When Oracle first mentioned Fusion I thought it was just going to be a project name, called something different on release. Oracle announced that they were going to take the best of the functionality from each of the applications they owned, their own original E business suite, PeopleSoft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel and the 'fusion', built using modern technology and open standards, the next generation suite of applications.
The name stuck, the marketing started but a term appeared was coined - 'Fusion, Confusion', which really annoyed me because the Fusion applications
story I thought was quite straightforward.
What did confuse people at this stage was the technology I
was always being asked if it was going to have Oracle forms and reports I
thought they were quite clear that this would be a new technology stack on
their award-winning database. In my role leading the Product Development Committee I presented to the Apps marketing team at Oracle in 2006 about how users worldwide understood the Fusion project. On e of the points we made was more than half of those surveyed were:
Unaware of middleware’s importance to
applications
Not long after that (and we don't take all the credit) Oracle introduced Fusion into the Middleware stack name, calling it Oracle Fusion Middleware. I guess this made it clear there was a link between Fusion Applications and the Middleware but I’m not sure it clarified it very well.
When Fusion Applications were released late 2010 and people started
looking at what was needed they were all too well aware of the technology
stack. It is a very complicated with lots of components and requiring an enormous amount of hardware, it was almost a step too far for most organisations. The availability of Fusion in the Cloud has changed this, and most are happy that when deployed in the cloud they don’t have to
concern themselves with the middleware.
Cloud deployment is definitely the way forward and last year
Oracle decided that all applications that could be deployed in the cloud be
given the name of Cloud Applications. Those applications I would have
called traditional are now known as On-Premise Applications. Cloud applications includes not
only Fusion but also some cloud acquisitions such as Taleo. Over a year ago I sat through a partner webcast that went through this, Start by deployment option, Product Family, Product Name, and was truly confused. This year Oracle marketing wanted us to stop using Fusion in our UKOUG marketing and when we held our Apps Transformation event most of the post event feedback from people who didn't attend was 'I didn't realise this was about Fusion'. At Collaborate the organisers stuck to Fusion as a theme for this reason.
So for a while the term has been interchangeable but not now at Oracle Open World I didn’t hear one Oracle person say Fusion in relation to applications. * a comment to this blog show some sessions did have Fusion in the title, which I guess agrees with my point until people understand the name change we have to keep saying Fusion so they know what we mean.
3 comments:
If you search the Openworld session catalog, there were tons of sessions (incl. many with Oracle speakers) that had Fusion or Fusion Applications in the title or description.
Take "Oracle Fusion Applications Security Management Directions [CON7662]" (the first search result) as an example. If they had used "Cloud Applications", it would have been utterly confusing and misleading since the security model for all of the acquired cloud applications is completely different from that of the home-grown Fusion applications.
Do you remember when people just said Oracle Applications, before the name eBusiness Suite was coined. We used to say things like, "Are you an Oracle Apps DBA, or a real DBA?" :)
Roll on Magic Pixie Dust Applications...
Cheers
Tim...
PS. I think getting rid of the "Fusion" word would be good for the whole product set. I've never likes it...
yes some sessions did have Fusion in the name, but I attended one and then the speaker never used the word. I agree if you don't people will not know what you are on about and that I think is my point
Post a Comment