Why does IBM think Domino Document Manager/ILDDM/Domino.Doc is dead?

July 24 2008

So Ed's comment sparked me to write this blog entry .. and it won't be pretty.

IBM seems to think that Domino Document Manager, also known as ILDDM, also known as Domino.Doc, is in maintenance mode. How can IBM put a product into maintenance mode when there is no replacement for it?

No folks, Lotus Quickr does not match the functionality requirements that ILDDM fits. Nor does any of the other document management systems that IBM owns, including FileNet. For large customers, FileNet is a great solution. For those looking for replacing network share drives with some basic collaboration, Lotus Quickr works pretty well. Heck, you can even use that amazing Mainsoft Sharepoint Integrator for Lotus Notes for document sharing. Their sidebar app for Sharepoint is absolutely killer!

But if you want a SMB document management solution or a document management solution that is so customizable it can become part of a larger process (for example, a major manufacturer using a custom Notes based work flow application for project life cycle that integrates with ILDDM for document control and versioning), there is no better solution.

I don't want to hear about using the Lotus Quickr Content Integrator to move my data from ILDDM to Lotus Quickr. Guess what folks ... Lotus Quickr does not do what ILDDM does! Where is the granular draft and versioning system? Detailed custom metadata that a power user can build? 7 level hierarchical structure that mimics a file cabinet so that any user can quickly understand how things are organized? And a LotusScript API that is super powerful? Lotus Quickr does not have those features ... and is a long way from having them as far as I can tell.

IBM should replace the web and Notes interface to match the new Lotus UI theme. Heck, just rip the Quickr UI. Replace the ODMA interface with the Quickr Connector technology. But do not force feed me a product that does not meet the requirements of my customers and projects!

It is time for IBM to step up and fix the Domino Document Manager message. NOW.

Update: Ed's comment didn't mean ILDDM was in Maintenance. And I knew that but it poured some fuel on to the fire that was burning around here this morning. So, apologies to Ed because ILDDM is not in maintenance mode officially. But it sure as hell feels that way.

8 Responses to “Why does IBM think Domino Document Manager/ILDDM/Domino.Doc is dead?”

  1. 1) Volker Weber says:

    You really did not see this coming at LS2007?

  2. 2) John Head says:

    Volker, I was at the ILDDM sessions at LS07 and LS08 and in the partner meetings concerning Quickr and ILLDM. Does not change the point that they are wrong.

  3. 3) Geoff Higgins says:


    I totally agree that Quickr does not match capabilities of DDM and a Quickr face lift is required.

    I have been in a situation where a customer needed the capability of DDM but then saw Quickr UI and Connectors and insisted he go for Quickr.

    DDM is a great product with a horrible UI, hmm that used to sound familiar.

  4. 4) Chuck Hauble says:

    In the BOF I attended at LS2007 there was a ton of feedback given to the IBMers in the room that they should be looking to leverage the QuickR UI and connectors to make DDM a better product.. I guess the wrong people must have been in the room..

  5. 5) Tim Lorge says:

    As someone working with a customer who is right now developing a solution with DDM & Workflow, I can tell you it is not dead in the customer's eyes. It is still a viable product. For the past few months, I've been complaining to just about anyone who will listen that DDM is still needed. It needs a quick refresh and some new marketing behind it. Hell, they should add it to the CEO Collaboration Bundle just for giggles!

  6. 6) Daniel Lieber says:

    This has indeed been a frustrating issue for many. ILDDM is included in many, many discussions that often do not seem to have a direct nexus to the product. It is currently managed by the Quickr team and is receiving attention. It has a great value proposition although it is unfortunately difficult for many customers, partners, and sales representatives to accurately explain the differences in content-based solutions, of whch IBM has many. Each solution, including ILDDM, has a definite purpose. The team managing the ILDDM product absolutely knows it; the IBM management team knows it; we are all just [still*] waiting for decisions to be made and then publicly disclosed. I am confident decisions will be good for both IBM and customers, although any decision will be met with some resistance.

    *There has been speculation for many years (more vocal since 2003) that ILDDM "is going away" and decisions were delayed on the product's direction. At Lotusphere 2008, support was guaranteed for at least five years.

    As a fellow leading partner with the ILDDM and Quickr products, we are simultaneously working with IBM on appropriate ways to resolve apparent product marketing conflicts and working with customers on maximizing the value of their investments.

  7. 7) An old DomDoc dev says:

    I believe DomDoc has potential, but I'm not on the same page as the people that make decisions. Part of me would love to go back and work on DomDoc, to breathe new life into it ( new UI, get it working with the Quickr connectors, overhaul some of the back-end code, etc ). However, the other part of me has moved on, and is at peace with what DomDoc has become ( probably because I know that I'll never get that chance to resuscitate it ).

  8. 8) Current Customer says:

    We've already told our rep that waiting for 3 years for an answer on the Dom.Doc question is now laughable. We are close to our 2009 budget cycle, and we better get an answer, even an NDA answer soon, or we will budget alternatives.

    Using an interface built on the R4x codebase using the web techniques available then is just plain ridiculous in this day and Web 2.0 age.

Leave a Reply