CMS Watch FatWire Feed

FatWire buys Australian reseller

info@jboye.dk(Janus Boye) — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 13:13:00 -0500

In news from "down under" Web CMS vendor FatWire has quietly bought a company called Future Tense Solutions, which previously had exclusive rights to represent FatWire in Australia and New Zealand.

Future Tense Solutions was founded by a small team of former Open Market colleagues, who had been working with Content Server since the late '90s. When FatWire came in and bought Content Server from divine in 2003, the company decided not to buy quite a few of the global offices, including the Australian ones.

As a private company, FatWire remains closed about its financials, and few details are available about this acquisition. According to a very brief statement on the Future Tense Solutions website, all Future Tense staff have become FatWire employees. This means that FatWire is now directly present in the region. Compared to other CMS vendors of similar size, FatWire retains a broadly global footprint, although many regions are mainly staffed by salespeople.

To FatWire this is the 2nd acquisition in 2 months (after Long Island-based wiki vendor Infostoria in November). Buying successful resellers might make good business sense, but clearly some change is afoot at FatWire more broadly.

To technology buyers, the impact of an reseller acquisition like this is dependent on employee retention and whether the change means less flexibility relative to local requirements. Time will tell if this is positive to buyers in Australia and New Zealand. We'll certainly be following it closely.

FatWire: No spoking, please....

kthomas@cmswatch.com(Kas Thomas) — Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:58:00 -0500

At the Gilbane conference in Boston last week, I chatted for a few minutes with new FatWire CEO Yogesh Gupta, who made what I thought was an interesting observation. Commenting on architectural trends in the IT world generally (not just with regard to content management systems), he suggested that hub-and-spoke systems have not served enterprises well, in many cases. Connecting users, client apps, and target systems via a centralized control point (whether it's a database server, a metadirectory, or whatever), and forcing all clients to "phone home" through the hub's service layer, is (or can be) a difficult and inefficient way to solve certain problems; problems that are sometimes better solved just-in-time at the edges of the network, using edge resources.

Gupta's comments weren't aimed specifically at JCR (the Java Content Repository initiative, also known as JSR 170 and now JSR 283), but he speculated that JCR, which effectively hides repositories behind one unified API, could be understood in the context of yet-another-hub-and-spoke-system. His point wasn't that JCR is evil or that abstraction layers aren't good, but that we know content exists in mini-silos all over the network, in heterogeneous systems, under non-centralized control. (And usually for good reasons.) Like it or not, the edges of the network tend to build out organically, resulting in what might be called "accidental architecture." Whatever you want to call it, content management systems need to take it into account, because Web 2.0 is driving things in that direction, fast. Of course, as a pure-play Web CMS vendor, FatWire has a vested interest in this approach.

Still, the "Web 2.0" way of working is about user empowerment, peer-to-peer data-sharing, collaborative authoring, ad-hoc formation (and dissolution) of groups, delegated administration, "just enough" access control, and (in general) decentralized management of things that were traditionally thought best to be under central control and administration. Going forward, the challenge of Enterprise 2.0 is to make these sorts of social-web architectural motifs, which involve ad-hoc teams and shared content with short shelf life, coexist within the greater Enterprise 1.0 machine.

This is also the challenge of "CMS 2.0." Right now, the industry is at CMS 1.1 or 1.2. Expect to see rapid-fire point-releases in 2008.

FatWire XSS vulnerability, and the perils of Web 2.0

kthomas@cmswatch.com(Kas Thomas) — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:17:00 -0500

Andrew Davies of Portcullis Computer Security Ltd reports that an older version of FatWire's Web CMS product, Content Server 6.3.0, exposes cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities "in multiple locations" in the Web UI, "mainly with the search and advanced search functions." FatWire told Davies that it had already fixed the vulnerability in a patch release.

The vulnerability is of a type where a specially-crafted URL (containing JavaScript) can cause mischief if an unsuspecting user clicks a link containing that URL. Also, just typing something like <script>alert('Hacked!')</script> in a search box will cause a script to execute, reportedly.

Just for kicks, I tried searching for word of the vulnerability on http://developernet.fatwire.com. But the Search box was disabled. Probably wise.

My goal here is not to ding FatWire specifically (and remember, 6.3 is not the latest version of Content Server), but to remind you that, in your quest for customer-facing interactivity, to the extent you turn over dynamic interaction to your Web CMS, you are inheriting their security profile. I think we'll see more of these alerts. Forewarned is forearmed.

Update (29 November): FatWire says that the XSS vulnerability described by Portcullis affects only the administrative search interface, not any UI that can seen by non-admins. A patch is available directly from FatWire.

FatWire buys local wiki vendor

info@jboye.dk(Janus Boye) — Thu, 1 Nov 2007 19:05:00 -0400

Earlier this week Long Island, NY-based Web CMS vendor FatWire announced that it has acquired Infostoria, a Long Island-based wiki vendor.

Also on Long Island is Computer Associates, and while Inforstoria was only a tiny start-up with 12 employees, it was founded by CA alumni. Among the CA alumni is also FatWire's relatively new CEO Yogesh Gupta, who came onboard in August.

The last time FatWire completed an acquisition, it was from bankrupt vendor divine, where FatWire bought its current flagship product Content Server. It seems unlikely that this acquisition will have the same impact.

Nevertheless, this news would confirm that wikis are very hot these days, with the major MOSS 2007 wiki integration news being only a week old. Where most Web CMS vendors (e.g. Microsoft, Stellent) have built their own wiki functionality, FatWire may have taken a short-cut with this acquisition. To me though it seems rather hard to fit a wiki into FatWire's traditional emphasis on persuasive content and object-oriented content management, but perhaps more change is coming for FatWire?

Of RIAs and dancing hamsters

tregli@cmswatch.com(Theresa Regli) — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:43:00 -0500

At Jared Spool's Usability Interface Engineering conference in Monterey, CA this week, Yahoo!'s Bill Scott presented on best practices in rich internet application ("RIA") design. The insights into making for delighted users of web-based applications were a painful reminder of how much the CMS world lags behind. But what's working on the public web is not far out. Scott emphasizes the importance of not being novel, and sticking to the emerging successful RIA design patterns: drag-and-drop, auto-complete, fade transition, inline status, cursor hovering tips, and wait indicators (though the dancing hamsters when dragging-and-dropping items on Yahoo! Photos is not recommended). See all of Yahoo!'s design patterns here. These are the interface design techniques that could make for happier content managers. While some CMS vendors are finally starting to deploy RIA features (one customer of CMS vendor FatWire here expressed eagerness to deploy the new AJAX-based version 7), these new CM interfaces, while slick, have yet to be fully tested in the marketplace (i.e., by you). As we mentioned in our Predictions for 2007, we'll see how the AJAX UI trend in CM pans out.

FatWire Still Likes Its Original Product

info@jboye.dk(Janus Boye) — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:14:00 -0500

A little more than 2 years ago we reported on Vignette "liking its old dog food," running its public site on its old, V6 platform (still does: tell-tale URL). With FatWire the situation is just as bad. Parts of fatwire.com are still running on Update Engine (e.g. this page), the original FatWire product from before the acquisition of Content Server from divine. FatWire still supports Update Engine, but the product has not been actively sold for some time. Content Server was acquired in 2003, but most of the Content Server specialists in the U.S. were let go. To be fair, parts of the FatWire website -- such as the developer extranet -- run on Content Server, but forms and other content are still generated from Update Engine. FatWire could also decide to migrate its site to Spark, a lighter version of Content Server that comes freely with Sun Portal Server. FatWire was hoping to get leads from the Sun partnership and portal bundle, but unfortunately Sun presently only resells TeamSite, which means the prospective customers are passed onto Interwoven. With competitor Day on the doorstep of new opportunities, whither FatWire?

CMS Idol re-runs available

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 16:23:00 -0500

Bob Doyle of CMS Review did a superb job filming the "CMS Idol" competition at last month's Gilbane Conference in Boston. To rehash, 6 vendors competed in live, 7-minute demos: Stellent, RedDot, WebSideStory, Interwoven, FatWire, and Ektron. The audience voted a winner (RedDot), but I thought they were all victorious for withstanding the critiques of the expert panel. Thanks to Bob, now you can see the re-runs yourself.

Die hard for FatWire Spark

info@jboye.dk(Janus Boye) — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:21:00 -0400

After FatWire acquired the Content Server product line from divine in 2003, most commentators expected the original FatWire "Spark" product to fade away. Although sold almost exclusively in the USA and not easily upgradable to the more robust Content Server package, FatWire has kept Spark alive and today announced that Sun Microsystems will offer an unlimited - use license free to Sun Portal Server customers. This is an interesting move for two vendors struggling to find their niche. FatWire may see Spark as a lead generator, but some Sun licensees might come to find Spark limiting -- although, to be fair, other portal vendors' CMS tools are similarly light. Other customers might be frustrated that Sun, and not FatWire, will handle product support. Internationally, the FatWire sales force could be left in an awkward position, with Sun giving away Spark for free while the FatWire reps try to push the more complicated (and expensive) Content Server product.

FatWire announces sunset for Content Server 4.0

info@jboye.dk(Janus Boye) — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:09:00 -0400

In an e-mail sent to business partners, FatWire has just announced the end-of-life or "sunset" of version 4 of its Content Server CMS as of December 30th, 2005 (the company will continue to support V4 through June, 2006). Version 4 dates to when the CS product was owned by divine -- a period that brought many new customers, mainly due to a very large sales force and worldwide expansion. Many of these customers still run this same initial version. They now have a a deadline to make up their mind on whether they want to upgrade or change platform. Either way, it will be expensive, as the upgrade is a complicated one (CS is now on version 6). On a side note, CS has now been owned by FatWire longer than any of the prior owners (divine + Open Market).

Portal Software: Passing Fad or Real Value?

jb@boyeit.dk(Janus Boye) — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:00:00 -0500

Janus Boye returns to CMS Watch to look at the benefits and drawbacks to enterprise portal packages. If you look closely at your requirements, Boye argues, you may find portal software more a hindrance than a help...

FatWire Offers Cheaper Version

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:00:00 -0500

As the CMS marketplace matures, software prices keep dropping. Major vendors continue to experiment with ways to profitably reach the small-to-midsized business (SMB) customer who has become a fairly active content management buyer. FatWire has elected to make its Content Server product available at a lower cost exclusively through resellers focused on the SMB marketplace. "CS Express" only supports one website/URL, but is otherwise fully functional. Resellers presumably gain integration contracts (FatWire is not a simple tool). Other vendors, such as Vignette, Interwoven, and Microsoft have tried variously to court the mid-market, generally without much success. If you're on a budget, you might want to check out FatWire's CS Express option, but remember that the lion's share of your expenses will come with implementation services, so don't overbuy on the complexity side...
Visit FatWire

Where are the Mid-Market Java Solutions?

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:00:00 -0400

Vendors will tell you that most of the CMS action is now in the mid-market -- that is, point web content management (WCM) solutions where product licensing starts at $40-80,000 USD. We find it interesting that there are very few pure Java solutions at this level. Among the major players, seemingly just Merant and perhaps FatWire fit the bill. Despite its name, "J2EE" is not just for the enterprise anymore; many mid-market firms have standardized on Java appservers. Moreover, even major enterprises often want to buy lower-cost departmental-sized WCM packages that can nonetheless plug nicely into their existing architectures. There's a market opportunity here...
Read about Merant Collage Visit Fatwire

And the Winner Is...

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Thu, 1 May 2003 00:00:00 -0400

...Looks like FatWire. After a marathon bidding session for poor divine's assets, auction attendees are reporting that FatWire will come away with Content Server. If true, this makes a lot of sense to us. Both products run on Java, but Content Server has stronger (and deeper) technology, while FatWire is generally easier on the eyes -- and wallet. This could be one of those rare acquisitions where one product actually ends up going away. But don't count on it soon. FatWire will likely move quickly to shore up Content Server support and reassure the product's large base of customers. Over time, though, the two offerings could converge...
Read about it in the Yahoo message board

FatWire Supports MySQL (sort of)

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:00:00 -0400

The open-source "MySQL" database is extremely popular. It powers the site you're reading now. Until recently, however, not that many CMS vendors supported it. Of course, MySQL has its limitations: it's not transactional and isn't optimized for rapid updating. However, it supports very fast "reads," which makes it great for publishing high-traffic dynamic sites where there aren't a lot of content contributors to compete for server resources. FatWire just announced support for MySQL in its lower-end "Spark" product which serves as a CMS back-end to various Java Portal products (like Sun ONE). Nonetheless, MySQL support presents an architectural dilemma for other CMS vendors who rely on native tools within commercial RDBMSs to conduct basic repository services like roll-back -- tools that don't exist (yet, if ever) in MySQL...
Read More About Spark

Sceptical About Stellent's Salad Dressing...

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:00:00 -0500

When CMS vendors detect weakness in a competitor, they often propose discounted migrations. But there's a problem: significant architectural differences are likely to convert a "migration" exercise into a highly complex and expensive makeover. We think this is the case with Stellent's oil and divine's vinegar. Stellent is reportedly offering discounts to divine customers to switch in the face of the latter's bankruptcy announcement. For most divine customers it won't be an easy migration. Content Server runs in an appserver with a relational database. Stellent offers a free-standing server that uses a Verity repository. Content Server is optimized for public-facing, news-oriented sites. Stellent focusses on document-heavy Intranets. We don't think this oil and vinegar will mix very well. And note, btw, that whatever divine's problems (they are legion), the company is not liquidating (yet, anyway), and Content Server is likely to find an owner in any case...
Read about Stellent's offer in eContent Peruse divine's bankruptcy notice

divine's Financial Woes Continue

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Tue, 18 Feb 2003 00:00:00 -0500

Unable to staunch continual financial hemorrhaging, divine is reportedly close to declaring Chapter 11 bankruptcy (perhaps even today). As a premier CMS package, we think divine's Content Server product could fetch a new owner (its fourth), but the dilemma for Content Server customers is that divine the company is too hopelessly complicated to just sell itself outright, and CS is the jewel in its crown. Of course, Chapter 11 is not liquidation, and divine has secured last-minute cash infusions before (though it would be tougher now). Recall that when divine itself bought CS from a failing OpenMarket, it waited all the way until the latter was about to miss a payroll to snap the company up at a bargain price. Do similar suitors await true desperation at divine? We're not sure CS customers should worry too much. divine under Chapter 11 protection could be a better CMS player, and the CS product is probably too strong to just evaporate. Worst case scenario: the codebase and support contracts fall to a decent-sized integrator...
Read a recent Chicago Sun-Times Article on divine