Truth Denied?

Plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery – or something like that. Anyway I’m sure Blake Dournaee of Intel will forgive me for borrowing the title for this blog…

…from his own “Truth Denied” blog entry on his Truth in SOA blog. Follow the link and you’ll see that Blake is a little aggrieved at a previous blog entry of mine where I suggested that Intel was using spin when describing something as both an appliance and software.

Now I’m also a little aggrieved because in his post Blake seems to suggest that he attempted to wield the sword of truth by posting a clarifying comment on this site but, he claims that his comment was subsequently deleted. This is just not true. And if you’re going to try to take the moral high ground by suggesting that the Truth had been Denied then I think you should at least be sure of your facts.

You don’t need to take my word for it, just follow this link to the Lustratus REPAMA blog post in question and you’ll see that Blake’s comment appears underneath the blog entry. It’s live as it has been since May 5th. In fact the comment that Blake suggested I had deleted was actually courteously, if I say so myself, replied to by me on May 6th. Indeed his own colleague Pete Logan also replied to the same post. In fact, my Lustratus Research colleague (who caused all the problems in the first place with his competitive review of SOA appliances) also replied to Pete.

So I took issue with Blake suggesting that his right of reply was somehow denied him. I thought the best thing to do was to reply to him. So on Friday 10th September I posted, or at least I tried to post the following comment on his blog.

I’m not sure how the “truth” has been denied here Blake. I’m the author you mention above and am a little concerned by your comments on the article I wrote in May. My original article concerned a report that my Lustratus colleague Steve Craggs wrote about the market for XML Appliances which touched on Intel’s Software Appliance.

You seem to think that my original comments were in some way designed to be provocative and you then went on to assert that the comment you posted in reply had been subsequently deleted from my site. I can assure you that as soon as I saw your comment I was happy to approve it and it has been live since May 5 2010.


In fact I replied to your comment on May 6th 2010, my colleague Steve Craggs added his thoughts and another colleague of yours from Intel – Peter Logan added a further clarification on June the 4th, which again I was happy to approve and post live as soon as I saw it.

I know that neither of us has any interest in denying the ‘truth’ so I’m sure you’d be happy to re-check your assertion that your comment was subsequently deleted. This is just not true.

But I say again that if you have to go to the lengths that you have in your message above to justify placing the word ‘appliance’ next to the word ‘software’, then it suggests to me that Intel knows well enough that it is stretching the commonly held definition for appliance. That is what my ‘provocative’ comment about spin was designed to illustrate.

And I say again more power to you. I’m a marketing analyst. I analyse the marketing strategies of vendors such as yourself and I think obfuscating the product category in this way is an excellent guerrilla marketing tactic – as is your DataPower trade in offer.

Kind regards

Danny Goodall
Lead Marketing Analysis
Lustratus REPAMA

The blogging system he uses told me that my post had been received and that it would appear soon – code for the fact that Blake needs to approve it before it goes live. I didn’t receive an email acknowledgement and having checked a number of times since, it appears that my comment has not been posted live. So on Wednesday 29th September I tried again. Again I was told that the comment was accepted by Blogger, but still, to my knowledge this new comment does not appear on Blake’s blog.

So what to do? Well I thought I’d put the record straight here so that if anyone does link back or forwards from Blake’s blog, they can at least get my view of the truth. So what’s going on Blake Dournaee of Intel? Are you just not checking your email? Has Blogger let you down? Has my comment got lost in a SPAM filter? Set it free. We don’t want the truth denied. Do we?

Whilst typing up this blog entry I was thinking about the process that Intel had followed in a) using the product category of software appliance and b) launching it on an unsuspecting and largely software-appliance-ignorant public. I thought it might be interesting to speculate on the process and their motives, and I will in a future blog entry but for now I just hope Blake finds this post and sets the truth free.

Danny Goodall

Posted in All Blog Categories, Competition and Competitive Intelligence, differentiation, marketing, Marketing Strategy, positioning, product category, product name, SOA and Integration and tagged , , , , , , .

One Comment

  1. Pingback: Truth Denied? The Software Appliance Revisited. | lustratus REPAMA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *