Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

IBM Symphony falls on deaf ears without open source e-mail, calendar

By | September 18, 2007, 1:18pm PDT

Summary: IBM’s debut of its homegrown open source version of OpenOffice without e-mail or collaboration features is not surprising but nevertheless disappointing. On the one hand, Big Blue’s recent endorsement and support and services plan for OpenOffice — an acknowledgement of the obsolescence of SmartSuite and Workplace — offers new hope for the struggling open [...]

IBM’s debut of its homegrown open source version of OpenOffice without e-mail or collaboration features is not surprising but nevertheless disappointing.

On the one hand, Big Blue’s recent endorsement and support and services plan for OpenOffice — an acknowledgement of the obsolescence of SmartSuite and Workplace — offers new hope for the struggling open source desktop.

On the other hand, the company’s release of free downloadable word processing, spreadsheet and presentation modules in beta form today with no complementary open source collaboration component stomps out any of that excitement.

IBM Lotus Symphony is more like a resurrected Workplace-like add-on for IBM’s proprietary Lotus Notes 8 and Domino upgrades (also announced today) than a genuine effort to pit OpenOffice against Microsoft Office.

Let’s face it: Lotus Notes is the crown jewel in IBM’s software productivity portfolio. Neither Lotus SmartSuite nor IBM’s Workplace components ever made a dent in Microsoft’s Office monopoly, and Symphony will likely follow the same path without a collaboration component.

One IBM strategist told me today that there are no plans to open source the company’s “premier” Notes product and no plans to release a Symphony Notes or calendaring component in the forseeable future. Too bad.

IBM is squandering a rare opportunity to steal market share from Microsoft Office. No one blames the company for protecting a valuable revenue stream. But handing over to the open source community some snippets of hot Notes code such as a calendaring applet does not spell the death knell for Notes.

Making open source software successful on the desktop is pivotal for its advance in corporate use, and that will require drastic measures. What could make IBM’s OpenOffice compelling is the inclusion of a standalone, open source Notes collaboration or calendaring component, a la Outlook, and the development of a SharePoint knock-off, said one open source consultant.

Chris Maresca, a founder and principal at open source consulting firm Olliance Group, points out that it’s going to be a monumental task for OpenOffice — or Symphony — to grab any share from Microsoft Office because corporate re-training costs vastly exceed any savings in software costs. And the latter is mute anyway since Microsoft is sharply discounting the cost of Office in its volume licensing contracts.

Maresca suggested, for example, that IBM could develop an open source equivalent of SharePoint and participate with the new as-yet-unnamed Thunderbird subsidiary to create a viable next generation OpenOffice collaboration solution.

One leader in OpenOffice.org has his own thoughts about how IBM could help the community but nevertheless praised IBM’s endorsement of OpenDocument format.

“We’d prefer them to ship OpenOffice.org to their customers,” said John McCreesh, marketing project lead at OpenOffice,org. “However, it’s good to have another first grade software product using ODF. Every additional product helps nail the lie that OASIS’s ODF is somehow tied to OpenOffice.org the same way that Microsoft’s OOXML is tied to Microsoft Office.”

IBM said it is giving back to the community accessibility improvements, Eclipse framework and programming tools, as well as administration tools, and is devoting more developers to OpenOffice than ever before.

In a recent interview, one IBM exec hinted that the company will participate in developing collaboration features for the next generation Web 2.0 Openoffice. And it’s possible that Steve Mills and the OpenOffice.org team are quietly planning an Outlook killer that they prefer not to talk about today.

But delivering Symphony in its current form, without a collaboration component, and without Office 2007 support, is a big yawn.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Paula Rooney is a Boston-based writer who has followed the tech industry for almost two decades.

Disclosure

Paula Rooney

Paula Rooney owns no stock in the companies that she covers. She holds a 401K that is managed by Morgan Stanley.

Biography

Paula Rooney

Paula Rooney has covered the software and technology industry for more than 20 years, starting with semiconductor design and mini-computer systems at EDN News and later focused on PC software companies including Microsoft, Lotus, Oracle, Red Hat, Novell and other open source and commercial software companies for CRN and PCWeek. She received a silver award from the American Society of Business Publication Editors in 2005 for her profile on Linus Torvalds and edited and co-authored "Partnering With Microsoft," a book about Microsoft's channel published by CMP Publishing in 2004. Rooney graduated from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism in 1997. In her off time, she enjoys scuba diving, sailing, sun worshipping, running, reading, surfing (the net) and hanging out with her family. She resides on the shores of Scituate, Massachusetts.

17
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

But my new laptop doesn't need Office
newmang 2nd Dec 2007
Well, As I buy a new laptop this week, I don't need to pay a penny for Office software since Symphony will run whatever .rtf, .xls and .ppt files I already have.

I assume this will improve either through IBM or 3rd party. It certainly needs to pick up speed loading.
Doc
0 Votes
+ -
Add-on?
dave.leigh@... 18th Sep 2007
Hardly, Paula. This is functionality that's baked into Notes 8. Corporate customers looking for collaboration will find that this is a lot more integreated than the Office + Outlook + OneNote + Exchange kludge, at around a $100 per client, and it allows them to use lower-cost Linux desktops. Even with proprietary Notes clients, this is a win for open source..

What IBM is offering for free isn't an add-on, it's a cutting from, Notes.

Sharepoint is Microsoft's response to the capabilities of Lotus Notes/Domino, not the other way 'round. Sadly, too many people think of Notes as an email client and Domino as an equivalent to Exchange.
0 Votes
+ -
Enough
Richard Flude 18th Sep 2007
"Chris Maresca, a founder and principal at open source consulting firm Olliance
Group, points out that it?s going to be a monumental task for OpenOffice ? or
Symphony ? to grab any share from Microsoft Office because corporate re-
training costs vastly exceed any savings in software costs."

Enough of this already. The interface changes in the last version of Office and
Vista, every bit as difficult as changing Office suite but where are the MS fanboys.

The tactic is to keep pressure on MS margins and provide an alternate desktop.
0 Votes
+ -
Very few analysts are up to anticipating real change. John Naisbett's "Megatrends" taught a generation that the way you predict the future is to capture all the recent news and then extrapolate in the direction of the current trend.
0 Votes
+ -
Honesty
russellmcormond 19th Sep 2007
This was an Open Source consulting firm being honest about his beliefs that there are limitations. It would be nice if the MS fanboys and "partners" were as honest about the limitations of Microsoft tools.

MS supporters often claim that it is too expensive to switch to alternatives, never being honest about the fact that upgrading to "new versions" of Microsoft products are just as expensive. The brand may stay the same, but a change in brand-name does not take any retraining.
0 Votes
+ -
Called Quickplace. Or even the fact that it's easy to web enable Notes databases.

However, SP is pretty much a POS and even MS touts the high cost of a SP implementation a "Feature".
How about Evolution in place of Outlook? Mozilla's efforts in this area are notable? But even better -- how about the tools available online as Google or Yahoo calendar?

More and more work is being done outside of office suites, and they are becoming less critical every day. It will take years to abandon them, in fact, decades. But the way in which we use them will keep changing.

I'm glad I'm no longer on the MS Office train. My life has been much better in open source, and I dread the times when I have to use Windows to get something done for which I haven't yet taken the time to find an open source alternative.

I have a dual boot system with XP and Xandros Linux. When I use Windows, you'd think it was time to replace my computer because it's so sluggish. When I use Xandros, you'd think I had just bough the latest desktop screamer.

Don't expect a revolution with IBM's announcement. Corporate IT decisions are not made like consumers who flock to buy an iPhone. They take time, and IBM's endorsement and participation in OpenOffice.org will be quite good for the whole open source desktop movement.
0 Votes
+ -
Think outside of the box
The Rationalist 19th Sep 2007
It seem you want someone else to produce a carbon copy of Office. Then sell it for less. That approach never worked in the past.

Think about it. Wouldn't it be better to invent the next generation of tools, rather than to say you want what you have right now, but forever?

It seem repetitive for you to keep saying all the upcoming office workspace components "are not Office". That is exactly why they are out there.

Example, why don't you insist that Office include a direct link into MySpace? But the open source approach makes it easy for a group to create exactly that. And then everyone would have it for free.

I believe the "next" generation components of office automation software will look nothing like Office. So let's forget trying to clone Office.
0 Votes
+ -
wasn't Symphony an old DOS app?
AtlantaTerry 19th Sep 2007
My foggy old memory cells recall Symphony as being an Ashton Tate product. Or was it from Lotus?

Anyhoo I thought it was an old DOS application long-shelved.

Terry Thomas...
the photographer
Atlanta, Georgia USA
http://TerryThomasPhotos.GooglePages.com
0 Votes
+ -
Symphony Was DOS App
greybeard99216@... 19th Sep 2007
Symphony was an integrated DOS app from Lotus in the old days, and was the first to integrate the word processing, spreadsheet, database, and minor communications. I used to use this back in the late 80's and early 90's and I loved it. Unfortunately, the Office Suite came out in the mid 90's and Lotus gave up completely on Symphony, which I thought was much more productive than Lotus 1-2-3 back then.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree with the main points of this article, but we already have a open source alternative to MS Sharepoint. It is called Alfresco, if you have not heard of it then you need to check it out.

Very high quality, and completely licensed under the GPL.

http://www.alfresco.com/
0 Votes
+ -
ODF tied to OpenOffice? Say it isn't so!
gary.edwards 19th Sep 2007
Did i miss something in this story? IBM is repackaging OpenOffice as "Lotus Symphony" . It is not releasing a new ODF ready product. It's the same ODF specific source code that runs OpenOffice.org, StarOffice, Novell Office, and NeoOffice (MAC).



So while it's great that there are more companies distributing OpenOffice variants AND contributing to the OpenOffice source code base, this does not prove in any way that ODF isn't application specific.



???We???d prefer them to ship OpenOffice.org to their customers,??? said John McCreesh, marketing project lead at OpenOffice,org. ???However, it???s good to have another first grade software product using ODF. Every additional product helps nail the lie that OASIS???s ODF is somehow tied to OpenOffice.org the same way that Microsoft???s OOXML is tied to Microsoft Office.???



Say what? MS-OOXML is application, platform and vendor specific in just about every way possible. It was designed for the emerging MS Stack of desktop, server, device, and web information systems-applications-services. With MS-OOXML, Microsoft eliminates the MS Stack use of HTML, even as the stack fully embraces the Web in a grand convergence of desktop, server, device, and web systems.



ODF on the other hand was designed desktop office suites. It is application specific, but platform and vendor independent. Well, the vendor independent part is a wait and see notion because Sun and only Sun can committ to the OpenOffice/StarOffice source code. This makes for a code patching nightmare if you're Novell or NeoOffice. Maybe IBM has broken Sun's lock on OpenOffice? Finally?



Sun also controls and dominates the OASIS ODF TC. The current voting rights roster lists six Sun representatives, two IBM reps, and one independent. Sun continues to control the key positions of chairman, vice chairman, and editor positions. Nothing goes into ODF unless and until OpenOffice supports and is able to implement the features.



This is one of the reasons ODF application interop is so bad. ODF is tied to the OpenOffice layout and feature set implementation model. High fidelity interop with ODF is possible, but applications have to figure out ways of effectively resolving their implementation differentials with OpenOffice.



Since OpenOffice is open source, application developers are welcome to study, understand, and even copy the OpenOffice feature set and ODF implementation model. This is great for emerging applications wishing to implement ODF, but is a bear for existing applications.



ODF is beautifully designed for preserving content throughout a document processing chain that might involve many applications. It was not however designed to preserve presentation fidelity. Meaning, it's a feature of ODF that every application applies their own presentation model, with the content remaining intact.



For document processing experts, this is great. For the general public though, ODF interop is a disaster. The surrounding hype public expectation was for PDF like high fidelity preservation of presentation. An expectation that is clearly outside the ODF objectives. And since OpenOffice is a cross platform free download, if users do want to exchange documents with high fidelity, it's an easy install. Just don't expect the same exchange presentation fidelity if you send an ODF document to Google Docs or KOffice. With ODF, when you exchange between applications, there is a guaranteed loss of presentation fidelity. And that my friends has to do with the fact that ODF is application specific, with OpenOffice being the only known application able to fully implement the file format.



But hey. If this can be fixed, i'm all for it. It would be a tremendous achievement if a document created in Lotus Symphony will be able to move into the Lotus Notes Stack, with end users able to engage other collaborative computing application services (like Google Docs) without a corruption of presentation fidelity.



Go XForms!

~ge~
0 Votes
+ -
OK... it isn't so.
dave.leigh@... 19th Sep 2007
Did i miss something in this story? IBM is repackaging OpenOffice as "Lotus Symphony". It is not releasing a new ODF ready product. It's the same ODF specific source code that runs OpenOffice.org, StarOffice, Novell Office, and NeoOffice (MAC).

Well, yes and no. "Based on" that code "is" that code. You'd better take a look at it before you blow it off as just "repackaging OpenOffice". For starters, it's operating under a different environment than OpenOffice.org. Notes 8 and Symphony both use Lotus Expeditor and Eclipse. It is a different application, which is pretty obvious if you look at it instead of basing your comments on a misinterpretation of a news story. Good Lord, it doesn't even cost you anything but time.

Functionally, the user experience "off the page" is entirely different. The user interface is identical to that of Lotus Notes 8 (they're even still using the Notes icon on the window in the beta). It's quite a bit different for the user, and that's the point of different applications. Different folks like to do things in different ways. They like a different look and feel to the app.

AFAICT, despite the differences, on the page the fidelity is 100%. There are clear differences between the apps that are apparent to the user. There are NO differences between the docs that are apparent to the user. And that's the way document interoperability ought to work.

With ODF, when you exchange between applications, there is a guaranteed loss of presentation fidelity. And that my friends has to do with the fact that ODF is application specific, with OpenOffice being the only known application able to fully implement the file format.

Gary, you didn't even look at the apps, dude. Beside which, even as FUD your proposition is FUBAR. For example, .DOC has loss of presentation fidelity even between versions of MS Office! As implemented by Microsoft, OOXML doesn't even comply with it's own proposed standard!

But hey! If this can be fixed... oh, wait! It won't! Brian Jones admits that he's not prepared to give any assurances that, Microsoft would comply with their own standard! Don't take my word for it:
"...it's hard for Microsoft to commit to what comes out of Ecma in the coming years, because we don't know what direction they will take the formats. We'll of course stay active and propose changes based on where we want to go with Office 14. At the end of the day though, the other Ecma members could decide to take the spec in a completely different direction. Now my impression is that won't happen, as the folks on the TC all have pretty similar visions for the future of the spec, but since it's not guaranteed it would be hard for us to make any sort of official statement." -- Brian Jones, http://tinyurl.com/2cy366

And THAT's even given the fact that ECMA rubber-stamped the spec to begin with! It's with great mirth that I read the load of hogswallop you've posted about what a "disaster" ODF interop is when for all practical purposes OOXML interop is completely non-existent. Compared to what OOXML is offering, ODF is fantastic. Witness that embarrassing mishegoss where Brian Jones trotted out Gnumeric as an example of how OOXML can be implemented by other vendors? Here it is: http://tinyurl.com/2cm28g. Not so impressive when you're doing more than a list of numbers, though: http://tinyurl.com/2x3lbp.

Now there's a disaster for you.

With ODF, all vendors are capable of fully implementing the spec... some are still working on doing so. With OOXML, one vendor is capable of fully implementing the spec, and they not only don't, and won't promise to, either.
0 Votes
+ -
Project has rival with Projity's OpenProj
linuxbeatsms@... 19th Sep 2007
I love the IBM announcement ! IBM has great respect by the entire marketplace and this will cause Microsoft some real heartburn. Projity is killing them with OpenProj, you wrote about them and they are kicking Project and their $1,000 pricetag around. This will fit nicely with StarOffice, OpenOffice and now Symphony. Look out in Redmond
0 Votes
+ -
No database application
wsamuel3 20th Sep 2007
When I saw a new Lotus suite was being issued, it got my hopes up that they would resurrect Lotus Approach, which to my mind was the best database interface ever created. I still use it, even though the last version was a number of years ago. People have noted other missing applications, but this was the one that caught my eye. Maybe sometime in the future?
0 Votes
+ -
Approach hope
rhubarbpie 20th Sep 2007
I strongly agree with your Approach thoughts and hopes. OpenOffice has Base. Unfortunately, Base is quite slow, feature-poor, and buggy. It's true Base is relatively new, but Approach is absolutely wonderful.
0 Votes
+ -
Since when is Outlook Open-Source?
tcgcaddymaster 21st Sep 2007
and SharePoint is a Lotus QuickPlace knockoff, though its interface is prettier.
0 Votes
+ -
Well, As I buy a new laptop this week, I don't need to pay a penny for Office software since Symphony will run whatever .rtf, .xls and .ppt files I already have.

I assume this will improve either through IBM or 3rd party. It certainly needs to pick up speed loading.
Doc

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix