<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Martin Notes &#187; Enterprise 2.0</title>
	<atom:link href="http://martinnotes.com/category/enterprise-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://martinnotes.com</link>
	<description>Open source in real life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:44:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Enterprise performance</title>
		<link>http://martinnotes.com/2008/10/31/enterprise-performance/</link>
		<comments>http://martinnotes.com/2008/10/31/enterprise-performance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:02:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enterprise 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enterprise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://martinnotes.com/?p=86</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been working with a lot of enterprise software during my whole career and it keep surprising me that almost no enterprise tool has any consideration for performance. I understand that the pricing is usually per CPU, which makes performance a less interesting feature for sales. But it goes too far. How is it possible [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been working with a lot of enterprise software during my whole career and it keep surprising me that almost no enterprise tool has any consideration for performance. I understand that the pricing is usually per CPU, which makes performance a less interesting feature for sales. But it goes too far.</p>
<p>How is it possible that you are advised to run 1 Oracle  WebLogic Portal instance on 1 CPU? I know portal is not comparable to PHP, but a factor 1:1000 is a bit to much for my liking. And Oracle is not alone in this: IBM, SAP, all of these are slow and slower. And it&#8217;s weird since we (the IT boys and girls) have fixed this a long time ago.</p>
<p>There is a beautiful concept called HTML caching. Yes, I know: that&#8217;s not nice, architectural incorrect, not flexible enough. Indeed, heavily personalised pages might not be the primary candidates for full page caching, but most of the websites out there still use a fairly static homepage. Cache that page!</p>
<p>At <a href="http://www.componence.com">Componence</a> we&#8217;ve (finally) delivered a standard caching solution to put in front of Oracle WebLogic Portal (or BEA Weblogic Portal and the result is shocking. The performance improvement is upwards of 1:20. Give it a try: <a href="http://www.wk-vet.fr">http://www.wk-vet.fr</a>. Yes, that&#8217;s portal, and it&#8217;s dynamic.</p>
<p>Dear enterprise architects, please stop being such principle asses and apply the most common fixes to your performance problems.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://martinnotes.com/2008/10/31/enterprise-performance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Open source and exchange</title>
		<link>http://martinnotes.com/2008/08/27/open-source-and-exchange/</link>
		<comments>http://martinnotes.com/2008/08/27/open-source-and-exchange/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enterprise 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ubuntu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open source enterprise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://martinnotes.com/?p=47</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The man is making sense. There is no alternative for exchange in the opensource. Not for the server, and not for the client. It&#8217;s a sad thing because it makes acceptance of linux in the business world tough, if not impossible. If Ubuntu is serious about the #1 bug, start thinking about this first: what [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://martinnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/exchange.png"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-48" style="float: left;" title="exchange" src="http://martinnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/exchange.png" alt="" width="145" height="141" /></a><a href="http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2008/082608-exchange-replacements.html?">The man is making sense</a>. There is no alternative for exchange in the opensource. Not for the server, and not for the client. It&#8217;s a sad thing because it makes acceptance of linux in the business world tough, if not impossible.</p>
<p>If Ubuntu is serious about the #1 bug, start thinking about this first: what software stack do you need to be a competitor to M$? That will include business software, quite a lot I think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://martinnotes.com/2008/08/27/open-source-and-exchange/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>GUI improvement</title>
		<link>http://martinnotes.com/2008/08/07/gui-improvement/</link>
		<comments>http://martinnotes.com/2008/08/07/gui-improvement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:40:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enterprise 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GUI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[desktop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[menus]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://martinnotes.com/?p=37</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why are we still working with menus in our desktops? It&#8217;s just about the most stupid way to give access to features in an application. Menus don&#8217;t give the user the possibility to &#8216;ask&#8217; an application if a feature is available. If a feature is hidden somewhere deep the user might even never find it. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://martinnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/menu.png"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-38" style="float: left;" title="menu" src="http://martinnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/menu.png" alt="" width="100" height="100" /></a>Why are we still working with menus in our desktops? It&#8217;s just about the most stupid way to give access to features in an application. Menus don&#8217;t give the user the possibility to &#8216;ask&#8217; an application if a feature is available. If a feature is hidden somewhere deep the user might even never find it.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m pretty sure interaction designers thought a lot on how to replace menus. But I still see the concept coming back in every application an every website.</p>
<p>Looking forward to the web 3.0 ideas: why don&#8217;t we at least have a way to search in the features that an application provides? Why can&#8217;t I search in a menu? Better then that: why can&#8217;t I search for a feature? I&#8217;d like to enter in a word processor: &#8220;paper size&#8221; and then I want to see the dialog where I can set the paper size. I don&#8217;t want to enter the help, search, and get an explanation where I can do what I just found! That&#8217;s how we had to solve it in the 80&#8242;s, but applications should be able to do a bit more now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://martinnotes.com/2008/08/07/gui-improvement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Open source  Enterprise 2.0?</title>
		<link>http://martinnotes.com/2008/05/04/open-source-enterprise-20/</link>
		<comments>http://martinnotes.com/2008/05/04/open-source-enterprise-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 19:16:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enterprise 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open source community]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://martinnotes.com/?p=15</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This thing has been in my mind for a long time now. There is a connection between the open source community and Enterprise 2.0. They both describe distibuted responsibility and the use of web 2.0 tooling. Look at the pages under: http://www.ubuntu.com/community/processes. This describes the organisation of the Ubuntu community. I&#8217;ve been reading this for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This thing has been in my mind for a long time now. There is a connection between the open source community and Enterprise 2.0. They both describe distibuted responsibility and the use of web 2.0 tooling.</p>
<p>Look at the pages under: <a href="http://www.ubuntu.com/community/processes">http://www.ubuntu.com/community/processes</a>. This describes the organisation of the Ubuntu community. I&#8217;ve been reading this for about an hour now and I&#8217;ve seen 10ths of things we can use in <a href="http://www.componence.com">Componence</a>.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to do more research on this to find out how the settled enterprise can learn from the anarchistic open source community.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://martinnotes.com/2008/05/04/open-source-enterprise-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Enterprise 2.0</title>
		<link>http://martinnotes.com/2008/04/20/enterprise-20/</link>
		<comments>http://martinnotes.com/2008/04/20/enterprise-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 08:15:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enterprise 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hype]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mixedlife.com/blog/?p=10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There has been a lot of talk lately about enterprise 2.0 in our company. It&#8217;s supposed to be the enterprise version of web 2.0, so: online collaboration, distributed content generation, distributed responsibilities, &#8230; This comes down to: wiki, blogging, but also a change in the company organisation. I think that real enterprise 2.0 doesn&#8217;t have [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There has been a lot of talk lately about enterprise 2.0 in our company. It&#8217;s supposed to be the enterprise version of web 2.0, so: online collaboration, distributed content generation, distributed responsibilities, &#8230; This comes down to: wiki, blogging, but also a change in the company organisation.</p>
<p>I think that real enterprise 2.0 doesn&#8217;t have anything to do with technology, since all the technology was already there and it was already used. Enterprise 2.0 is about a change in mindset. Knowledge sharing has always been one of the major issues in enterprises. Componence (the company I work for) is not an enterprise, but we do work on 7 locations over the whole world. This means that our problem with knowledge sharing is in a way representative for larger companies.</p>
<p>Contact between employees is mostly through <a href="http://www.skype.com">Skype</a>. I&#8217;ve never been in a company where they are so happy when you have 15 skype chats open; this means you&#8217;re working hard. Chats, conference calls, video conferencing, mail, it all works, but the knowledge that is exchanged doesn&#8217;t stick. It&#8217;s lost after the conversation is over. Two or three people have learned something and then we go into the regular creating of presentations, text documents, mindmaps, etc.</p>
<p>But real knowledge should be shared with other people, discussed, enriched and USED! Wiki and blog give the company a way to do that. But then the employees still have to understand what they are doing. Don&#8217;t blog because your boss tells you to, don&#8217;t post something on wiki because it&#8217;s good for your bonus. It&#8217;s change in working: the knowledge in your head is worth nothing until you do something with it! Share the knowledge, actively join the discussion with other people in your company (our outside).</p>
<p>Me personally, I don&#8217;t have enough time to do all that shit&#8230; Ehm&#8230; Ah&#8230;.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s going to be a long way before this Enterprise 2.0 thing will really work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://martinnotes.com/2008/04/20/enterprise-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

