|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: Re: Article regarding Covisint purchase
There was also a good bit of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.' Other
than those leading this charge in the beginning, I don't think most of
the rest of the players in automotive saw any real benefits in yet
another middleman offering services, regardless of the technology behind
those services.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rachel Foerster [mailto:
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 5:32 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Re: Article regarding Covisint purchase
Hi back, Jamie.
Your comments are on the mark of course. And even if this effort impaled
itself on the XML cross, I would concur that it was probably not XML per
se,
but rather a total lack of understanding of the XML and readiness of XML
and
where the targeted customers were in the use of it. I suspect it was one
of
the dot.com get-rich-quick schemes that drank the coolaid of
XML/Internet
ecommerce without understanding that it's not just what the front door
looks
like - the door has to open and then lead the buyer and seller reliably
and
surely through to the back-end systems that enable commerce to be
successfully concluded.
Whew....too long a sentence, but too late in the day to re-write!
Rachel
Rachel Foerster
Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd.
Voice: 847-872-8070
email:
-----Original Message-----
From: James Bryce Clark [mailto:
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 3:33 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: [EDI-L] Re: Article regarding Covisint purchase
I second the question. Hi, Rachel. New technologies that are
rolled
out in a dumb or disruptive fashion can fail even if they have intrinsic
value. Did the paper products project impale itself on a cross of
XML? (Apologies to W.J. Bryan)
Ventro/ChemDex and all those others skidded too. But RosettaNet
thrives and I think CIDX, PIDX and AIAG's e-commerce efforts are doing
just
fine. Maybe this tells us something about middlemen, not technology?
Cheers, Jamie, admitted XML junkie & standards executive
At 07:35 PM 2/5/2004, Rachel Foerster wrote:
>John, I'm curious....from your comments one could conclude that being
>XML-based/focused was the fatal flaw. Is this what you want to convey
or
>were there other deficiencies that contributed to the failure?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jgoetzman [mailto:
>Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 8:27 AM
>To:
>Subject: [EDI-L] Re: Article regarding Covisint purchase
>
>I agree with Tom - this isn't too surprising, especially after they
>sold
>off the auction business to FreeMarkets who has subsequently been
acquired
>by Ariba (Is there a pattern here?). The whole industry owned
consortium
>thing just hasn't seemed to click. Here in Atlanta, Omnexus just shut
its
>doors. Omnexus was focused on the plastics industry * * *
>
>I spent some time at a paper and forest products exchange here in
>Atlanta,
>and a big part of their offering was a network to exchange XML
>messages. It shouldn't be too surprising to this group, but the XML
>exchange never took off and they had to retrofit and partner to enable
the
>exchange of EDI, where they have been moving a pretty significant
volume
>of traffic. * * *
~ James Bryce Clark
~ Manager, Technical Standards Development, OASIS
~ http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.shtml
~ +1 978 667 5115 x 203 central office
~ +1 310 293 6739 direct
.
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix:
<SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
 |
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
