Google Analysis Of The Guardian Article11:11:37 AMThe Guardian's
Lotus Notes is used by millions of people, but almost all of them seem to hate it. How can a program be so bad, yet thrive?
Over on Peter de Haas' blog, where he (predictably, but understandably) quoted the article, I answered the question as follows:
Hmmm.... I ask myself that question all the time. How can Windows be so bad, yet thrive? How can Word be so bad, yet thrive?
Same answer for all of the above as is the answer for Notes: because as bad as they are, they still make people more productive than the best available alternatives.
OTOH, how can a newspaper reporter be so bad, yet thrive? There's a different answer altogether.
After posting that response, I thought about how best to respond to the fact that the article's author puts a lot of stock into the fact that some people have (gasp!) web pages that say that "notes sucks". So, I went to Google and did a little bit of searching. Let's check out the results.
Let's start with "notes sucks"
Now, let's note that there are actually about 10% more hits for "outlook sucks"
Along with three times as many hits saying that "word sucks"
And seven times as many hits that say that "windows sucks"
Now let's compare companies, startng with "lotus sucks"
And here are some that claim that "ibm sucks"
But there are twentyfive times as many hits for "microsoft sucks" as there are for the combined total of Lotus and IBM
Of course, the value of all these hit counts for "sucks" is a bit dubious, so let's turn it around a bit. There are a few hundred pages that actually declare that they "love microsoft".
And a few hundred more that "love microsoft outlook"
But nearly four times as many hits for "love lotus notes" as for microsoft and outlook combined!
Of course, software isn't the only thing that people think "sucks". There are a few hundred hits that say the Guardian does.
All in all, I think it's fair to conclude that web pages that say something sucks... suck as a measure of anything useful. It might even be fair to draw a conclusion about newspapers and journalists who lend credence to such pages.
1. Darren02/09/2006 02:26:26 PM
Homepage: http://www.dadams.co.uk
Nice bit of research 
2. Doug Cohen02/09/2006 02:48:36 PM
This is a great post!
It really puts into perspective how users of most any product will gripe about it.
3. Ben Langhinrichs02/09/2006 02:57:14 PM
Homepage: http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog
A brilliant bit of research
4. Charles Arthur02/09/2006 06:21:52 PM
Homepage: http://technology.guardian.co.uk
I have to say, that's the most content-free analysis of this topic I've come across so far.
I didn't put any stock into how many pages say "X sucks". I focussed on one page which has a long list of user interface errors, counterbalanced it with a guy from the UK Notes User Group, and drew in a third opinion.
I have to believe you read no further than the standfirst (look it up), else you're just wilfully being contrary.
5. Billl Buchan02/09/2006 06:39:10 PM
Homepage: http://www.billbuchan.com
Charles - welcome. And thank you for the opportunity to interact with you....
Your article spent a lot of time bashing Lotus Notes v5. Which went out of support last year. Ouch. Sorry. Two releases later and the world is a far happier place. Inbox refreshes automatically (well that was a *while* ago), etc, etc.
Seriously - check out 7.0.x on the Mac. Its very very good.
---* Bill
6. Charles02/09/2006 06:47:55 PM
Homepage: http://technology.guardian.co.uk/
Give me the stats for how many people are using 7.0 on anything, and I'll be happy to. I'd be interested by the market share stats by version. You might be interested by them yourself. I think old versions probably linger longer than you expect.
7. Richard Schwartz02/09/2006 08:02:11 PM
Homepage: http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz
Charles,
"Willfully contrary"? I can live with that, actually. I think "deliberately sardonic" might be a better choice of words, but who am I to argue?
I did, by the way, read your entire article. You may choose to believe it or not, but I wouldn't dream of labeling something a "hatchet job" if I had not read all the way to the end. In fact, had you not ended with "None of the options includes 'rip up the interface and start again'. You could suggest it, though," I may not have been so harsh in my assessment.
Perhaps I was a bit clumsy in my approach, and being more direct would have been better. So, here goes...
I am challenging the very foundation of your article.
You propose that 119 million out of 120 million Notes users hate it. That's why I quoted you directly, saying "almost all of them seem to hate it". Now, we could quibble about your use of the word "seem" and whether or not that relieves you of a journalist's responsibility to deal with facts, and that might make for an interesting discussion someday, but for now I'm taking it for granted that you know you're exaggerating, but you honestly believe that you're not exaggerating much.
Incontrovertibly, you did base a large part of your article on four (not one!) web pages on which people say "Notes Sucks". Having just re-read your article, I fail to see a single reference to any opinion or fact on the anti-Notes side that didn't originate on an anti-Notes web page. Other than your own opinion, that is. Did I miss anything? Oh, wait! I did. You took something from IBM's unquestionably pro-Notes web site and attempted to portray that as revealing a reason why Notes drives users mad. You were a little off-base there, but I'll concede a half point to you on the grounds that you did come close. Had you simply made the point that Notes is a 20 year old program, and IBM's committment to maintaining compatability and familiarity for their user base hinders their ability to make the program more intuitive, you would have earned a whole point.
Please note that I don't take you to task for putting stock in how many pages say that "Notes Sucks". That it is four, not one, that you cited makes no difference -- apart from correcting what you wrote in #4 above. What I take you to task for, rather is putting too much stock in the fact that such web pages exist at all, without challenging the accuracy of those pages.
Anyone anywhere can put up a web site that says this sucks or that sucks. The numbers, as you have directly pointed out, don't matter. The substance does.
You start by citing the two pages posted by Jack Schofield on your paper's technology blog where he asks "Is Lotus Notes the world's worst application?" (but it's not really asking an objective question, is it, when the author says from the get-go that Notes is "by far the most horrible application I've ever used for more than five minutes"?). A few commenters joined Mr. Schofield in agreement, but interestingly it was a minority of the commenters. I count that, and his follow-up a few days later, as two web pages that say "Notes Sucks".
You also cite the well-known "Notes Sucks" site that contains extensive criticism of the product, There's valid stuff there, but on the whole it is one person's page, and much of it is out of date by several years. Some of the problems he points out have been fixed in later versions. Some have not. There are also new ones. In any case, that's the third page, and you didn't challenge any of it.
Finally, you cite Stowe Boyd. I presume that since there's a slight difference in wording, you did actually interview him, but how did you find him? Why, through the "Notes Sucks" screed he posted on his web site January 6th! Am I right? Of course I am. So that makes four "Notes Sucks" pages, though once again it's not the number of pages that matters.
To your credit, Charles, you quoted two supporters of Notes in your article, but you did not quote anyone refuting the specific claims made by Stowe Boyd (or on the other pages)? I would have been very happy to point out to you (as I did via a trackback on his blog!) the egregious error of fact that he made in his statement. Here's a link to my rebuttal of Mr. Boyd:
http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz/d6plinks/RSCZ-6KUN9J
And, by the way... when you posted your comment here, you proved my refutation of Stowe's point. I wrote this blog post using the blogsphere template running on a Lotus Notes 7 client and you responded by posting from your browser to my Lotus Domino 7 server. While you and I may not be collaborating per se, we are using Notes and Domino in the very same manner in which Notes users routinely collaborate with non-Notes users every day in thousands of settings!
Well, this has gotten a bit long, so I'll wrap up.
So far, you've accounted for about ten individuals on the record with their "Notes Sucks" sentiments. I didn't actually count, so I'lll charitably raise it to 20. Don't get me wrong, though. I know that there are a lot more than that, but you proposed that in excess of 99% of users hate Notes. I can find 20 users who don't think that Notes sucks by just reading my blogroll. I can find 200 actually, but I'll stop at 20 so we're even for now.
I think you've got a bit of work left to do in order to support your proposition.
8. Richard Schwartz02/09/2006 08:04:55 PM
Homepage: http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz
Re the stats -- Ed Brill is the fellow to go to for them. I believe he's on record as saying that release 7 has the fastest adoption rate of any release they've ever put out, but I should let him speak for himself. You can find him at http://www.edbrill.com (I suspect that you already have.)
9. Chris Bordeleau02/09/2006 10:00:20 PM
Homepage: http://chris.bordeleau.net
This came up in a blog entry I did at Lotusphere on something I thought was totally insignificant... http://www2.itec.suny.edu:81/blogs/ChrisBordeleau.nsf/d6plinks/CBOU-6LDKEA
Like I said there while these numbers are "interesting" they should only be compared between things with simliar user bases. Otherwise the statistical comparison that is trying to be reached is even more suspect then a search of how much thing "suck" really is.
10. Vinay02/10/2006 01:51:53 AM
Homepage: http://revengeofsmith.blogspot.com
As someone said, this was an opportunity for Charles Arthur to vent his personal frustration with an old version of LN. I've used version 7, and although many aspects of the interface are still not as intuitive as they should (and easily can) be, it's a good product on the whole, and better than Outlook by miles (except for the word processing bits). While I understand Charles' sentiments, it would have been more responsible of him to not make a statement to the effect that 119 million people hate Lotus Notes, with only his personal frustration and a few outdated and/or anonymous websites to base it on. As stated elsewhere, that kind of line would be excusable in a personal blog, but uncomfortable in a newspaper's blog, and deplorable in a newspaper article. But I get the feeling Charles would have learnt his lesson, considering all the reactions.
11. Jens02/10/2006 04:22:34 AM
Homepage: http://www.ligonet.ch
I didn't put any stock into how many pages say "X sucks". I focussed on one page which has a long list of user interface errors, counterbalanced it with a guy from the UK Notes User Group, and drew in a third opinion.
Charles, I hope you are aware, that this is simply bad journalism.
12. Peter de Haas02/10/2006 03:11:10 PM
Homepage: http://www.peterdehaas.com
Richard,
Glad you find me *that* predictable
I do think the remark made in the article that Notes may be far more popular with the Admin / IT Pro cummunity than amongst end-users sounds pretty heads on ...
13. David Bailey02/10/2006 06:24:00 PM
You left off "Forbes sucks" -- 355,000!
14. Richard Schwartz02/10/2006 07:34:55 PM
Homepage: http://www.rhs.com/poweroftheschwartz
@13: ROFLMAO 
15. Roberto Boccadoro02/11/2006 05:06:05 PM
@6 - Charles, is nice from you to ask real statistics about how many people use Notes 7. Too bad the same approach was not used in the article. I already posted my comments on Ed's blog, and though Volker seem to disagree with me I stick with my opinion : this is really bad journalism.
RoB
16. Gavin Bollard02/21/2006 10:34:51 PM
Homepage: http://dominogavin.blogspot.com/
I don't think I've laughed so hard at a Notes/Domino posting for a long time. Those google results made my afternoon.
17. Brendan04/04/2007 07:15:21 AM
Hello.
/me waves
Just wanted to be counted as one of the people who hate notes [v6]. I don't know where the rest of us 119 million are.
In a vague attempt to contribute something more than the usual 'notes sucks', the problem seems pretty simple. While the intentions behind Notes are good, and it's a powerful collaboration environment, most people just use it for email, and it does loads of really stooopid things. The interface is amongst the worst I've ever encountered, and it makes my day-to-day life less pleasant. It's like being kicked in the face by poor design on a daily basis.
Brendan, IT Project Manager.
Blocked Response!05/01/2008 09:35:08 AM
This response from IP Address 85.106.154.208 was blocked by the owner of this blog.
