Comments on: Web in a Box, or Mix and Match? http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/ Confessions of a Digital Agency Nerd Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:43:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: John Garner http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-3405 John Garner Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:56:22 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-3405 I'm still coming back to your <a href="http://jonontech.com/2009/08/10/what-has-the-ministry-of-magic-quadrants-got-against-me/" title="Magic Quadrant article" rel="nofollow">Magic Quadrant article</a> in my mind. I think you have a very interesting point about reports on the CMS arena. They all seem to lack information about the breadth of functionalities (are we talking about a full blown forum or a comment system like the one I’m using right now), the ease of implementation, how many bespoke adaptations are required etc. with an 'out of the box' version etc. A more operational view on what is required to get the site up and running. As we experienced together some products can be up and running in a 1 or 2 months whereas others really need closer to a full year's development if not more, and all that regardless of whether you have a long list of functionalities. Maybe the down to earth educate and ‘tell the client the truth about it all’ approach is what clients may be lucky enough to get with an outspoken Head of Development from a leading digital agency rather than a nice looking report ;) PS: 1 more vote for the Bob Dylan quotes I’m still coming back to your Magic Quadrant article in my mind. I think you have a very interesting point about reports on the CMS arena. They all seem to lack information about the breadth of functionalities (are we talking about a full blown forum or a comment system like the one I’m using right now), the ease of implementation, how many bespoke adaptations are required etc. with an ‘out of the box’ version etc. A more operational view on what is required to get the site up and running. As we experienced together some products can be up and running in a 1 or 2 months whereas others really need closer to a full year’s development if not more, and all that regardless of whether you have a long list of functionalities. Maybe the down to earth educate and ‘tell the client the truth about it all’ approach is what clients may be lucky enough to get with an outspoken Head of Development from a leading digital agency rather than a nice looking report ;)

PS: 1 more vote for the Bob Dylan quotes

]]> By: Jon Marks http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-3140 Jon Marks Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:53:58 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-3140 Lucky you. I don't get much exposure to the US Federal Government procurement system, but it sure sounds fun. Is everyone as aware of the system as you are, so it's pretty much a given that one-suite vendor is going to win? Or do the best-of-breed guys still try? Lucky you. I don’t get much exposure to the US Federal Government procurement system, but it sure sounds fun. Is everyone as aware of the system as you are, so it’s pretty much a given that one-suite vendor is going to win? Or do the best-of-breed guys still try?

]]> By: Walid Elgamal http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-3138 Walid Elgamal Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:15:48 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-3138 Another way to look at this, the way our great federal government works, the federal procurement system lends itself to the one suite vendors. An attempt to get the best of bread products can take a government agency to massive disarray and long list of contracts for vendors, SI, infrastructure and PMO players, with each contract is open for a protect or non performing vendors. Even when they awarded the contract to super sized SI, technology changes and contract amending is an endless task. Another way to look at this, the way our great federal government works, the federal procurement system lends itself to the one suite vendors. An attempt to get the best of bread products can take a government agency to massive disarray and long list of contracts for vendors, SI, infrastructure and PMO players, with each contract is open for a protect or non performing vendors.

Even when they awarded the contract to super sized SI, technology changes and contract amending is an endless task.

]]> By: Shane K Johnson http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2949 Shane K Johnson Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:55:38 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2949 I see where you are coming from. I think we were just looking at it at different levels ;) I can see businesses investing in the types of add-ons (ex: GSA) you mentioned along with their WCMS for a best of breed approach. I meant that some businesses do not purchase a full WCMS as it may be too expensive. Instead they purchase a generic CMS, a DM solution, a portal, along with some other ingredients and then try to integrate them so it looks/functions as a single WCMS. In the end a single, nice WCMS would have done the job much better. I see where you are coming from. I think we were just looking at it at different levels ;)

I can see businesses investing in the types of add-ons (ex: GSA) you mentioned along with their WCMS for a best of breed approach. I meant that some businesses do not purchase a full WCMS as it may be too expensive. Instead they purchase a generic CMS, a DM solution, a portal, along with some other ingredients and then try to integrate them so it looks/functions as a single WCMS. In the end a single, nice WCMS would have done the job much better.

]]> By: Jon Marks http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2945 Jon Marks Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:03:39 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2945 Yeah, very wise words on the recession view. Not so sure about the innovation cycle piece being appropriate for us, though. Surely we'll get to a point with some standards in the not-too-distant-future where a product can implement ISearchProvider, IAnalyticsIntegrationHooks or IStoreYourSocialGraphAndContributions. This might be CMIS / OAuth / OpenSocial or some standard not-yet-invented. But when we get there, all-in-one Web In A Box products will surely struggle? Can I ask what FatWire's long term plans are? Will the idea be that FatWire always provides everything (search, analytics, social, etc), can provide it as an optional extra when customer doesn't have another supplier for that, or will focus on the content management side of things mainly? Yeah, very wise words on the recession view. Not so sure about the innovation cycle piece being appropriate for us, though. Surely we’ll get to a point with some standards in the not-too-distant-future where a product can implement ISearchProvider, IAnalyticsIntegrationHooks or IStoreYourSocialGraphAndContributions. This might be CMIS / OAuth / OpenSocial or some standard not-yet-invented. But when we get there, all-in-one Web In A Box products will surely struggle?

Can I ask what FatWire’s long term plans are? Will the idea be that FatWire always provides everything (search, analytics, social, etc), can provide it as an optional extra when customer doesn’t have another supplier for that, or will focus on the content management side of things mainly?

]]> By: Jon Marks http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2944 Jon Marks Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:59:06 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2944 I like our different perspective of the price models. In my head, the "one stop shop" is the cheap version, and the expensive option is the best of breed. For one-stop-shop, think of most of the mid/upper tier products on the CMS Watch WCM report doing everything. For best-of-breed, I'm thinking a WCMS + (Google|Omniture|WebTrends|etc) + (FAST|Endeca|Autonomy|Lucene|etc) + (Telligent|Pluck|etc) + (SiteMorse|SiteConfidence|Vamosa|etc) + .... I like our different perspective of the price models. In my head, the “one stop shop” is the cheap version, and the expensive option is the best of breed. For one-stop-shop, think of most of the mid/upper tier products on the CMS Watch WCM report doing everything. For best-of-breed, I’m thinking a WCMS + (Google|Omniture|WebTrends|etc) + (FAST|Endeca|Autonomy|Lucene|etc) + (Telligent|Pluck|etc) + (SiteMorse|SiteConfidence|Vamosa|etc) + ….

]]> By: Shane K Johnson http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2943 Shane K Johnson Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:39:07 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2943 From what I have seen it depends on the familiarity and budget of the customer. Those customers that are familiar with application development and have a high budget will look at the expensive 'all in ones'. I suspect they understand the concept that 'you get what you pay for' and the fact that integration/maintenance is expensive. Usually because the duct tape keeps coming loose. Those who are less familiar and are on a tighter budget will opt for multiple 'less featured (aka cheap)' products in the hope that integrating them will yield the equivalent of an expensive 'all in one'. They often lose site of the fact that this duct tape approach has no durability. The maintenance/sacrifices of the integration will often negate and product purchase savings. Could be coincidence too. Just happens to be what I've seen. From what I have seen it depends on the familiarity and budget of the customer. Those customers that are familiar with application development and have a high budget will look at the expensive ‘all in ones’. I suspect they understand the concept that ‘you get what you pay for’ and the fact that integration/maintenance is expensive. Usually because the duct tape keeps coming loose.

Those who are less familiar and are on a tighter budget will opt for multiple ‘less featured (aka cheap)’ products in the hope that integrating them will yield the equivalent of an expensive ‘all in one’. They often lose site of the fact that this duct tape approach has no durability. The maintenance/sacrifices of the integration will often negate and product purchase savings.

Could be coincidence too. Just happens to be what I’ve seen.

]]> By: Dmitri Tcherevik http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2942 Dmitri Tcherevik Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:19:28 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2942 I read somewhere that in recession companies gravitate towards all-in-ones and during boom times they prefer best-of-breeds. In other words, they go for the good stuff when they can afford it, and settle for a package deal when they must make compromises. Interestingly, when times recover, they usually make a purchase again, this time buying a couple of best-of-breed to do what the all-in-one could not. I also subscribe to your lego block vision. This is how we build web apps today, if you think about it ... the facebook or the twitter model. There was another study somewhere (MIT?) claiming that all innovation cycles start with best-of-breeds and end with all-in-one suites. Think VisiCalc vs. Office. Given the rate of innovation on the web, i would look twice under the cover of any ECM all-in-one claiming to do the web stuff. I read somewhere that in recession companies gravitate towards all-in-ones and during boom times they prefer best-of-breeds. In other words, they go for the good stuff when they can afford it, and settle for a package deal when they must make compromises. Interestingly, when times recover, they usually make a purchase again, this time buying a couple of best-of-breed to do what the all-in-one could not.

I also subscribe to your lego block vision. This is how we build web apps today, if you think about it … the facebook or the twitter model.

There was another study somewhere (MIT?) claiming that all innovation cycles start with best-of-breeds and end with all-in-one suites. Think VisiCalc vs. Office. Given the rate of innovation on the web, i would look twice under the cover of any ECM all-in-one claiming to do the web stuff.

]]> By: Piero Tintori http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2937 Piero Tintori Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:03:55 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2937 Very interesting stats. 48% is a high figure for companies under 100 employees looking for a "one stop shop" solution. It's an interesting figure as this sized company often often don't have the dedicated resources to roll out larger "one stop shop" projects fully. From what I've seen, these solutions often don't get implemented fully and end up only being used to solve specific issues rather than "everything". Very interesting stats.

48% is a high figure for companies under 100 employees looking for a “one stop shop” solution. It’s an interesting figure as this sized company often often don’t have the dedicated resources to roll out larger “one stop shop” projects fully. From what I’ve seen, these solutions often don’t get implemented fully and end up only being used to solve specific issues rather than “everything”.

]]> By: Philippe Parker http://jonontech.com/2009/09/23/web-in-a-box-or-mix-and-match/#comment-2936 Philippe Parker Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:49:25 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=1107#comment-2936 If you <cite>ask</cite> people, they'll always say they want the best of breed, but when it comes down to buying, they'll want a single relationship with a single supplier. That supplier can go and partner with other vendors, or sub-contract service offerings, but the client wants one contract and one person to go to when things go wrong. That fits in with your vision for selecting an agency rather than a vendor doesn't it? Isn't a full service agency "web in a box" and more (i.e. offline campaigns too)? Yes, the client is at the mercy of a single vendor, but it's easier to manage one relationship than many. I agree with your point about obsolescence, but I think this is likely to affect businesses whether their technology comes from one supplier or from many. The Lego brick option would be the best, provided everyone could say that they wouldn't change the Lego bricks for the next few years... How likely is that? If you ask people, they’ll always say they want the best of breed, but when it comes down to buying, they’ll want a single relationship with a single supplier. That supplier can go and partner with other vendors, or sub-contract service offerings, but the client wants one contract and one person to go to when things go wrong.

That fits in with your vision for selecting an agency rather than a vendor doesn’t it? Isn’t a full service agency “web in a box” and more (i.e. offline campaigns too)? Yes, the client is at the mercy of a single vendor, but it’s easier to manage one relationship than many.

I agree with your point about obsolescence, but I think this is likely to affect businesses whether their technology comes from one supplier or from many. The Lego brick option would be the best, provided everyone could say that they wouldn’t change the Lego bricks for the next few years… How likely is that?

]]>