Hardware company mantra. Part II

I thought a lot how to write continuation for previous blogpost, because I have my own OpenText experience and I’m looking forward to share it, on the other hand OpenText has recently shared their Documentum “roadmap“, so I want to share my thought on it as well. Today Alvaro de Andres has inspired me to write a blogpost about second topic, i.e. roadmap. Actually, I would completely ignore this blogpost if it was written by a sales person, who was hired a couple of months ago and has a KPI to sale as much D2 licences as possible, but statements like “migrate to D2 because you can configure it” sound ridiculous if you are an architect with 20 years of experience. Well, let’s discuss this topic more thoroughly, and let’s begin not with Documentum 🙂

Simple question: what is the worst bugtracking software ever?

I do know it is not correct to use universal quantifiers, because my experience is limited only by four bugtracking systems:

but without doubts I can say that in my opinion Atlassian JIRA is the worst bugtracking software ever – it is so uncomfortable that every opening of JIRA dashboard causes a vomiting attack. Simple case: imagine that I need to create an issue in my bugtracking system, what steps I had to perform in order to do this? There is nothing special: I need to login into bugtracking system, open special page, provide short/full description, steps to reproduce, information about environment and versions, attach log files and submit an issue. Now how it looks in JIRA:

What is the hell? First of all, Atlassian guys, who think that modal window is extremely convenient, must to commit a suicide as soon as possible, at second, JIRA offers to fill a lot of irrelevant information but misses the important thing – adding attachments. Now how the same functionality looks in another bugtracking system:

It is awesome! Another case: every evening I want to review all recently submitted issues in order to check that those issues has been properly classified and assigned, JIRA search functionality:

the same in YouTrack – after JIRA it is like a big gulp of clean air:

Well, why is there abysmal gap in “user” experience between YouTrack and JIRA? The answer is pretty simple: YouTrack is a specialized software, which was designed to support development activities, JIRA is a software which allows you to setup/configure processes which look like trouble ticketing, i.e. you can use JIRA both as bugtracking and ITSM system, but in both cases it’s functionality lacks some crucial points, for example, in case of ITMS trouble ticketingincident management is not the only discipline, there are also problem management and configuration management – take a look at this marvel: JIRA as CMDB (actually, there is a third-party CMDB module for JIRA, but it’s existence just proves that JIRA lack some functionality). And the real question is: if I want to support some processes in enterprise, what is the best option: buy specialized software or use a single system, which is definitely not ideal for particular processes but, it general, covers about 80% of required functionality?

Now let’s return to Documentum. Why did I provide a user experience comparison between JIRA and YouTrack? Because it perfectly fits to the following statement from the original blogpost:

These days, the goal is more likely to be user acceptance, or better put – user adoption – making users happy and productive. The business side now typically drives decisions about which products and solutions will be implemented, and this makes total sense: Users must derive a business benefit from any implementation, otherwise, why implement? So the focus now is more on User Experience in terms of ease of adoption (including level of training needed), ease of use, speed of use – essentially, does the solution drive productivity or hinder it?

Hey, talented team, why are you still on JIRA if YouTrack provides better user experience? YouTrack also reduces TCO because it is cheaper – compare: YouTrack Standalone License and JIRA, hosted on your server. And, moreover, it is obvious that your users fail to adopt JIRA:

How was it possible that webtop CR became a part of D2 release? There are only two options:

But in both cases I do think OpenText must immediately migrate to YouTrack, otherwise the statement about TCO and user experience seems to be inconsistent – you suggest customers to migrate to another software due to certain reasons, but fail to do the same for your organization. And more vital question: if I think that webtop does not fit my needs well, why do I need to migrate to D2 and stay with OpenText? Why do not prefer another ECM vendor? If you think that your ECM processes are so simple that you are able to “transparently” switch between Webtop and D2, I swear: for you it won’t be a challenge to change ECM vendor. Moreover, if we start comparing ECM vendors using TCO and user experience metrics Documentum will demonstrate the worst results. My personal suggestion: never ever try to calculate money in someone else’s wallet – TCO is just a last resort when you are trying to compare competing products – if these products do not compete you statements looks poor, during long period of time Microsoft was trying to do the same and as the result we have a MSSQL running on Linux servers.

Now we are ready to talk about Documentum roadmap.

Frankly speaking, I didn’t expect much from that webinar due to following consideration: the “roadmap” term assumes that you clearly understand what is your current location and where is your final destination, and roadmap just defines a set of steps (milestones) you need to perform to reach your final destination, and, if you think that 30 minutes is enough to present “Documentum roadmap” you are bloody idiot – even a couple of days is not enough to do that, moreover, 90 days are not enough to think the current situation through and define a final destination and milestones, so, I was expecting that OpenText reps would use some populist slogans like: we are going to improve support, documentation, security, stability, integration capabilities, etc… – sounds poor from technical perspective, but it is exactly what Documentum customers were expecting, but even these low expectations didn’t come to true – all what we got was: we have acquired a 25-years old building and what we are going to do is change it’s signboard (change version numbers) and paint a facade (change D2 UI – actually, this analogy seems not to be perfect because D2 is just an outbuilding which has been constructed using dirt and cane, but on the other hand OpenText reps do think that D2 is our future, so, this analogy is correct). And when you are suggesting customers to migrate from Webtop to D2 you are actually suggesting to move from 25-years old building into an outbuilding – it is ridiculous.


7 thoughts on “Hardware company mantra. Part II

  1. Pingback: Hardware company mantra. Part III | Pro Documentum
  2. Pingback: Never happened before and happened again | Documentum in a (nuts)HELL
  3. Pingback: Why you should stay clear of REST | Pro Documentum
  4. Pingback: Documentum innovations | Pro Documentum

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s