* only the money. They pumped up Lotus with "business" products but neglected the user interface. I still think Notes is lacking from resources. GUI, fully Ecplise IDE, iphone integration - they all take ages to show up.

It's important to me as a Business Partner that Lotus is an IBM brand. Teamsoft approaches new customers who don't know Lotus, but they know IBM. Saying that Teamsoft is an IBM Business Partner gives credibility.

Right Erik. In fact, this CFO is in the other half of the company. That company has *no* IBM technology but for those few who are now using our Sametime. That half of the company (who is the parent in this instance) refers to themselves as "a Microsoft shop". Which, in reality is far from true, but is the perception.

So to my point, while we chat here amongst ourselves and with people at IBM, it is totally invisible to the people who make the decision of what technology to buy. Even Lotusphere misses the mark for acquiring new customers. "If IBM has a conversation online and no CEO hears it, does it make a difference?"

@28 Ed we hope it's the other way and means more for you, it's deserved.

I agree it would be hard to split Lotus out of IBM now, but then again stranger things happen in the world. But glad to hear it's not the case, although I'd be open to negotiating a price if it got to that point.

To me, IBM means big $$ and I don't see them using it to grow the esteem/validity of the product that my company has (rightly so) invested years and $$ in.

@37 David, your experience is telling -- we are a "Notes-saturated shop" since 1996 with no threats of take-over and no loud voices of discontent and yet... it feels so precarious... The suggestion has been made that it would be prudent to "investigate technology alternatives" to reduce the organisation's risk should Notes (finally) fail or we can no longer find qualified people to work with Notes/Domino. I can't help but think there is more that can be done to make my CFO respond to the suggestion with "You must be joking -- let's spend our time on better things" rather than "Hmm. Yes, that approach does seem prudent."

And everyone who suggested that IBM/Lotus have to make Notes "cool" again (and to do it by making it ubiquitous) is right on. When I watched the ad Nike is running during the Olympics ({ Link } ) I said, "Hey! That's the kind of cool, passionate thing that Lotus used to produce." My Lotus rep used to pass me VHS tapes of Lotus promotional videos which I would show at lunch & learns and people would stay afterwards and ask to see them again -- they thought it was cool to be associated with a product that came from such a cool bunch of people. It would bring a tear to my eye if my tech-savvy 17 yr old nephew could use nmail instead of gmail at home and use Notes in the ways suggested by David.

The other area where IBM/Lotus could make inroads is in the highschools and colleges. Don't just give them free licenses, send people in to do (free) workshops that teach IT staff, instructors AND students how to set up servers, clients, and develop cool apps. Reward institutions that use your product by helping them be the "center of excellence" for your product. Help link up students with Notes customers for co-op terms and full employment. And, offer free training to Business Partners for their employees (I am not a BP but I want my BP to have superbly-qualified employees and I know he has the same issues I have with the cost and availability of training). Make training accessible and affordable -- I live in the 3rd largest city in Canada and the only way I can get someone to a Domino Admin course is to pay air fare and put them up in a hotel AND pay a huge fee -- that's if the course goes ahead, which it doesn't, due to low enrollment... sigh...

Lastly, I would say that it is imperative that the business leaders in our organisations hear a clear message that using Notes & Domino is a wise decision for all the reasons that matter to THEM (and their executive friends will not mock them for this wisdom but rather nod along). And that is IBM's job.