Thoughts on SharePoint Conference 2014

March 10, 2014 12 comments

My thoughts on the Microsoft SharePoint Conference 2014.  The event was a great success, held Mar 3-6, 2014, at The Venetian, in Las Vegas.  Compared to previous SharePoint Conferences, SPC14 was held at a bigger venue, it was easier to get around in, the exhibition hall was more wide open, the keynote speaker was about as big a deal as could have been had (Would Hillary have been a bigger coup?) and The.WIFI.Worked.  A tremendously successful conference.  The SharePoint and Office 365 teams at Microsoft deserve to take the next 36 hours off, perhaps attend the Las Vegas NASCAR race, and then bask in the success of their conference.

The new product announcements show some good new direction. I’m particularly excited about

  • the New Office 365 APIs that bring Office 365 closer to parity with SharePoint Server 2013 as a platform for business applications (http://bit.ly/PkMEO2),
  • the new content enablement that is provided for PowerPoint, Excel, and Outlook applications (http://bit.ly/PkMEO2)
  • Improvements to Power BI across the board and the release of Power Map. (Even though this was announced a month ago, I’m adding it here (http://bit.ly/PkOvmd)
  • The concept of Working Like a Network (http://bit.ly/PkO23e). It will take a while for this to roll out, but the application ideas are already starting to roll around this one.
  • And the biggest one, for me and my new company, BluLink Solutions, will be the patterns for migrating Trusted Code solutions to the App Model (http://bit.ly/PkOXkj).

SPC14 was the 5 year reunion for those attendees of the tremendous and inimitable SPC09 conference, and it was the 10 year anniversary of the launch of SharePoint 2003, which started the enterprise-wide push and where “SharePoint” started to find its legs, as it grew into MOSS 2007 and SharePoint Server 2010.

SPC14.InfoPathFuneralOne of the things that makes for a great reunion is a strong community.  I consider myself lucky to have been able to observe the growth of the community and the depth and breadth that it contains now is fantastic.  No longer can anyone single group, or collection of groups, control, manage or “provide direction” to the community.  There are many groups within the community, and the overall group is large enough to support new groups as needed.   I attended the meetings of the MSFT Technical Communities and the SharePoint Saturday leaders and the SharePoint User Group leaders and some very useful coalitions are building helpful tools to support different locales and groups of different sizes. I heard that the Women in Technology (secondhand, as I wasn’t on the list) group overflowed its planned meeting space and that is tremendous. Impromptu activities such as the funeral procession for InfoPath, small groups such as SP FitBitters and SPRunners, or around evening events or side trips to local attractions, and countless others, are great examples of where the community is diverse enough to take care of its own.  This is so encouraging.

On the other hand, it does mark the maturation of the SharePoint community and marks the time when messages will be more and more difficult to ensure are delivered and received accurately.  The good old days of one person being able to understand all of SharePoint is gone. One person can now understand most of SharePoint, and can track most of what is goingon through diligent following of multiple blogs, RSS, and twitter feeds, but that can be difficult to maintain when we also have to work…

The early three social kings of SharePoint have changed, as well.  Mark Miller (@EUSP), it seems, has moved to greener pastures, Joel Oleson (@Joeloleson) will always continue to drive a large group of followers as illustrated by his leading a procession in a Monk’s robe through the conference, and Jeremy Thake (@jthake) has now moved to join Microsoft in leading developers to new depths. No longer are the three of them driving the community audiences (Devs, IT Pros, End Users) in a coordinated broad direction.  True, the trio has been divided for a little while now, but I think SPC14 marks the official passing of the torch back to the community as an entity.  Even at SPC12, the community booth efforts were spearheaded by a group with these three providing much of the guidance.

Moving forward, though, I think that SharePoint as a whole is too large for a single group of friends and workers and associates to be considered the leaders.  Each of us has our own path to carve out of the world of business solutions. The relay baton has been passed. SharePoint has grown up.

Where will you, as an attendee of SPC14, shine your light?  Whatever you are working on, share it. When you come up with a best practice, or a new approach to using OOB features combined in a unique manner to provide new functionality, let others know.  As you see your companies using SharePoint as a platform for new vertical applications and to support solid business processes that have been rebuilt to mash up data in a new way and expose it to new business groups who couldn’t access it before, share what you see! Talk about the impacts, and help other groups realize the potential locked within their SP OOB mentality.

SharePoint Friends Don’t Let SharePoint Friends Work Only with OOB Functionality.

I had a great time at SPC14 and I hope that all of you did, as well.  If you didn’t, let MSFT know. If you did, let the community know!    I can’t wait to see everyone again next time.

Should Microsoft Kill SharePoint?

September 18, 2013 1 comment

This is a pretty sensationalistic title.  Memeburn wrote an article based on word spoken by Gartner Analyst Jeffrey Mann (@jeffmann) at the 2013 Gartner Symposium

Disclaimer: I don’t have access to Jeff’s original words, only his words as reported by the Memeburn article, so there might be some differences in the interpretation.

The article mixes contexts like flammable fuels.

“Hardly anybody likes it” (yet, still 70% of companies see that at lest 50% of their employees use SharePoint at least once a week)

“The problem is that SharePoint is a victim of its own success”  (I’ve never understood how this comment can be applied generally to anything.  Don’t we want success?)

“It’s too big and complex”  (the implication here is that IT Pros are scared of managing SharePoint, and once it is installed it is unusable…)

These points lead to the summary datapoint that drives the fear: “As a result, many people are using versions of SharePoint that are at least four years old.”

ACK! The Horror!  The platform is dead because not everyone updated within the first six months!  AUGH!  Can you hear the anguished cries of IT Pros who don’t understand it when  SharePoint upgrades don’t roll onto server boxes as smoothly as the most recent version of Microsoft Office?  Or that, given the fact that the release cycle was 3 1/2 years in between SP2010 and SP2013, having a version that is 4+ years old at this point is actually the normal state of things?

A second line of reasoning in the article is that SharePoint “is too big and complex” and that IT shops would be better off using an entire range of point solutions to provide specific features instead of one large platform, such as SharePoint. 

Really?  What happens when you want to upgrade all 32 of the point applications that you had to install in order to match what SharePoint provided you? Certainly, all of them will upgrade at the same time so you’ll never have to worry about mismatched versions, right? 

I’ll be the first to stand up and tell a business group that if you only want to do 4 things, then you should use stand alone tools, and SharePoint is not for you. However, for most medium-to-large enterprise that I’ve worked with, the amount of integration and services that are needed to meet business requirements just simply cannot be managed more efficiently with point solutions.  If the organization does not work with SharePoint, they are probably working with another relatively large collaboration platform, from a large vendor.  Point solutions are best for small companies, but not for medium-large.

The third point in the Memeburn article is that Microsoft should kill the on-premise version of SharePoint because Microsoft wants to move everyone to the cloud.  And Microsoft will be the first to tell you that they believe that every employee can work just fine in the cloud.  We have to remember, though, that enterprises are called large organizations because they have a lot of moving parts.  It will take time.  No need to rush.

And then the icing on the cake that just caused me to shake my head.  “The installed base is so large that Microsoft will of course keep supporting it, but upgrades will be slower coming, and users shouldn’t expect the latest or greatest functionality.”

This statement is the most important of all of Jeffrey Mann’s quotes in the Memeburn article, and it is being treated as a consolation point.  Users need to have this last quote etched in their minds, and instead of getting all sensational about “Should Microsoft Kill SharePoint???”, the article should focus on the meat of the news – that is, that your investment in SharePoint on-premise is going to be supported going forward, so don’t do anything crazy, but you should be moving to the cloud as your systems and enterprise software packages and tools allow.  Moving to the cloud needs to be important.

But, please don’t shoot the horse while it is still attached to the plow. 

Categories: Cloud, SP2013 Tags: ,

Metalogix Gobbles up Pieces of Axceler

August 28, 2013 4 comments

Interesting news this morning.  Metalogix gobbled up the SharePoint products and offerings from Axceler.  Rumors have been flying for months about an acquisition between the two parties, and both directions were mentioned – either Axceler doing the acquiring or Metalogix doing the acquiring.  In the end, though, it didn’t come out either way – Metalogix only acquired a portion of Axceler’s business.  

Image  The SharePoint products from Axceler have driven Axceler to be one of the fastest growing ISVs in the SharePoint ecosystem.  A darling of growth, and of product innovation, the Axceler ControlPoint products have illustrated that there is potential within the SharePoint ecosystem for Management, Administration, and Governance tools.

At least, there used to be lots of potential in the SharePoint ecosystem in the Management and Administration spaces. While I think there remains lots of potential in the governance space, I think it’s fair to say that with the shift to Office 365, the room for growth in the SharePoint Management and Administration space feels like there is a cap on it.  We don’t know exactly where that cap is, but there is no doubt that the open range for Administration and Management of SharePoint On-Premise is now a fenced in corral, and the ability to run free is limited.

In the short term, this will put Metalogix in a very powerful position for SharePoint On-Premise solutions.  Every SharePoint On-Premise solution will either be in the AvePoint camp, the Dell camp, the MetaVis camp, or the Metalogix camp.  Metalogix does have a very compelling set of offerings.  This is a very busy space for SharePoint users to wade through, and the removal of one of the players (Axceler), simplifies the space a little bit, but it is still confusing when there are 4 strong providers to consider and many little providers.  

Do you think that Axceler realized that 1. the space was very crowded, and 2. the Office 365 future was limited?  I think that the leadership of Axceler realized this and pulled off an amazing feat in this divestiture of their SharePoint business to Metalogix.  I think that Metalogix is being driven somewhat by optics and not by the realities of the SharePoint ecosystem in this case.  I hope that the price that Metalogix paid takes into account that the market for SharePoint On-Premise in 3 more years will only be the largest SharePoint customers, and that their Long Tail market of small and medium SharePoint customers will be dried up.

I found myself joking with some colleagues that while we used to refer to Open Text as the CA (Computer Associates) of the Document Management world, it now appears that one could consider Metalogix as the CA of the SharePoint world.  CA, in this case, as a euphemism for the place where software companies go into eternal maintenance mode…  I wonder how true this might turn out to be.

In the meantime, congratulations, Axceler, and we will be watching with interest to see how Metalogix takes advantage of this bundle of riches that their combined offering now provides. Can Metalogix turn this into a productive acquisition and gain significant market share against the other SharePoint management and administration tools?

Veronique Nails It

November 26, 2012 Leave a comment

While scanning a few blogs today – something that I haven’t taken the time to do frequently enough, it seems, I ran across Veronique Palmer’s blog entry which was a recap of her visit to SPC12 last week. (http://veroniquepalmer.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/thoughts-on-sharepoint-2013-after-the-conference)

I had the good fortune to run into Veronique at lunch one of the days and it was good to see her again.  She has a huge source of energy running through her, and anyone who strays too close to her can’t help but feel the energy that she brings to SharePoint and, I can only imagine, the passion that she brings to her clients.

First, there was a lot of confusion and frustration about how Microsoft and SharePoint decided to release information about SharePoint 2013 (SP13) during this release cycle.  Veronique was not the only one who complained about the seemingly targeted approach to the release of product information.

It seemed that the SharePoint team was following the lead from the Windows 8 team and keeping things as quiet as possible to avoid competitive product offerings as well as to maximize the “Wow” effect on the day of launch.

It might also have been the opinion of the SharePoint marketing team that with SharePoint 2010 doing so well in the marketplace, that the need for pre-launch buzz generated from conversations in the ecosystem about the product was minimal.

The potential downside of this is a reduction in the number of end-to-end product reviews that SharePoint could have received from partners and developers about the product, when each different type of developer or user was shown only the pieces of the product that were most necessary for them.

Another potential problem, which Veronique pointed out, was that time was “lost” in allowing consultants to be up to speed with the product at the time of launch.  This had an impact on partners, as well, as many partners and consultants had a difficult time predicting the launch date, and many products had their timing set for post-January 2013, instead of being able to be ready for a November 2012 release date.

I can only imagine that Microsoft decided that it was, in fact, getting a good amount of feedback, and that these negatives were manageable.

The next set of points that Veronique makes in her blog entry apply to all users of SharePoint who are considering a SharePoint deployment.

It’s important to consider the following when considering/planning a SharePoint deployment:

  • Do the research and go into your project with your eyes open about the possible alternatives.
  • Make sure that you are listening to multiple sources for your information. Microsoft, consultants, partners, blogs, analysts, and other community sources for SharePoint are useful in rounding out your strategy.
  • Understand that different SharePoint versions have different user interfaces and have different user expectations.  Your training and procedures may have to regularly go through modifications as you move from version to version, so plan accordingly.
  • Don’t cause yourself to feel too much pressure to move to a specific SharePoint version just because it is newer.  By understanding the features of each SharePoint version, combined with the capabilities and experience of your teams, your developers/consultants, and partner solutions, combined with the lifetime of your expected deployment and when you might be ready for an upgrade, you will be able to select the right version for your current deployment and plan ahead for future releases.
  • It should be understood that your users are going to resist change.  Build this into your operations and training plans.

Thanks, Veronique, for getting the conversation started, and for giving me the impetus to write a blog entry again…  (I really need to do this more often.)

Categories: SP2013 Tags: , ,

SharePint at WPC12

June 27, 2012 1 comment

One of my favorite weeks of the year is coming up – the Microsoft WorldWide Partner Conference.  One of the best meet-ups of the week has always been the SharePint event.  This year should be no exception.

Image

This year, the Microsoft SharePoint Marketing Group has worked with Pingar and 3 other software companies, Axceler, Rackspace, and Idera, to host a meet-up for partners that work within the SharePoint ecosystem during the week of WPC12.

You know what they say…  SharePoint by Day, SharePINT by Night!

This year SharePint will be on Tuesday, July 10, from 6-8PM at the Madison Avenue Pub, in Toronto.

WPC is a huge event, and while there are some important sessions for SharePoint partners, the real significant effort at WPC should be about meeting with other partners and working to grow your company’s network and connections.  I think this is why the WPC Connect portion of WPC has grown to be (at certain times of the week) the busiest part of the conference.  While it can be hard to find open time to meet with specific partners, at least SharePoint partners understand where they can meet their SharePoint peers and enjoy some good conversation.

If you haven’t already registered for WPC12, please do so at http://digitalwpc.com.

I’ll be meeting with partners at WPC Connect, attending a couple of the sessions, and hoping to meet everyone at SharePint!  If I haven’t already reached out to meet you, please reach out to me and let’s meet at WPC12!

I’m certainly looking forward to an amazing week in Toronto.

Image

SHARE 2012 Conference – SharePoint Business on Deck!

April 12, 2012 3 comments

The SHARE 2012 Conference is coming up (April 23-26, Atlanta), and Pingar is a sponsor. I’m looking forward to it because of the focus on business solutions and applications that SHARE has as its primary focus.

It is well past time, in my opinion, for a SharePoint conference that is focused strictly on business-oriented solutions. The speakers and sessions have been selected by a committee of users, and have been curated by The Eventful Group, who has many years of solid conference experience.

As much as I love my SharePoint infrastructure and development friends, I think that the surface area for business solutions on SharePoint is very large and should be recognized as a significant and valuable contribution to SharePoint customer implementations.

I’ll be watching the keynotes and sessions to see how many SharePoint business “Roles” are introduced or discussed. I’m not enough of an expert to enumerate the roles that I think should exist for SharePoint business solutions, because I have a feeling that there are many more than I can describe right now. Excluding all developer, IT Pro, and infrastructure roles, I could probably describe 3 or 4 business user roles that need to exist for a “best practices” SharePoint implementation. However, I fear that there really should be 8 or more roles identified and explained. Perhaps, after SHARE 2012, I will be able to put more description behind these roles.

I notice that the folks at Bamboo have proposed a sample schedule for attending SHARE 2012. Niice!

I’m going to make an effort to be sure to see the keynotes from Dux, Michael Sampson, and Gideon Bibliowicz.

There are so many incredible speakers, however, it would be hard to list all of the sessions that I would like to attend.

I’d just like to add that the Pingar booth/kiosk in the exhibitors area will be a great place to talk about business user roles in SharePoint, as well as how business users can benefit from rich information about documents. Yes, the magic that Pingar provides to SharePoint. :-)

I hope to see you there!

Links
Share 2012 Conference US
Share 2012 Conference US Speakers
SharePoint Reviews
Michael Sampson Currents
Bamboo and Share 2012 Conference

SQL Server 2012 switching to Core-Based Licensing

April 12, 2012 5 comments

I found this news item from Directions on Microsoft, “SQL Server 2012 Adopts Per-Core Licensing Model” interesting.

SQL Server 2012 now requires processor core-based licensing for SQL Server 2012 enterprise edition, and core-based licensing is one of two types of licensing available for SQL Server 2012 standard edition.

For about 6-7 years now, ever since Oracle started charging for processor core, Microsoft enjoyed an easier licensing conversation because they licensed per processor, and not per core. I used to sell Microsoft technology, and had to answer licensing questions often about how their products were licensed, and was glad that Microsoft was only charging per processor, and not per core. It felt, at the time, that Microsoft wasn’t trying to penalize people for using the latest and greatest CPUs (which then were arriving with 2 cores, or 4 – of course, now, there are many more cores).

How times change. Apparently, Microsoft isn’t concerned about competitive licensing scenarios with Oracle any longer. I think that is probably a good thing for Microsoft. It probably also means that Microsoft’s internal models probably identify that they have been leaving money from customers on the table, and that moving to a per-core license will be able to extract a little bit more from customers than the per-server licensing model. All’s fair in product licensing?

Redmond.mag quotes Wes Miller, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, as saying that a single Enterprise core for SQL Server 2012 will have a list price of $6,874 per core. These are only sold in two-core packs. A server can be partially licensed or fully licensed. A fully licensed server requires a minimum purchase of 4 cores. Of course, volume licensing customers and customers with an Enterprise Agreement and Software Assurance will have significant discounts off of the list price.

I do like the flexibility of the licensing model to allow customers to move licensed cores from on-premise to hosted cloud providers and back again.

I was pleased to see the analysis on thelowercasew.com:

The actual cost for EE is roughly the same as if you licensed 2 sockets of SQL 2008 R2 Enterprise Edition as long as it had 4 cores per CPU. The cost goes up as soon as you start using 6 core processors and above. The prevalence of 4 core processors means this likely won’t change much for many organizations.

Compared to SQL 2008 R2 Datacenter, however, there is a large cost difference. Datacenter costs $54,990 per processor or over $100,000 to license a 2 CPU system. You can now essentially get the benefits of Datacenter Edition (unlimited virtualization rights, etc.) for half the cost you would pay in SQL 2008 R2.

Even with this new licensing model there are still huge cost savings to be had by licensing all cores of a server and virtualizing your SQL 2012 workloads. It’s hard to argue with unlimited virtualization rights especially for those lightly loaded SQL workloads.

I wonder if this model will also fall through on the upcoming next version of SharePoint Server licensing that will be out sometime this year or early next year. My guess is that this will also apply to the next version of SharePoint Server. (I have no insider knowledge of this, this is just a guess.)

Links:
Directions on Microsoft report

Microsoft SQL Server 2012 licensing page

Redmond.Mag: SQL Server 2012 to Bring Some Price Hikes

thelowercasew.com: New SQL 2012 Licensing and its Impact on Virtualization

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,736 other followers

%d bloggers like this: