The relationship between the two software powerhouses, Microsoft and SAP, has been intriguing to put it mildly, at least since Microsoft's entry into the enterprise applications arena in late 2000 (see Microsoft 'The Great' Poised to Conquer Mid-market, Once and Again ). While the relationship has been depicted by many through a myriad of antonyms, such as "on-off", "hot-cold", or "love-hate", currently, it can best be described as "mutually civil". One can even find some uncanny similarities between the two, such as the occasional involvement in intellectual property lawsuits (whether as plaintiffs or defendants) or through the relatively recent, almost coinciding departures of technological visionaries, Satya Nadella and Shai Agassi, respectively (although Nadella was merely transferred within Microsoft, to the search and ad group that will hope to fend off Google's undeniable threat).
Microsoft and SAP then entered a "strange bedfellows" or co-opetion phase in their relationship, by dallying in business applications. Acting like two high-profile on-again, off-again celebrities, the two were dismissive about questions from the press and analysts about the inevitable competition this partnership would create (i.e., responding "We do target different sizes of companies"). Nonetheless, this stance become moot owing to SAP's forays into small business via SAP Business One and Microsoft's propping up of Microsoft Dynamics AX, as an upper mid-market solution. Then came a perceived snub by SAP for opting for Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE) as a primary development environment for its infrastructure and development platform (while there is, nonetheless, some lesser valuable interface options for the counterpart Microsoft .NET Framework environment). However, SAP's move was quite logical given the still lingering perception of Java's better fit for larger enterprises (see Understand J2EE and .NET Environments Before You Choose ).
Any hard feelings between SAP and Microsoft were short lived, as we found out in 2004 when the two were engaged in secret (and startling) merger talks, which was quickly put ad acta before the news broke (whether for good remains to be seen). For most of that year, both vendors had to spend time explaining their separate forays into developing next-generation, service oriented architecture (SOA)-enabled products. Then 2005 seemed to be the year of bliss, where the two expressed mutual respect, and even worked jointly on a commercially available product featuring best of both worlds. Specifically, SAP and Microsoft joined together to leverage the openness of the SAP NetWeaver and Enterprise Service Architecture (ESA) blueprint (see Multipurpose SAP NetWeaver ) with the .NET-based architecture of Microsoft Office desktop applications suite (see Subtle [or Not-so-subtle] Nuances of Microsoft .NET Enablement ). The result was the joint product code-named Project Mendocino (the name of a town halfway between the companies' respective US headquarters) that promised to deliver familiar Microsoft Office desktop management and productivity tools as the façade for the heavy-duty lifting processes of SAP's enterprise applications. In other words, Project Mendocino extended and automated selected business processes from SAP ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) through the familiar Microsoft Office user interface (UI), by providing role-relevant displays of information while retaining SAP applications' process context and the necessary collaboration and analytic tools.
Microsoft and SAP then entered a "strange bedfellows" or co-opetion phase in their relationship, by dallying in business applications. Acting like two high-profile on-again, off-again celebrities, the two were dismissive about questions from the press and analysts about the inevitable competition this partnership would create (i.e., responding "We do target different sizes of companies"). Nonetheless, this stance become moot owing to SAP's forays into small business via SAP Business One and Microsoft's propping up of Microsoft Dynamics AX, as an upper mid-market solution. Then came a perceived snub by SAP for opting for Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE) as a primary development environment for its infrastructure and development platform (while there is, nonetheless, some lesser valuable interface options for the counterpart Microsoft .NET Framework environment). However, SAP's move was quite logical given the still lingering perception of Java's better fit for larger enterprises (see Understand J2EE and .NET Environments Before You Choose ).
Any hard feelings between SAP and Microsoft were short lived, as we found out in 2004 when the two were engaged in secret (and startling) merger talks, which was quickly put ad acta before the news broke (whether for good remains to be seen). For most of that year, both vendors had to spend time explaining their separate forays into developing next-generation, service oriented architecture (SOA)-enabled products. Then 2005 seemed to be the year of bliss, where the two expressed mutual respect, and even worked jointly on a commercially available product featuring best of both worlds. Specifically, SAP and Microsoft joined together to leverage the openness of the SAP NetWeaver and Enterprise Service Architecture (ESA) blueprint (see Multipurpose SAP NetWeaver ) with the .NET-based architecture of Microsoft Office desktop applications suite (see Subtle [or Not-so-subtle] Nuances of Microsoft .NET Enablement ). The result was the joint product code-named Project Mendocino (the name of a town halfway between the companies' respective US headquarters) that promised to deliver familiar Microsoft Office desktop management and productivity tools as the façade for the heavy-duty lifting processes of SAP's enterprise applications. In other words, Project Mendocino extended and automated selected business processes from SAP ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) through the familiar Microsoft Office user interface (UI), by providing role-relevant displays of information while retaining SAP applications' process context and the necessary collaboration and analytic tools.
No comments:
Post a Comment