But in case you want to know... I can still hit a golf ball 250 yards on a good day... bad day, maybe 235.”
Thursday, September 16, 2010
An "Empathy Walk" with Alicia Staley
But in case you want to know... I can still hit a golf ball 250 yards on a good day... bad day, maybe 235.”
Evolve...Or Die
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Follow Me on Twitter
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Oracle & Informatica - The Odd Couple
With the rapid pace of vendor consolidation in the business intelligence space, there’s been a fair amount of buzz about the future of the remaining players. Of the pack that remains – Actuate, MicroStrategy and Informatica at first glance all look like interesting acquisition targets.
Upon deeper examination as long as MicroStrategy’s eminent captain Michael Saylor is around a takeover seems unlikely (although the question of why MicroStrategy dogmatically sticks to its SAP-esque “100% organically grown” label remains mystery – an acquisition of an in-memory analytical engine to provide QlikTech-style dashboard interactivity would be a great addition to what is a very capable BI platform).
I won’t go into the attractiveness of Informatica due to steady growth, back-to-back profitable quarters, or their cash on-hand, which are all metrics that have been examined elsewhere (and by more capable analysts). After the departure of founders Gaurav Dhillon and Diaz Nesamoney, who did a marvelous job with PowerCenter, still the crown jewels of the company today, current CEO Sohaib Abbasi has worked his magic to turn the company around, re-establishing the its sole focus as a data integration player without the distractions of analytical applications or BI. While this message is a little outdated for the BI/data warehousing world (most BI companies now have their own ETL or firmly established partnerships) the broader integration market is definitely big enough for Informatica to grow and establish a beachhead. A strategic acquisition of their own would clearly accelerate this - MDM, BPM and BPEL are all technical gaps that need filling.
For the past few years, as the rumors about Oracle acquiring Informatica were circulating more strongly, a hookup made a lot of sense. Why it didn’t happen was probably be down to (1) price – INFA stock was trading on a high for the past 12 months, and an acquisition with premium would have been easily north of $1.5-2B (2) INFA board confidence/ego that Sohaib can take the company to even greater highs. Although Sohaib’s Oracle background may lead casual observers to note how Oracle would be a natural acquirer of Informatica here are some reasons why it probably won’t happen now:
Oracle has invested considerable resources into their own Data Integrator (ODI) product. When Synopsis was acquired, Oracle gained a pretty good E-L-T product, which placed the processing burden of data transformations on the database (hence, doing the “T for transformation” part last). This allowed companies to leverage their existing Oracle database server investments, which of course meant that the database server become even more important. While in terms of features, Synopsis was no PowerCenter, from the announcements made at Oracle World this year it has certainly closed the gap significantly.
SAP may have been considering Informatica but ended up acquiring Business Objects instead, and with it got a very capable product – BODI (the old Acta offering). Thus, a pre-emptive acquisition by Oracle was no longer necessary to protect their customer base (the majority of Informatica PowerCenter deployment involve Oracle database; an important upsell market for Oracle middleware vs. Netweaver).
Oracle BI Analytical Applications will (soon) ship with Oracle’s own ETL. This is a pretty obvious point, but when acquiring Synopsis, Oracle signaled two things: (1) it realized that Oracle Warehouse Builder had limited shelf-life and couldn’t completely replace PowerCenter, and (2) It needed to ship an in-house ETL tool with its Siebel Analytics offerings. When the Siebel Analytics were expanded to support non-CRM analytics (and renamed to Oracle BI Analytic Applications) this became even more important. An in-house ETL tool could be designed to focus on Oracle’s needs, instead of a broader set of Informatica partners and would also be easier to support – complex issues simply mean an internal call from Oracle Support to Oracle Development, rather than Oracle Support to Informatica Support, to Informatica Development, etc.).
Cognos got acquired themselves otherwise a Cognos-Informatica merger would have made a lot of sense. Now Cognos can tout closer ETL integration through an in-house offering (Ascential) which will help them position themselves more competitively in deals involving SAP/BO. And Oracle can rest assured that Informatica will remain independent.
Sybase might have had enough cash…and still might, but barely. While it would be a smart move (Sybase is headquartered locally and the Informatica customer base would make Sybase reps salivate) I’m uncertain whether the premium could be agreed upon or even afforded in the current climate. Informatica is relatively cheap right now but would command a hefty premium – posing huge risks for the Sybase executive team).
Teradata have never seemed interested and would rather process transformations inside the database so a custom-coding approach will continue to be their solution.
In conclusion, if Oracle run into significant issues rolling out their Apps on ODI (unlikely) or an Oracle competitor starts loitering around INFA HQ (again unlikely) things could change. But in all likelihood this couple will continue to remain just friends…and that’s all.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Cognos, Business Objects and Other News
It was a risky takeover for SAP (BO was a large buy by SAP standards) yet things seem to be gelling together from an outsiders perspective. Would love to hear your thoughts if you're a BO customer who has survived the acquisition...
News from IBM, after their acquisition of Cognos, has been relatively quiet. Cognos are continuing about their business which is good to see as the rumors of their "demise" were starting to build to an annoying level last year. I attended their recent Western Region Users group in San Jose and it was great to see some real SaaS solutions being built on the platform. Cognos 8 looks solid but I've not had time to use it yet, so won't attempt to review the product here. The most interesting Cognos-solution I saw was from a company called Daptiv (formerly known as eProject) who provide a very cool online project management solution. It seemed clear that SaaS is a bandwagon that all the BI vendors want to jump on, but OEM customers who are using BI in a SaaS environment are still very hard to find.
The past few months have been busy for me personally. I've been working with some interesting SaaS companies and building out some new Analytics and BI products. I will review the main one in June once it's publicly launched but for now I can disclose that it's a very interesting sales performance management application that reports on sales commissions, payments, credits, etc. to help decision makers get a better handle on sales spend (the biggest expense for most companies after employee wages). Stay tuned!
Lastly, MicroStrategy are holding a free, one-day hands-on class on their BI Platform in San Francisco on May 1st. I plan to be there - check it out!
Monday, November 26, 2007
Open Source Business Intelligence - Real Benefits or Just Hype?
Even though these two vendors are competitors, they both use the Mondrian OLAP engine under the covers, with Pentaho claiming "ownership" of it and thus some sort of technical advantage over Jaspersoft. I don't see the advantage myself particularly when Jaspersoft (according to Gartner) is still placed higher in the visionary area of the BI Magic Quadrant than Pentaho. And from a personal standpoint I've used both platforms and they are equally challenging to setup with Pentaho definitely being the more confusing end-user tool.
I believe in pervasive BI - meaning that even the most technically inept business user should be able to pick up a BI tool, connect to some data (usually in an Excel spreadsheet) and create some simple reports. Is this too much to ask?
No doubt these two solutions are improving every month. But during my last deep dive I noticed that Jaspersoft still has a single XML file in which the semantic layer definitions are stored, and yes, you guessed it, any changes (such as new connection string settings, or adding a new table) requires manual editing to the XML code!
On the plus side, Pentaho has a nice demo that installs all the back-end components without any trouble and amazingly works just as described.
It's clear however, that both vendors have some serious work to do around usability, particularly in the administration area, and also need to build out their end-user functionality. Both are still tied to thick client technologies in one form or another. In this age of Web 2.0 usability this is simply unacceptable.
Monday, October 8, 2007
A Case of SAP "Picking up the Scraps"?
I will not go into the financial details of the transaction, as they can be found elsewhere and in greater detail than the intended scope of this blog. I will, however focus on the broader technology impact and what this may have in store for current BO customers and future SAP customers.
Although the BI market leader, BO has a fractured architecture and one where a confusing array of options is sadly indicative of the BI market (Cognos being another notable example of this lack of architectural elegance, although 8.0 has made huge strides in the right direction). BO XI - the flagship product has many admirers. It gets the job done for many analysts and data junkies, often tasked with the job of making sense of data residing in rigid schemas not particularly well designed for long-term business growth. Hence, the flexibility of XI to enable analysts to build out metrics and reports directly off OLTP or analytical tables while ensuring consistency, and no chasm or fan traps has always been a strength. As soon as you move off the thick client however, is where things start to look ugly.
I've never been a big fan of BO's web architecture and trying to support a large number of web users (particularly analysts with requirements for ad-hoc analysis) is something that BO has never done well. Web Intelligence is neither well suited to the masses (it's overly complex and difficult to use) nor embeddable (the breadth of the APIs are weak and BO's OEM sales model is not particularly customer-friendly). With SAP placing a large emphasis on Netweaver as the future technical direction of the company I'd be interested to see how SAP will pull off trying to get Netweaver customers to integrate Web Intelligence into their environment. A far better choice would have been something more seamlessly embeddable and more open to the pro-development stance of Netweaver - such as Actuate (strength in embeddability), MicroStrategy (APIs) or QlikView (data discovery for business analysts). Cognos in this area is also marginally better than BO.
However, it's pretty clear to me that SAP decided to go with BO for one key metric, and that's customers. If Henning wants to achieve his goal of 100K customers getting 40K or so of them from BO certainly helps!
The question is how many of those 40K will remain loyal to BO once the SAP reps start talking-up Netweaver and tools such as Visual Composer. It's hard to see the complimentary nature of these fundamentally different approaches. Netweaver+VC was always a pitch to developers and CIOs. That's territory that BO hates. BO reps always aimed at the CFO (with their EPM products), CMO (with XI) or Sales (with Crystal) - but essentially the business side. Netweaver is an IT sell. So who wins? Will Netweaver be pushed aside by BO reps as they continue the charge into the BI space armed with fresh SAP customers contacts and lots of new Euros to spend on marketing? Or will the Netweaver push eventually force BO to become more open, embeddable and standards-based?
If one looks at the traditional BI customer base for SAP they are pretty much all die-hard SAP BW users. Amongst these folks a BO acquisition is hard to swallow for two reasons (1) BO's architecture will require significant investment to move from BWs InfoCubes to Universes (2) BO doesn't have native support for BW data structures the same way Cognos has. This is why from a BW perspective, Cognos would have been a much better buy.
At SAPPHIRE in Atlanta this past summer Nimish Mehta's group sung the praises of the SAP BW accelerator - a strange foray into hardware for SAP (albeit with partnerships with Intel and HP). Yet as many solutions architects will tell you, throwing more hardware at a badly designed software application is only a short-term remedy. Yes, the Accelerator may have improved performance for BW but the longer term future for BW was bleak. The BW dev team being in Europe kept them too far from the important US customer base and SAP's clear lack of desire for good UI design meant that the product was a laggard in terms of features. Arguably it's customer base would have died out sooner if it wasn't for SAP reps giving it away with R/3. As BO reps become dominant within the company for every BI sale, BW will become relegated to the SAP museum. If it does, the Accelerator will soon follow.
Finally, what happens with xApps? The thought of them being deployed in BO with the maintenance nightmare of managing those Universes, is painful enough. BO's rigid Universe structure would make enterprise wide analytics (which SAP touts) very difficult especially with the array of customization choices that SAP customers have become accustomed to. Again, Cognos would have been the better choice here.
The question now is what happens to the other players? Cognos will almost certainly get acquired in the next few months, with IBM or HP being a likely suitor. With Mike Saylor still at the helm MicroStrategy seems destined to remain independent, as does Informatica. I see these companies competing more and more against the open source vendors (Pentaho, Jaspersoft for BI and Talend and Kettle for ETL) who will steal significant market share.
As always, we'll continue to watch the space to see how this plays out.