Comments on: Worklight Enters the Enterprise Facebook Market

By: Tina

Tina — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:32:58 +0000

i saw more info on this blog http://www.ntechmania.blogspot.com very useful information good for someone who is intrested in this subject

By: David Lavenda

David Lavenda — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 12:51:36 +0000

Alan,
Your observation about WorkBook/WorkLight is correct - WorkBook and Facebook are only part of the bigger picture. WorkLight however, is not an “RSS vendor” per se; RSS is only one of many Web 2.0 technologies that we enable within a secure enterprise environment. WorkLight, in fact, allows employees to collaborate with peers and access application data via many Web 2.0 tools like RSS, personalized home pages, widgets and gadgets, social networks, social bookmarking and others.

In this sense, WorkLight is an Enterprise 2.0 “platform” or “operating system.” Today, we support many enterprise applications and Web 2.0 tools and services. If tomorrow, another application is needed or if another web 2.0 service becomes popular, we do not have to re-architect the product, we merely add another interface through which information can be extracted or can be displayed through. All the essential elements of the Enterprise 2.0 platform, such as the capability to extract/display information across multiple systems, being able to tap into native security systems to authenticate and apply access control to data, to ensure that data is secured end-to-end, and to provide web 2.0 self-service capabilities to employees, are all basic parts of the WorkLight platform. RSS is just one aspect of the big picture.

By: Alan Morrison

Alan Morrison — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:40:29 +0000

Appreciate your sharing thoughts on this topic. I’ve just seen a demo of the WorkLight software, and Facebook is only a part of the picture. Securing and feeding widgets in iGoogle pages (and even enabling SAP transactions in them) is another capability they cite.

I’d classify them as an enterprise RSS vendor with some novel security approaches to platforms and portals that have open APIs. The bigger picture is not the Facebook interface, it’s all the systems WorkLight taps into and makes more accessible, via whatever front end.

By: Bill Ives

Bill Ives — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:31:53 +0000

David - Thanks for the clear explanation of Workbook. As I said in my post, I think that Workbook can serve a useful function both in terms of actual functionality but also overcoming concerns in the adoption process. My comments on the cover charge were, in part, in fun. Clearly you deserve the fee if you provide the value described. I was also wondering about the Facebook model in general. I know that they open up their application for third party tools at no cost to the third party. This was a smart move on their part for the reasons you stated. I had just not seen an third party that charged a fee before (again they were generally not business services like yours which deserves a fee), perhaps I had just missed this, and others do as well. Bill

By: David Lavenda

David Lavenda — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 14:43:17 +0000

Bill,

WorkBook is a security overlay for Facebook. The way it works is an employee to a company logs into his public Facebook account and then installs the WorkBook application, just like they would install Funwall or SuperPoke. Once the application is installed, they are authenticated by their enterprise authentication engine, which provides them with the appropriate access to enterprise data based upon their corporate roles. This information is served from the WorkBook server (which is installed behind the firewall) and viewed on a Facebook canvas (technically an iFrame).

What the customers are paying for is not for any Facebook functionality, but rather for an on-premise server that is able to securely serve protected enterprise data through Web 2.0 tools, like Facebook. Facebook, in this case, is the front-end tool through which information is delivered, much like iGoogle, MS Live, Netvibes, and other home page servers can be used to display application data via gadgets, widgets, or RSS (which is the original WorkLight functionality).

“Enterprise data” in the WorkBook context includes things like “Q&A,” search for expertise, news sharing, contact information sharing, even application data, – basically all the social networking functions one would expect. However, Facebook provides none of this functionality – it all comes from WorkBook.

The Facebook model is to encourage vendors like WorkLight to develop 3rd party apps and hence, enrich Facebook’s value by bringing more users to the party. As such, the assumption that a fee for WorkBook should be shared with Facebook is not correct. Just thought I would clear that up.