Products

Solutions

Resources

Partners

Community

Blog

About

QA

Ideas Test

New Community Website

Ordinarily, you'd be at the right spot, but we've recently launched a brand new community website... For the community, by the community.

Yay... Take Me to the Community!

Welcome to the DNN Community Forums, your preferred source of online community support for all things related to DNN.
In order to participate you must be a registered DNNizen

HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...So why is DNN Corp Purchase of OpenDNN a good thing?So why is DNN Corp Purchase of OpenDNN a good thing?
Previous
 
Next
New Post
3/28/2010 2:21 PM
 

(Cross-posting the comments I left in Navin's blog, as they are related to this discussion)

As much as it may appear to some that DNN Corp was totally clueless in regards to the acquisition of the Xepient modules, I have to admit that there was a lot of careful thought and deliberation which went into this announcement..

From the moment that DNN Corp announced Professional Edition, we made it very clear that our goal was to sell a "complete solution". This approach conformed to the "open core" business model and was comprised of the DotNetNuke core framework, some proprietary extensions ( we take advantage of the same extensibility points which are available to the community ), and professional support. And alhough we knew that some of the proprietary extensions we created would have business value on their own, we deliberately made a decision to NOT offer them independently from the complete solution. We imposed this restriction on ourselves because we wanted to absolutely avoid a situation where we would be competing with module vendors.

If DNN Corp offered Open Document Library as a stand-alone module on Snowcovered, would it not send a message that we are now in the "module business"? Would this not set a precedent which would make other module vendors worried in terms what other types of modules we would introduce in the future? If developers feel there is unfair competition in a market, they will go elsewhere for opportunities. This would be devestating for the DotNetNuke ecosystem, as the module vendors provide a tremendous amount of professionalism, innovation, and value to the platform.

From a consumer perspective, we did realize that the Open Document Library acquisition would cause some discomfort. However, the fact that a comparably priced document management solution is still available ( DMX by Bring2Mind ) does provide a suitable alternative for those using Community Edition. Not to mention that in the DNN ecosystem we have seen time and again how the laws of supply and demand instill healthy competition amongst module developers, so I would not be surprised to see some other offerings emerge in the near future.

Document management was a special case based on the fact we had received enough demand for it that we concluded we needed to include the feature in our Professional Edition. This was identified ~ 9 months ago and since there were already a few options available, we then needed to make the build vs. buy decision. Clearly, a lot of work was required to build a robust document management system so it became clear that an acquisition would be the best option, so long as as we could find a suitable partner and the economic conditions were agreeable. We analyzed the 2 leading document systems and opened negotiations with their owners. Ultimately, when all factors were weighed against one another ( ie. legal, financial, product , etc...) we felt Xepient had a slight advantage and we were very pleased that their management team was interested in working with us.

At this time we have no plans for additional module acquisitions. So to interpret this isolated event as a trend is certainly the wrong conclusion. We recognize the value of the extension ecosystem and it would be illogical ( if not fatal ) for us to disrupt it by removing all of the most popular modules from circulation.


My comments are my own and are offered WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Shaun Walker
http://www.siliqon.com
 
New Post
3/28/2010 10:23 PM
 

I've given this matter a bit of thought since my first post to this thread. While I take Shaun's comments at face value and believe this is not indicative of a trend, the fact that it happened certainly points to the fact that it can happen. Should similar conditions to the need for document management arise in another technical area, the same build or buy issues will be considered. Available products will be considered. Another good product may disappear from the market. More to the point, a solution that developers and their clients currently depend upon as part of their business solution may cease to be. It might be good for DNNCorp, and it might be good for the module vendor. It may not be so good for others.

Yes, a similar solution of similar cost may remain on the market, but not everything is easily migrated. Sometimes, solutions are ingegrated beyond their native features to achieve results not found in a single module. Then it's not just a matter of uploading a different extension and using it instead.

The observations of my earlier post were possible to me because I am not one who uses the particualr modules affected in this action. Were it one of those that I depend on, I expect the other side of the coin would have been quite obvious to me from the get-go. To  my peers in the community, I apologize for being a bit slow.

So - I believe Shaun that this is not indicative of a trend. I also believe that all the factors that made this a good busines choice may well collect around another set of requirements, and another solution, in the future. This may not be trend, but it is certainly precedent.

Thus, I think there is room for both understanding and concern.


pmgerholdt
 
New Post
3/29/2010 2:04 AM
 

Although we did expect that this acquisition would result in some vocal concerns from community members,  I believe the feedback from the systems integrators and consumers were far more extreme than anticipated. So in the future should similar conditions arise in another technical area, when it comes to a build vs. buy decision I believe we will be far more inclined to select the "build" route. This approach may actually reduce the exit opportunity for some module developers, but the lessons learned from this event seem to indicate that we should try to avoid disrupting the delicate balance which exists in the ecosystem.


My comments are my own and are offered WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Shaun Walker
http://www.siliqon.com
 
New Post
3/29/2010 2:19 AM
 
Philipp Becker wrote:

The corp on the other hand doesn't want to become a module vendor, nor does Xepient stay a vendor any longer.

At the request of Andreas Di Palma of Xepient, I think it is important to provide some clarification to my earlier post in this thread. DNN Corp approached Xepient about the acquisition of their module, not vice versa. Xepient obviously received a financial benefit from the transaction but they were also very interested in establishing a long-term business relationship with DNN Corp. Xepient is not abandoning commercial DNN module development. They will continue to be active in this market; in fact, they sell a variety of other high quality modules on Snowcovered and intend to develop more in the future.


My comments are my own and are offered WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Shaun Walker
http://www.siliqon.com
 
New Post
3/29/2010 3:34 AM
 
Michael Gerholdt wrote:

 Another good product may disappear from the market. More to the point, a solution that developers and their clients currently depend upon as part of their business solution may cease to be.

 

 

A number of people have voiced this thought. 

We should remember that a purchase by DNN Corp is NOT the only way for a perfectly good solution to vanish from the market.  The developers/owners may simply get bored with it.  The hard drives of the internet are littered with projects that have been abandoned and no-one wants to take up.

If a module is open source then you have the right to keep it going yourself should no-one else want to - that's what open source means.

If a module is closed source then you don't.  Your rights were documented in the agreement when you purchased it.


Best wishes,
- Richard
Agile Development Consultant, Practitioner, and Trainer
www.dynamisys.co.uk
 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...So why is DNN Corp Purchase of OpenDNN a good thing?So why is DNN Corp Purchase of OpenDNN a good thing?


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of DNN Platform and Evoq Solutions.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:

  1. No Advertising. This includes promotion of commercial and non-commercial products or services which are not directly related to DNN.
  2. No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or other customers to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  3. Discussion or promotion of DNN Platform product releases under a different brand name are strictly prohibited.
  4. No Flaming or Trolling.
  5. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  6. Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.
  7. English language posting only, please.
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out