<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Content Management, 2008</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/</link>
	<description>Ponderings on Life, the Universe, and Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:28:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pie</title>
		<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3648</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordofpie.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3648</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Carlos, your points are dead on but I think you are making it too hard.  Let&#039;s boil it down to this...

In addition to the current quals for ECM that Gartner uses, how ready is the software to be used as infrastucture?  For example, if I am using a BPM or CRM tool, how easy is it for me to store the content in SharePoint?

SharePoint wasn&#039;t designed for that.  The volumes will break it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Carlos, your points are dead on but I think you are making it too hard.  Let&#8217;s boil it down to this&#8230;</p>
<p>In addition to the current quals for ECM that Gartner uses, how ready is the software to be used as infrastucture?  For example, if I am using a BPM or CRM tool, how easy is it for me to store the content in SharePoint?</p>
<p>SharePoint wasn&#8217;t designed for that.  The volumes will break it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carlos Vidal</title>
		<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3647</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carlos Vidal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordofpie.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3647</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Quadrant is flawed. If the X access was changed to &quot;completeness of product&quot;, Microsoft would pull hard left. Every IT executive I speak to about this new addition to the leaders quadrant laughs out loud.

In my opinion, changing to completeness of &quot;product&quot; wouldn&#039;t really affect the other players in the top right quadrant that much.  As for adding advanced ECM features, I see this as extremely challenging given the reality that you are dealing with two different platforms.

Try spanning a workflow across Documentum and SharePoint and maintaining visibility to the prior and pending steps in both applications. I&#039;m still not convinced that the true ECM vendors need to spend valuable time and resources trying to back fill SharePoint&#039;s gaps.  

Here is one example I heard recently that shows just how difficult it can be when you work with the lowest common denominator - SharePoint.  Lets say you have a need to expose a piece of content to an employee and their manager and the manager&#039;s manager with the ability to add comments by each then try to shield the comments of the superiors so the lower person can&#039;t see it. That isn&#039;t possible in SharePoint; there isn&#039;t a concept of levels of security to meta data.

Someone may prove me wrong but I heard this from some pretty knowledgeable folks who live and breath SharePoint.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Quadrant is flawed. If the X access was changed to &#8220;completeness of product&#8221;, Microsoft would pull hard left. Every IT executive I speak to about this new addition to the leaders quadrant laughs out loud.</p>
<p>In my opinion, changing to completeness of &#8220;product&#8221; wouldn&#8217;t really affect the other players in the top right quadrant that much.  As for adding advanced ECM features, I see this as extremely challenging given the reality that you are dealing with two different platforms.</p>
<p>Try spanning a workflow across Documentum and SharePoint and maintaining visibility to the prior and pending steps in both applications. I&#8217;m still not convinced that the true ECM vendors need to spend valuable time and resources trying to back fill SharePoint&#8217;s gaps.  </p>
<p>Here is one example I heard recently that shows just how difficult it can be when you work with the lowest common denominator &#8211; SharePoint.  Lets say you have a need to expose a piece of content to an employee and their manager and the manager&#8217;s manager with the ability to add comments by each then try to shield the comments of the superiors so the lower person can&#8217;t see it. That isn&#8217;t possible in SharePoint; there isn&#8217;t a concept of levels of security to meta data.</p>
<p>Someone may prove me wrong but I heard this from some pretty knowledgeable folks who live and breath SharePoint.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pie</title>
		<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3645</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordofpie.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3645</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks, especially considering the typo, now fixed, in my statement.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, especially considering the typo, now fixed, in my statement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lopataru</title>
		<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3644</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[lopataru]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:13:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordofpie.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3644</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;key isn’t to bring scalability to SharePoint, but to bring advance ECM features&quot; - right on! i think this is the best line around the subject that i&#039;ve seen for a long time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;key isn’t to bring scalability to SharePoint, but to bring advance ECM features&#8221; &#8211; right on! i think this is the best line around the subject that i&#8217;ve seen for a long time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pie</title>
		<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3643</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:40:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordofpie.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3643</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nagu, you are correct.  However, until a majority of clients out there think so, they will remain relevant.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nagu, you are correct.  However, until a majority of clients out there think so, they will remain relevant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nagu</title>
		<link>http://wordofpie.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3642</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nagu]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:23:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordofpie.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/the-ecm-magic-quadrant-2008/#comment-3642</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is however a school of thgought that Gartner studies are a sham and their proccesses to evaluate are out dated.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is however a school of thgought that Gartner studies are a sham and their proccesses to evaluate are out dated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

