Posts Tagged ‘ActiveVOS’

Intalio: The enterprise storm cloud company?

Friday, May 22nd, 2009

Intalio claims to be a "cloud company"

Earlier this week, Intalio (formerly “the leader in open source BPMS” and formerly “”the open source business platform company”) announced that it has — once again — transformed itself. This time Intalio is now “the enterprise cloud company.”

As a marketer, I admire thought-leadership and the value of aligning your company to whatever is “hot” in the marketplace. Still, you have to wonder what it means when a company is continually “reinventing” itself. Is it real product and technology leadership? Or is wrapping your company in the hot terminology of the day a more cynical form of marketing — maybe even simple opportunism?

Clearly, I don’t know which is at work inside Intalio. But I’ve written a few press releases in my time and so I know a little about the “form” for press releases — and this one is a whopper. Reading Intalio’s “enterprise cloud computing” release gathered more than a few storm clouds for me.

I spend hours agonizing over every press release we issue: what are we saying when we use that word? Does this comma make a difference? What will the reader think of us when he or she reads that phrase? What are we projecting about Active Endpoints and ActiveVOS if we position ourselves in this way? It ain’t easy work, but we think it’s worth it because we want to “get it right” without going over the top — a common complaint about press releases in general.

I assume Intalio sweats the details, too. So, once you’ve made your news public, it’s reasonable to expect others to comments on it. After all, it’s a public document — meant to get attention.

So, I thought it might be interesting to respond — not necessarily about the product — but instead with my reaction about how Intalio’s cloud announcement “reads” to another marketer who writes press releases as part of his job. After all, how you write about a product is an important indication to customers of what it’d be like to do business with a company. Providers of luxury goods know this: BMW car brochures are printed on heavy paper — almost always in Germany and shipped to the US at great expense — and contain spectacular photography and no typos. Full of technical specifications and details, BMW spends a lot of money to communicate what driving the car might be like for you before you even set foot in one.

The first few paragraphs of Intalio’s release start off innocently enough. The company announces two acquisitions and a new product. Unlike a press release I might write, the new product takes a back seat to the acquisitions. It’s not until the second paragraph that we hear about what customers care about: new technology. This could be chalked up to style. But in my world, all marketing is about the product — what customers are presumably interested in — and company news is interesting, but secondary.

Then, suddenly, in the third paragraph, Intalio is “at feature parity” with salesforce.com and offers “a much better user interface” than Microsoft Dynamics CRM. OK. I get it, the company thinks its new product — whatever it is — is a natural to compete with Microsoft and salesforce.com. I say, “Good luck to you.” I am not one to shy away from competitive comparisons — in fact, just call us if you want to compare ActiveVOS BPMS to Intalio BPMS…uh…I mean “cloud.” But we learn nothing — not a single feature — of this new product other than it’s better than others. Innovative? Maybe. Bombast? For sure.

Then, the release just gets curiouser and curiouser. Consider this section:

“Intalio is integral to the operation of the Bank’s back office processes,” said a Vice President at one of the World’s largest banks.  ”…The introduction of Intalio’s Enterprise Cloud Platform provides us with the platform for the next stage in our evolution…”

Every marketer has struggled with this one. You have a new product — but nobody’s probably using it and you want a customer quote to say future customers are going to love using it. The problem is that many customers will not give you an attributed quote to say that — because they haven’t used it. Also, unless you ran a beta, you can’t find anyone to say nice things.

So, you can do what we would — and not quote an unnamed customer — or you can do what Intalio did and make the claim anonymously. When you do, you raise the question in the reader’s mind of exactly why you couldn’t get an attributed quote from a current customer. Did this customer get a demo? Did they actually see this new product? Or were they simply “briefed” (in other words, shown slideware)? We want to know what bank, exactly, is anticipating this new product and why, if they’re so eager for it, they won’t tell the world who they are? By whose definition is this unnamed bank “one of the world’s largest?” At the end of the day, when a technology company uses unnamed sources to praise a new product, it raises more questions than it answers.

Now, the release gets progressively more surreal. Intalio announces an appliance on HP blades. OK, no problem there. Gotta have something to run the software on. But then, abruptly, the press release starts promoting the value of HP blade systems:

“HP BladeSystems will also allow Intalio’s customers to dynamically gain efficiencies through their advanced power and cooling optimization techniques, while providing the very best hardware/software solution.”

This sounds like what you’d normally see in a partnership release between a hardware and software company. So, who from HP is quoted as praising their blades as part of Intalio’s platform? Uhh…that would be someone who used to work at HP.

Any marketer — indeed any customer reading the press release — will tell you what that means: Intalio probably couldn’t get a quote even from some middle-level marketing manager in the HP channel. Why, you ask, wouldn’t someone in HP give Intalio a hand in marketing HP’s products? Are they not an official HP partner? Why isn’t HP happy to have Intalio announcing their product more or less exclusively on HP machines?

On the other hand, I can’t imagine why Intalio is hawking HP blades for no apparent marketing benefit from HP — or why cooling optimization is important in a CRM/BPM/cloud/enterprise/my-UI-is-better-than-someone-else’s-UI product press release — but it has the effect of undermining the whole release. Rule one of product marketing is “don’t shine the light on something else unless you get something in return.” Getting a quote from HP for this should’ve been easy (though not fast). Is Intalio just throwing around brand names? How is this relevant to the rest of what they’re talking about?

Finally, the starkest omission of all: other than saying the products are available “today” at their website, there’s no pricing information, no upgrade information, no details, no features…no nothing. Most of all, there’s no mention of the previous incarnations of the company as an “open source leader” and how that affects customers of its new offerings.

Yes, I believe you can tell a lot about a company by how it communicates. We taken Intalio to task before for claiming “leadership” in open source. Do you also see the pattern in the cloud?

BPM in a bottle contest winners announced

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Today, Active Endpoints is pleased to announce the winners of the BPM in a Bottle contest, where entrants were asked to submit evidence which shows how they used their free, supported 30-day trial of the ActiveVOS business process management suite (BPMS) in the development of their own BPM applications. Prizes included two T-Mobile G1 smart phones and three Logitech Squeezebox Boom music network players.

Selected from hundreds of entries, the five winners were chosen based on creativity and quality of work for their BPM applications and concepts. Congratulations to the winners!

Winners of the smart phone:

Kenneth Peeples, company undisclosed, Senior SOA Software Engineer

BPM contest winner

J.D. Baker, BAE Systems, Principal Systems Engineer

BPM contest winner

Winners of the music network player:

Susan Fox, company undisclosed, Product Manager

BPM contest winner

Michelle Crow, CMR – Complete Medical Record, Business Analyst

BPM contest winner

Denis Gagné, Trisotech

(photo unavailable)

VOSibilities podcast #32: BPMS for Java developers

Monday, May 11th, 2009

We are pleased to post a recording of a webinar originally presented on May 7, 2009 entitled “BPMS for Java Developers.” This webinar, jointly presented by JBoss and Active Endpoints, will introduce Java developers to business process management suites (BPMS) using ActiveVOS and to the JBoss SOA Platform.

There are two files attached to this post. The first is an iPod-formatted .m4v file for our podcast feed subscribers. The second file is a DivX-encoded .avi with slightly larger resolution.

 
icon for podpress  VOSibilities podcast #32: BPMS for Java developers [78:51m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (794)
icon for podpress  VOSibilities podcast #32: BPMS for Java developers [78:50m]: Download (294)

Thinking about BPM? What you should REALLY ask your BPMS vendor

Friday, May 8th, 2009

bpm-questions-you-should-ask-your-bpms-vendor

Keith Swenson has posted this interesting list of questions to ask a BPM vendor.  I liked his emphasis on standards, since it is so important that the hard work that goes into creating business processes not be trapped in proprietary technology.  However, I think he concentrated on the wrong standard — XPDL.  If you really care about safeguarding your investment in your processes, the standard that you should care the most about is BPEL4People.

Don’t get me wrong, XPDL has its place.  ActiveVOS can both import and export XPDL version 2.1 (the latest version).   But XPDL is not a technology that will allow you to take an business process that is executable on one vendor’s BPM engine and move it to another vendor’s engine.  It just won’t work.  If you are lucky, the resulting business process diagram will look recognizable because the “abstract model” (as XPDL calls it) will import successfully.  But don’t get your hopes up about saving all the work that you did on the executable details.

The problem is not that XPDL has no place to put those executable details — it does.  It just doesn’t put enough constraints on what should go there.  There are just too many different things you can do, so no two tools do the same things.   Also, the bar for being able to say that you support XPDL 2.1 is just too low.  If a tool exports something that conforms to the XML Schema (possibly with liberal use of extensions) and import doesn’t barf on any Schema-valid input, then the tool conforms.  But don’t look for guarantees that you will see, much less be able to execute, anything reasonable.

By contrast, users of ActiveVOS have had great success in using BPEL-based business processes that were created by either IBM, Oracle or TIBCO tooling.  They have also found that the BPEL generated by ActiveVOS can be used by the tools of those other vendors.  That is real investment protection.

I do like Keith’s idea of having a list of questions for BPM vendors to help in the evaluation process.  I think the best way to organize such an evaluation is around four key areas.

Are the key BPM standards supported?

  • Does the product generate executable WS-BPEL 2.0 processes?
  • Can you model processes using BPMN?
  • Does the product use the BPEL4People for activities that are handled by people?
  • Are worklists and tasks exposed through the WS-HumanTask standard?
  • Does it support the important enterprise web-service standards, such as WS-Security and WS-ReliableMessaging?
  • How about non-SOAP access to services, such as JMS, REST or plain Java?
  • Does the product import and export XPDL?

Does the development environment make the process developer highly productive, especially for processes that are larger than mere toys?  For some important examples, how easy is it to:

  • Incorporate existing web services into a process?
  • Detect changes to web service definitions and update the process accordingly?
  • Define services provided by the process (including defining XML Schemas and WSDL)?
  • Define new human tasks using existing data definitions (XSDs)?
  • Prepare the input data for human tasks or services?
  • Support services that “call back” into a running process, and specify the appropriate data to use for correlation?
  • Find all uses of a variable within a large process?

An executable process is deployed software.  What support is available for ensuring and maintaining its quality?

  • Is there test case generation?
  • Is there test suite support?
  • Is there remote debugging?
  • Is there Metadata for controlling the difference between staging and deployment?
  • Can you new versions without effecting existing process instances?
  • Can you deploy new versions that do change existing process instances?

What can be done to a running instance?  Can you:

  • See where it has been (with anotations on the process diagram)?
  • View current and historical data?
  • Change data?
  • Skip activities?
  • Single step through activities?
  • Rewind execution, optionally reverting all process data to what it was?

What kind of runtime console support is there?

  • Can you get reports with either operational or business information?
  • Can the end user create any kind of new report and incorporate it into the runtime console?
  • How powerful is the query capability to find a process instance you care about?

All of these characteristics of a BPMS will eventually be important to anyone that is creating the kind of critical business processes that will really transform a business.  Knowing the answers to these questions can help you to avoid making the wrong choice.

eBizQ Podcast: BPM That Includes Both Services and People: A Talk with Active Endpoints

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

The VOSibilities podcast from Active Endpoints on BPM, BPEL, BPMN, BPM, CEP and SOA for service orchestration and Java developers

We are very pleased to include a podcast produced by Peter Schooff of eBizQ in our podcast feed. In this short 6:30 minute podcast, Peter interviews our own Michael Rowley on why a good BPMS (business process management system) needs to include both services and human tasks. When a standards-based way to include people activities in a BPM application is available, developing end-to-end, integrated applications is easier and faster. We believe that every BPMS must deliver both human tasks and machine (or services) integration to be a real solution to the challenge of creating BPM applications.

 
icon for podpress  BPM That Includes Both Services and People: A Talk with Active Endpoints [6:50m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (458)

VOSibilities podcast #31: An Introduction to BPM with the ActiveVOS 6.2 BPMS

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

Every Wednesday, we have a live webinar in which we introduce the ActiveVOS BPMS (business process management suite) using a fictional company called Classic Cars. You can always sign up for a live webinar, held every Wednesday at noon Eastern time, by clicking on the blue box on the right-hand side of every page on the ActiveVOS website.

By popular request, we recorded a recent webinar and are putting it into the podcast feed for subscribers and other visitors. There are two versions of the file: a smaller .m4v file, perfect for viewing on an iPod and a larger DivX-encoded .avi file in slightly higher resolution.

 
icon for podpress  VOSibilities podcast #31: An Introduction to BPM with the ActiveVOS 6.2 BPMS [76:31m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (435)
icon for podpress  VOSibilities podcast #31: An Introduction to BPM with the ActiveVOS 6.2 BPMS [76:31m]: Download (231)

Active Endpoints Ships ActiveVOS 6.2 MultiSite BPMS

Tuesday, May 5th, 2009

Today, Active Endpoints announced ActiveVOS 6.2, including ActiveVOS’s new MultiSite capability. ActiveVOS becomes the first business process management suite (BPMS) to enable multiple, geographically dispersed data centers to be joined together to execute and manage BPM applications. More details are in the press release attached to this post.

icon for podpress  Active Endpoints Ships ActiveVOS 6.2 MultiSite BPMS: Download (154)

What’s New in ActiveVOS 6.2 BPMS

Tuesday, May 5th, 2009

Continuing the very fast pace of innovation and product releases, Active Endpoints is pleased to ship ActiveVOS 6.2. Coming less than 60 days after the release of ActiveVOS 6.1, our new ActiveVOS 6.2 delivers an industry-first: true multi datacenter fail-over and clustering. ActiveVOS 6.2 makes it possible for BPM developers and users to ensure that long-running and crucial business processes are never lost.

Read more about ActiveVOS 6.2 MultiSite in the PDF attached to this post.

icon for podpress  What's New in ActiveVOS 6.2: Download (274)

Putting ActiveVOS BPMS into focus

Friday, May 1st, 2009

repetition

Long-time Active Endpoints follower and Forrester analyst Stefan Ried has written a post about us on the occasion of our new investment round that gives me a chance to address some points about our company and our product that we haven’t discussed very much on this blog.

Stefan writes, “It looks like the company is really heading to become a real BPM vendor. Coming out of the origin of a pure BPEL engine, their product evolved into a more and more comprehensive BPM product.” We are very grateful for this comment and so gratified that Stefan understands this about ActiveVOS.

Because Active Endpoints has been around for some time, we sometimes have trouble shaking a dismissive “just a BPEL engine” classification from analysts and bloggers who have not looked at ActiveVOS since we revised the product in March, 2008. Further, we suspect that some BPM advocates who’d rather not address issues raised by promoting model-based execution — the “pretty picture purists” — actually prefer to classify ActiveVOS as “just a BPEL engine.”

It’s as if they wish by doing so they could make BPEL irrelevant to BPM. In our ears, that sounds like denial. That’s because the nitty-gritty of how to actually get a business process executing on a real computer is one of those things you can hide behind a great demo…until the customer discovers that the promise of punching a button and having the process run in an integrated, end-to-end manner is a chimera. And an expensive one at that, since ignoring the execution issues early means great cost in consultants and IT people to get the process deployed. Just the thing model-based execution is designed to avoid.

Stefan goes on to issue two challenges to us at Active Endpoints. I’d like to address them both.

First, Stefan writes, that we need to create a “unique positioning.”

Done.

We have “declared for” IT developers. Our college major is making IT developers part of the collaboration necessary to design, model, develop, deploy and manage business processes. And we intend to make people love using ActiveVOS by making it easy. How would you make this ambition come true? You’d start just the way we have: create a single, integrated product that’s compatible, open and familiar.  With ActiveVOS, developers and business analysts can do what comes naturally — and ActiveVOS makes sure that what’s created is architecturally correct. Every time. No need to worry about “stacks.” ActiveVOS is the first real product that is “shrink-wrap middleware.” IBM, Oracle and SAP can’t get there — and aren’t trying. We assert — and increasing numbers of customers agree — that this is a very unique positioning for ActiveVOS. (And I was able to get it into a single paragraph, too.)

Second, Stefan advises that we “balance our ecosystem.” Active Endpoints’ success in the OEM marketplace allowed us to develop superior technology. After all, what’s harder: selling middleware to end users or selling it to other software companies? Combined with rigorous adherence to standards, that OEM experience has yielded a product with excellent reliability, performance, scalability and a widely deployed user base.

Today, just as we have innovated in BPM, we are innovating in our sales model. Now, we sell our ActiveVOS BPMS over the phone instead of via OEMers. We list our affordable prices on our website. How do we succeed at this? Simply,  it’s because ActiveVOS is a shrink-wrap BPMS. IBM, Oracle and SAP need fleets of expensive direct salespeople, planeloads of expensive consultants, months, and mountains of money to achieve anything useful. Mere mortals are successful with ActiveVOS, usually within a free trial period.

We think we have achieved the perfect balance in our ecosystem: an all-in-one product that is uniquely positioned in the marketplace. Combined with a novel go-to-market unlike anyone else in the BPMS business — one that works for customers — we have created an ecosystem that works for customers and gives us global reach.

Thanks, Stefan, for giving me the chance to put today’s Active Endpoints into sharper focus.

Dana Gardner: “Talk about the benefits of CEP and business users eye light up”

Friday, May 1st, 2009

Dana Gardner has written an interesting post on it-director.com about the promise of complex event processing (CEP). In reference to us, he points out that we aren”t big on terminology. That’s because terminology isn’t what people buy…they buy products. We hope that what Dana has in mind is that by being first to completely integrate a CEP engine into a BPMS, ActiveVOS has made the terminology debate unnecessary. We sure think it has.

Learn more about CEP inside ActiveVOS and see why our users’ eyes are lighting up when they see what the combination of a truly flexible BPMS with integrated CEP can do for them.

VOSibilities podcast #30: ActiveVOS 6.2

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

The VOSibilities podcast from Active Endpoints on BPM, BPEL, BPMN, BPM, CEP and SOA for service orchestration and Java developers

I am joined by Luc Clément, senior director of product management and Michael Rowley, director of technology and strategy, for a discussion of our latest release, ActiveVOS 6.2. This release of the ActiveVOS BPMS introduces MultiSite and makes ActiveVOS the first BPM system that can extend business process management applications across geographically separated data centers. Luc and Michael discuss the benefits and implementation details of MultiSite.

You might also be interested in reviewing our podcast from March, 2009 on ActiveVOS 6.1.

 
icon for podpress  VOSibilities podcast #30: ActiveVOS 6.2 [21:12m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (389)

ActiveVOS featured in eWeek Slideshow

Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009

Screenshots of ActiveVOS 6.1, including any-order BPM development and how standards-compliant BPEL is automatically generated, are featured in an eWeek Slideshow.

Bloor Research “definitely recommends” a look at ActiveVOS BPM

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

We are pleased to post an update on ActiveVOS 6.1 by Bloor Research’s Simon Holloway.

In the PDF attached to this post, Simon overviews the ActiveVOS BPMS, outlines how it works and describes how users will benefit from using ActiveVOS in their BPM roll-outs.

icon for podpress  Bloor Research Overviews the ActiveVOS BPM system: Download (117)

ActiveVOS Experiences Rapid Growth in Q1 2009

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

Today, we are pleased to announce that Active Endpoints’ ActiveVOS BPM system has continued to experience rapid growth and acceptance among BPMS buyers worldwide. The details are in the press release attached to this post.

icon for podpress  ActiveVOS Experiences Rapid Growth in Q1 2009: Download (231)

VOSibilities podcast #29: CEO Mark Taber on Gartner BPM Summit, the BPMS market and ActiveVOS in Q1

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

The VOSibilities podcast from Active Endpoints on BPM, BPEL, BPMN, BPM, CEP and SOA for service orchestration and Java developers

In our latest podcast, I sat down for a quick chat with Active Endpoints’ CEO Mark Taber to recap our recent attendance at Gartner’s BPM Summit and the company’s approach to the BPMS marketplace. Mark detailed the reasons for the success ActiveVOS BPM had in Q1, despite these challenging economic times. Note to competitors (yes, we know you’re listening (-: ): you will squirm more than a little as Mark details how customers are able to get into production with ActiveVOS BPM with only modest levels of professional services billings.

And a special treat: I got Mark to spill the beans about some of the future plans for ActiveVOS. A must-listen podcast for anyone interested in using BPM to improve their business results.

 
icon for podpress  VOSibilities podcast #29: CEO Mark Taber on Gartner BPM Summit, the BPMS market and ActiveVOS in Q1 [14:18m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (202)