Mail Box

Software Magazine, Oct, 1998

Software 500

It would appear that due to error, Hummingbird Communications Ltd. was excluded from Software Magazine's Software 500 this year. We would very much like to inform your readers, as well as the very large family of customers that Hummingbird supports worldwide, that had Hummingbird appeared in the listing, it would have been ranked the 86th largest software company in the world, based on FY97 year-end revenue of (US$) $101.1 million. Compared to FY96 revenue of (US$) $74.7 million, Hummingbird therefore, enjoyed a substantial revenue growth of 73.8% in 1997.

During the year, Hummingbird continued to increase its world market share of the PC X market, which, according to IDC, grew to 67%. This meant that Hummingbird's franchise ownership of this market was equivalent to more market share than the sum of all its competitors. In addition, Hummingbird continued to strengthen its total connectivity business by gaining market share and worldwide user acceptance of NFS Maestro, its Network File System software, as well as securing major contracts for HostExplorer, Hummingbird's PC to mainframe terminal emulation solution.

At the end of the year, Hummingbird announced its strategic growth plan, which comprised the acquisition of Andyne Computing and, thus, the company's entry into the business intelligence market. While continuing growth in the connectivity market, Hummingbird's forward direction is toward the greater data warehousing market, which represents the fastest growing and most active sector of the software market. Hummingbird's aggressive entry into this market is expected to be achieved through acquisition of other companies and related technologies, as well as through internal product development and expansion of worldwide sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities.

We consider the Software 500 to be an important measure of the North American software market and we would appreciate the opportunity of bringing our organization to your readers' attention.

Hummingbird

Communications Ltd.

CORPORATE AFFAIRS DEPT.

INVESTORS@HUMMINGBIRD.COM

Proper Project Management

Three cheers for Editor-In-Chief Patrick Porter for his Editor's Letter, "Projects Gone Bad," (April issue, pg. 8) and Joshua Greenbaum for his article, "Microsoft Hates Me," (April issue, pg. 10). Both gentlemen have stated what I, as an independent consultant, have been telling people: "The key to a successful project is proper management."

For organizations to succeed in getting their projects done on time and within the budgeted costs, they must communicate with each part of the organization to make sure everyone is working toward the same goal in the same ways. Management must establish and keep a view of the big picture and look at the costs of assets as the bottom line. The net profit (net loss) is only an indicator of how well the assets are used and how much additional revenue is brought into the organization, not just how little cash is spent.

As for Microsoft, I see them in the same light as Alcoa Aluminum. If a customer wanted to purchase Alcoa's aluminum sheeting, it was forced to also buy aluminum electrical cabling, even if it did not want the cabling. Alcoa was found in constraint of trade. Even though Microsoft might not be intentionally doing what Alcoa did, it is, in effect, doing the same thing by forcing customers to use Intel computers, even if it is not the best machine for the purposes of the organization.

I say this because Microsoft does not popularize the fact that it does make some of its programs and systems available for other platforms. Microsoft's lack of letting the public know, or just reminding the public, that it has a licensed version of Unix -- known as Xenix -- which will run on more than one platform, for networking, and that Microsoft Word and Internet Explorer are also available for the Macintosh computer, is why I liken them to Alcoa.

The morals of all this are that organizations should communicate to be understood organization-wide; they should look again at the "Big Picture" of why they exist; they should use consultants/integrators who understand the business and how the project can affect other factors that ultimately can affect the results of the project; and they should regard their information specialists as important in their view of what is really needed.

Finally, organizations should not ensconce themselves into one computing platform because it prevents them from trying alternatives that might work better.

By doing all this, your organization will probably finish most projects on time and within budget, because the budget and time needed would have been realistic at the start.

Julian Aronowitz

CONSULTANT

BRONX, N.Y.

JULIAN@CNCT.COM

What's in a Name?

What is so different -- other than the name -- about component-based development ("CBD Is the Real Deal," July issue, pg. 12), as compared to the modular software design and development that I was taught back in the late '70s through the '80s?

Rick Bennett

RICK.BENNETT@ABBOTT.COM