« New CIOaudio Podcast | Main | Google Buys Online Document Manager Writely »

Because of Web 2.0's collaborative technology and the blogosphere's ability to provide a glimpse into what people are thinking as they're thinking it, you can almost hear the analysts formulating their views about the BEA-Fuego Acquisition. Little by little, blog entries are starting to consider the acquisition in its context.

Beth Gold-Bernstein, over here at ebizQ, has started thinking about what an SOA platform actually is, in light of comments by BEA Chairman Alfred Chuang saying that because of the buy, BEA is "now the only company to offer a unified SOA-based platform to integrate business processes, applications, and legacy environments."

Tony Baer of OnStrategies Perspectives has started discussing the acquisition as something to think about in terms of companies actually starting to acknowledge that they have to deliver on the kind of simplicity they promise.

BEA was filling in a blank in their product portfolio to keep pace with IBM and Oracle, snaring one of the most promising pure plays in the process. But most of all, it reveals that vendors must acknowledge the demand for the kind of simplicity they've been promising all these years. What might look robust to a software architect may appear positively intimidating to business analysts bent on avoiding programming-intensive solutions.

David Ogren, who had been blogging from inside Fuego, and who will soon move his blog to a new home here at ebizQ, has said some really interesting things about the acquisition here and here.

Our own Sandy Kemsley, of Column 2 fame, got into it a bit with David Ogren, and has been watching the deal with a close eye.

The 451 Group has written a market insight statement on the aquisition, and I'm going to ask for them to release it as a feature for ebizQ readers next week. 451 gives us a feature for ebizQ use once a month.

Demir Barlas of Line56 has made his comments here. Barlas highlighted comments made by ZapThink analyst Jason Bloomberg:

'While Fuego does address the BPM component of SOA, Bloomberg is concerned about how its Java-based approach will fit in with AquaLogic. "If you're neutral with respect to the underlying code rather than having a Java infrastructure, you have flexibility at runtime, you can make changes to business logic on the fly," he explains. "The power of the SOA view of BPM is that you don't need to get developers to generate Java code and recompile when you're making new processes, or changes to processes."'

Annrai O'Toole, CEO of BEA competitor Cape Clear Software, came out with a blog entry on Monday called BEA's Strategery. If you know the origin of the word "strategery," then you probably would guess that this commentary isn't too positive. Here's a taste:

BEA claims to be focused on the SOA market, but how exactly does this help them? Admittedly, disciplines within BPM are very relevant to SOA, but the BPM market is founded on legacy, proprietary technologies, and the success of SOA is dependant on open standards. How does the addition of more proprietary technologies get them closer to supporting SOA? How in the world are they going to rationalize two non-integrated portal products and two non-integrated proprietary process tools (lets not forget about WebLogic Integration!) into an integrated, standards-based SOA platform??

More as it comes.

Because of Web 2.0's collaborative technology and the blogosphere's ability to provide a glimpse into what people are thinking as they're thinking it, you can almost hear the analysts formulating their views about the BEA-Fuego Acquisition. Little by little, blog entries are starting to consider the acquisition in its context.

Beth Gold-Bernstein, over here at ebizQ, has started thinking about what an SOA platform actually is, in light of comments by BEA Chairman Alfred Chuang saying that because of the buy, BEA is "now the only company to offer a unified SOA-based platform to integrate business processes, applications, and legacy environments."

Tony Baer of OnStrategies Perspectives has started discussing the acquisition as something to think about in terms of companies actually starting to acknowledge that they have to deliver on the kind of simplicity they promise.

BEA was filling in a blank in their product portfolio to keep pace with IBM and Oracle, snaring one of the most promising pure plays in the process. But most of all, it reveals that vendors must acknowledge the demand for the kind of simplicity they've been promising all these years. What might look robust to a software architect may appear positively intimidating to business analysts bent on avoiding programming-intensive solutions.

David Ogren, who had been blogging from inside Fuego, and who will soon move his blog to a new home here at ebizQ, has said some really interesting things about the acquisition here and here.

Our own Sandy Kemsley, of Column 2 fame, got into it a bit with David Ogren, and has been watching the deal with a close eye.

The 451 Group has written a market insight statement on the aquisition, and I'm going to ask for them to release it as a feature for ebizQ readers next week. 451 gives us a feature for ebizQ use once a month.

Demir Barlas of Line56 has made his comments here. Barlas highlighted comments made by ZapThink analyst Jason Bloomberg:

'While Fuego does address the BPM component of SOA, Bloomberg is concerned about how its Java-based approach will fit in with AquaLogic. "If you're neutral with respect to the underlying code rather than having a Java infrastructure, you have flexibility at runtime, you can make changes to business logic on the fly," he explains. "The power of the SOA view of BPM is that you don't need to get developers to generate Java code and recompile when you're making new processes, or changes to processes."'

Annrai O'Toole, CEO of BEA competitor Cape Clear Software, came out with a blog entry on Monday called BEA's Strategery. If you know the origin of the word "strategery," then you probably would guess that this commentary isn't too positive. Here's a taste:

BEA claims to be focused on the SOA market, but how exactly does this help them? Admittedly, disciplines within BPM are very relevant to SOA, but the BPM market is founded on legacy, proprietary technologies, and the success of SOA is dependant on open standards. How does the addition of more proprietary technologies get them closer to supporting SOA? How in the world are they going to rationalize two non-integrated portal products and two non-integrated proprietary process tools (lets not forget about WebLogic Integration!) into an integrated, standards-based SOA platform??

More as it comes.

Posted by elizabeth in M&A |Digg This|Add to del.icio.us

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.ebizq.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/95