IBM acquires Bowstreet

IBM announced today they have acquired Bowstreet and will integrate it with Websphere Portal Server.

As more organizations move away from "one size fits all" software, demand for tailored, customizable software has dramatically increased. By adding Bowstreet technology to IBM's software portfolio, IBM customers can now quickly and easily develop tailored, integrated portal solutions designed to meet the specific business needs of their market or vertical industry. Based on results of more than 100 joint customer engagements over the last three years, customers using Bowstreet technology with IBM Rational software built portal applications between 2 to 12 times faster than when using other portlet tools, drastically reducing development costs and producing business benefits in less time.

Red Herring and Peter O'Kelly are among early posters, but there's not much analysis out there yet. Redd Herring pointed out:

IBM and Bowstreet will be facing competition in the portal market from other technology providers such as Vignette, Sun Microsystems, Tibco, Comergent, Portal Software, ClientPortals.com, and DigitalHarbor.

My take is that this is a necessary step to help IBM simplify portal development. IBM announced a partnership with Bowstreet almost exactly three years ago, based on this premise. However, since that time, Microsft Sharepoint has been growing fast and simplicity has been one of its major advantages over Websphere Portal Server.

In addition, Bowstreet has also helped IBM integrate between Domino and its replacement technology, Workplace (which is based on Websphere). Sharepoint is popular with Domino customers because of its strong Office integration, and its relative simplicity. This acqusition may also help IBM plug that leak.

My colleague Don Dodge used to work at Bowstreet, and I'm amazed he hasn't blogged about this yet. However, I'm sure he will, so watch this space.

Comments

[Don Dodge]

Thanks for the pointer to the Bowstreet acquisition. I was one of the former VPs of Product Marketing at Bowstreet back in the go-go years of 2000.

The company raised $150M of VC money, but has since been recapitalized, and more money added by IDG Ventures and the remaining VCs.

Bowstreet is a shadow of its former self. They focused on solving a complex problem that few companies actually had, constant variability of their web applications. They later focused the same technology on building web portals, ultimately becoming just a productivity tool for IBM's Websphere.

SharePoint is so much easier to use and a very powerful, flexible platform. I don't see Bowstreet adding much to WebSphere that hasn't already been available as an add-on component.

This is a big yawn from my perspective.

[Duffbert]

Nice spin there, Cliff... "replacement technology". And you wonder why we don't buy the "we're just here to help" line? Sounds like you're trying to sell the "Notes is dead" song.

[cliffreeves]

Hi, Duffbert. You are right. To be scrupulously fair, I should have said "erstwhile replacement."

IBM was very clear at Lotusphere 2002 and 2003 that Workplace was the replacement for Domino. This was reported pretty widely, but here is a Jan 2005 recap from Enterprise Systems http://www.esj.com/Enterprise/article.aspx?EditorialsID=1227

------ begin quote
"IBM itself is as much to blame for this situation as anyone else. At its Lotusphere user conference in 2002, for example, Al Zollar, then the general manager of Big Blue’s Lotus Software Group, told attendees that the future lay with J2EE and IBM’s WebSphere Application Server. At Lotusphere 2003, Lotus announced a new WebSphere-based “Next-Gen Messaging” platform that was designed to provide simple e-mail services. For many users, this begged an obvious question: If WebSphere powered Lotus’ vision of “Next-Gen” Messaging, was Domino, then, the IT equivalent of chopped liver—that is, legacy code?"
------ end quote

It is also fair to say that IBM has been much more vocal recently about its long-term commitment to Lotus. IBM has recently said clearly that Workplace is not a repalcement. Here is the official IBM position http://www-306.ibm.com/software/swnews/swnews.nsf/n/nhan6ddktt?OpenDocument&Site=dominonews

You have to ask, though, if this is really a permananent reversal of product strategy, and a long-term commitment to Notes, or a temporary reaction to slow adoption of Workplace, and a lukewarm reception from Notes users.

To tell the truth, I don't know for sure.

For my money, I think Gartner has stated the situation most clearly, in this paper: http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=126489

----- begin quote
"IBM's positioning of Workplace against Microsoft represents a tacit admission of the shortcomings of its well-established Notes/Domino product. Within IBM, many viewed the technologies underneath Notes and Domino as limiting the potential to enter new markets and for technological evolution. The Notes/Domino infrastructures were too monolithic and proprietary for the rest of IBM to embrace, and not ready for the emerging world of service-oriented architectures and open systems. In addition, Notes and Domino were alien to the other technology initiatives inside IBM software, such as DB2 and WebSphere. The problem for IBM is that Workplace is not ready yet for Notes/Domino customers to switch to.

Therefore, until Workplace matures, IBM must continue to satisfy the large number of Notes/Domino customers and business partners. At Lotusphere 2004, IBM confused them (see "IBM Needs Independent Vendors to Achieve Rich-Client Vision"). It did a better job in 2005. In "Is IBM's Lotus Notes/Domino a Safe Investment Platform?," many of the questions IBM customers have about the product naming and positioning of Lotus Workplace, IBM Workplace, Notes, Domino, WebSphere and more are answered. "IBM Lotus Customers Lack Support and Deployment Plans for IBM Workplace" provides some education on Workplace and will help you to understand how it will provide opportunities for your organization. "IBM Lotus Partners Hopeful About IBM Workplace" explains why ISVs and service providers should not ignore IBM Workplace and why they need to understand the roles of IBM's different products.

IBM needs to provide more clarity on when and how well various parts of the Notes/Domino ecosphere will interoperate with, and integrate into, Workplace. "Reduce Confusion of IBM Workplace by Understanding Interoperability Levels" explains why planners and architects should not assume that because a product uses the "Workplace" moniker it will be tightly interoperable with the overall Workplace model or architecture. "Workplace Messaging vs. Domino Mail: Confused? You're Not Alone" provides clarification on the confusing messages about IBM's Domino vs. Workplace strategy."
----- end quote