<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Brian Magierski - Latest Comments in Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week</title><link>http://bkm.disqus.com/</link><description>Entrepreneurial finance, venture capital, debt, mergers &amp; acquisitions, and more - brian.magierski.com</description><atom:link href="https://bkm.disqus.com/social_enterprise_software_discussion_buzzing_last_week/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:38:32 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week</title><link>http://brian.magierski.com/2008/05/03/social-enterprise-software-discussion-buzzing-last-week/#comment-67657159</link><description>&lt;p&gt;So, I'm interested in the effect you think Drupal Commons (&lt;a href="http://drupal.org/project/commons)" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://drupal.org/project/commons)"&gt;http://drupal.org/project/c...&lt;/a&gt; will have. I agree that the issue is not technology - it's making sure the enterprises understand the business benefits of using the technology.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But when the technology itself becomes free (as in both libertas and beer), what changes about how fast enterprises try, and find the benefits? What will this do to both the businesses, and the proprietary social business software market?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thoughts?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jay Batson</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:38:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week</title><link>http://brian.magierski.com/2008/05/03/social-enterprise-software-discussion-buzzing-last-week/#comment-25298625</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Discussing of Enterprise Social Software is very amazing.&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.staffingpower.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.staffingpower.com"&gt;staffing power&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">staffpower</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:11:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week</title><link>http://brian.magierski.com/2008/05/03/social-enterprise-software-discussion-buzzing-last-week/#comment-515361</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well said&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jeff Dachis</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 23:45:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week</title><link>http://brian.magierski.com/2008/05/03/social-enterprise-software-discussion-buzzing-last-week/#comment-418613</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Oliver - great comment. I agree that IBM page is not impressive in&lt;br&gt;the least, and the timeframe question for the big players is the real&lt;br&gt;question. All have a placeholder for sure because they have to, but many&lt;br&gt;lack commitment - in the ham &amp;amp; eggs analogy, they are the eggs. This&lt;br&gt;includes Sharepoint despite the civil defense force you mention. The&lt;br&gt;Sharepoint story seems to their typical play - rather than just have a&lt;br&gt;placeholder, they deliberately seed something inside their customers into&lt;br&gt;which will grow whatever needs to grow to dominate that part of the customer&lt;br&gt;infrastructure over whatever timeframe it takes them to figure it out.&lt;br&gt;I agree with your comment - we are seeing the natural evolution in market&lt;br&gt;development in play here - from Education to Custom Solution development to&lt;br&gt;more packaged Applications / Solutions. We're probably in between the&lt;br&gt;Education and Custom Solution development stage, with collaborative&lt;br&gt;processes now being defined in some enterprises / industries, and custom&lt;br&gt;solutions being developed on these infrastructure toolsets - wikis, blogs,&lt;br&gt;forums, social nets, Sharepoint : ) - and single sign-on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Dennis is probably right, these infrastructure players get consolidated into&lt;br&gt;the infrastructure. Alongside that, new application / social enterprise apps&lt;br&gt;providers will emerge building the next generation apps leveraging this web&lt;br&gt;middleware. All in all, a fun time to be in the market.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brian Magierski</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 19:34:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Social Enterprise Software discussion buzzing last week</title><link>http://brian.magierski.com/2008/05/03/social-enterprise-software-discussion-buzzing-last-week/#comment-415172</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Very cogent and coherent contribution to this debate.  Conventional wisdom of course is that the big dogs- Oracle, IBM, MSoft et al, will ultimately provide the underlying infrastructure for collaboration with other players either subsumed or in niche roles augmenting big player platforms. &lt;br&gt;Assuming for a moment this is how things play out the bigger question then becomes in what timeframe. In my earlier post you cite above, I deliberately linked to an IBM 'collaboration' page that was less than impressive. I know IBM are planning big things but no one challenged my post, unlike the sharepoint civil defense force who are vigilantly scanning the horizon for comments about their baby.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The reality is most enterprises are not ready for fully formed 'solution' suites at this point in time. We are in a fascinating era where collaboration processes and procedures are still evolving - software represents the functionality required from this thinking and at this point the solution is often a combination of different apps under single sign on for specific goals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There clearly will be consolidation and shake out in this space which is set to be joined by yet more me-to apps as the consumer web 2.0 bubble deflates and attempts are made to rationalize 'social' in the enterprise.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;What I'm seeing on the ground today  as an enterprise collaboration consultant recommending appropriate sets of tools for a given set of client needs is diversity. This diversity is typical solved with an amalgamation of appropriate solutions, usually under single sign on.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There's no question suites are coming as we rationalize but that day hasn't arrived. Yet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">oliver marks</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 23:58:57 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>