Ever since I decided to stop dealing with Time Matters, I haven’t blogged about LexisNexis. However, there is a fair amount of information coming out of the recently concluded consultants’ conference in Las Vegas that is worth reporting. Since I wasn’t there, this is second-hand, but the information has been confirmed by more than one source, all of them trustworthy.
Apparently Loretta Rupert, the Senior Director of Community Management at LexisNexis gave a speech referring to me by name and stating that my blog was “very damaging” to Time Matters and one of her tasks was to control the damage. As the saying goes: “truth be my defense.” I don’t see people disputing the accuracy of my posts, and a number of consultants and users have thanked me for “telling it like it is,” even if they think it would be impolitic for them to do so. So if I seem to be labeled Public Enemy No. 1, the truth is that LexisNexis is its own worst enemy.
Reading between the lines, it seems that Time Matters is at the end of its product cycle and will basically be allowed to wither away, although a version 11 is supposed to be forthcoming early next year. It will include a “mobile app” based on Microsoft Azure and akin to Steve Stockstill’s Mobile TM application, but bi-directional. But the version demonstrated at the conference did not include a calendar, which is a key ingredient of any such application. In addition, MS Azure is an immature product and the jury is still out on how good it will really be. True, it shows a lot of promise, but who wants to deploy v.1 of any Microsoft product?
LexisNexis is still pushing to develop an SaaS application, but it is unclear how long that will take, and a number of other applications have a serious head start on them, including Advologix (ex-Time Matters developer Steve Stockstill is the CIO there) and Houdini, Esq., headed by Frank Rivera (who originally was a key figure behind the Time Matters World edition, the first effort at a Web-based version).
As people have known for a while, the link between Time Matters and PCLaw is broken, apparently as a result of a failure to communicate between the respective development teams. LexisNexis doesn’t seem to know how long it will take to get it fixed. It seems that if you create new matters in PCLaw to take advantage of the automatic client numbering, they do not get pushed across to Time Matters correctly.
They have (finally!) indicated that they will be moving toward an 18-month development cycle due to the inability to maintain reliable yearly releases. This is actually good news, although people who have paid their Annual Maintenance fee may find they haven’t gotten very much for their money. In addition, it is unclear whether the bean counters will insist on annual releases to justify the Annual Maintenance Plans.
More generally, it appears that Time Matters sales are seriously declining and that there is a significant backlash against the cost of the Annual Maintenance Plan and especially the punitive reinstatement fees. However, this kind of model is becoming more and more frequent as companies move toward SaaS-type subscription models, so it is unlikely to change.
Apparently Loretta Rupert, the Senior Director of Community Management at LexisNexis gave a speech referring to me by name and stating that my blog was “very damaging” to Time Matters and one of her tasks was to control the damage. As the saying goes: “truth be my defense.” I don’t see people disputing the accuracy of my posts, and a number of consultants and users have thanked me for “telling it like it is,” even if they think it would be impolitic for them to do so. So if I seem to be labeled Public Enemy No. 1, the truth is that LexisNexis is its own worst enemy.
Reading between the lines, it seems that Time Matters is at the end of its product cycle and will basically be allowed to wither away, although a version 11 is supposed to be forthcoming early next year. It will include a “mobile app” based on Microsoft Azure and akin to Steve Stockstill’s Mobile TM application, but bi-directional. But the version demonstrated at the conference did not include a calendar, which is a key ingredient of any such application. In addition, MS Azure is an immature product and the jury is still out on how good it will really be. True, it shows a lot of promise, but who wants to deploy v.1 of any Microsoft product?
LexisNexis is still pushing to develop an SaaS application, but it is unclear how long that will take, and a number of other applications have a serious head start on them, including Advologix (ex-Time Matters developer Steve Stockstill is the CIO there) and Houdini, Esq., headed by Frank Rivera (who originally was a key figure behind the Time Matters World edition, the first effort at a Web-based version).
As people have known for a while, the link between Time Matters and PCLaw is broken, apparently as a result of a failure to communicate between the respective development teams. LexisNexis doesn’t seem to know how long it will take to get it fixed. It seems that if you create new matters in PCLaw to take advantage of the automatic client numbering, they do not get pushed across to Time Matters correctly.
They have (finally!) indicated that they will be moving toward an 18-month development cycle due to the inability to maintain reliable yearly releases. This is actually good news, although people who have paid their Annual Maintenance fee may find they haven’t gotten very much for their money. In addition, it is unclear whether the bean counters will insist on annual releases to justify the Annual Maintenance Plans.
More generally, it appears that Time Matters sales are seriously declining and that there is a significant backlash against the cost of the Annual Maintenance Plan and especially the punitive reinstatement fees. However, this kind of model is becoming more and more frequent as companies move toward SaaS-type subscription models, so it is unlikely to change.
Hi John, just a quick note on MobileTM.
Data Equity will continue to develop, enhance and release new versions of MobileTM for those clients who require more sophisticated mobility options than the limited (likely) offerings from a future version of Time Matters. To that end, I would encourage everyone to review the features of the pre-announced Time Matters offering. My guess is they will come away understanding the vast differences in maturity and value in our MobileTM offering.
Posted by: Steve Stockstill | October 02, 2010 at 04:26 PM