|
Table
of Contents
There is a popular argument, especially
as the Internet and Intranets become more commonplace, that the
Internet and WWW will make “traditional” groupware obsolete.
However, until IP (internet protocol) networks mature and vendors
provide the same level of product functionality and reliability
on them as is available on LANs and WANs, collaborative technologies
will still require a hybrid network. Organizations that we surveyed
are using an “and” rather than an “or” philosophy
for collaboration i.e. today they are supporting both infrastructures
for collaboration.
However, to fully leverage each infrastructure,
it is important to know what collaborative functions work best on
what infrastructure. There are five primary functional differences
between groupware and the WWW which demonstrate the superiority
or added benefit of using groupware.
- Security and Collaboration:
-
Notes today provides better security
than the Web (witness the offer from Netscape of a free T-shirt
to those helping patch the holes found in Netscape’s supposedly
secure server technology). All collaboration calls for some
trade off between security and communication. Different technologies
are appropriate in different circumstances.
- Sharing objects:
-
Notes version 4.0 is OLE 2 compliant.
Passing objects on the Web is not so easy.
- Replication:
-
Notes works well in a connected and
disconnected mode, i.e. you can replicate with your Notes server
and the Notes application enables you to do work while mobile
and in a disconnected manner. This is not true of the Web supports
a continuously connected model of interaction.
- Threaded Discussions:
-
While some Internet news groups support
threaded discussions, they are not as powerful as Notes, Collabra,
TeamTalk, or Conference Plus. Not only do the latter products
allow the user to track the threads of conversations, they have
additional functionality which allows users to summarize discussions
by topic and to scan topics. This functionality is probably
one of the strongest reasons Netscape bought Collabra -- to
integrate this type of collaborative technology into Navigator
3.0 in the second half of 1996.
- Workflow:
-
IP networks are not inherently process
oriented and they are just starting to be used for this function.
Where as Notes today easily supports workflow, and has an API
to which many workflow vendors write. Vendors, such as Action
Technology, are more tightly integrated, to the extent that
they can generate code for Notes applications and databases
directly from the workflow diagram. On the other hand, the Web
supports only the most rudimentary workflow, i.e., e-mail messaging
is available on someone’s Web page by simply clicking a
button. These functions and the growing trend towards “web-enabled”
collaborative or process oriented applications have Action Technologies
releasing a web-based workflow product called “Metro”
in 1996. Action is one of the first, but almost every workflow
vendor is porting their software over to the web, and some are
re-writing their software to take advantage of this infrastructure.
Since collaborative technologies are rapidly
converging with the Web, we believe that by late 1997 many of these
differences will have disappeared. Does that mean Lotus and other
groupware vendors probably will be outdone or squeezed out of the
market? Not likely!
We might compare this situation with that
of the U.S. Postal Service and Fed Ex. Both will deliver mail or
a package, but Fed Ex is more secure, offers a tracking system,
and assures arrival the next day. The Postal Service now offers
some of the same high quality delivery services at a lower cost,
but they have not put Fed Ex out of business. Why? Fed Ex continually
pushes the edge of technology to offer better services, maintaining
their competitive advantage and leaving the Postal Service to play
catch up. This analogy holds true for the competitive nature of
groupware.
|
