Did IBM Create Their Own FUD?

Competitors of IBM Lotus Notes/Domino could not have scripted it better. Chris Linfoot calls it "Do it Yourself" FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). Volker Weber asks "Why is it so hard to just tell it as it is?". Ed Brill is left scrambling to get clarifications posted. What happened? IBM had to pull the download code of the newly released Notes/Domino 7, and they did not post what seemed to be any reasonable reason for the action.

This left the Lotus community wondering if there were undisclosed problems in the executable code. The real reason was not as "sexy" but just as troublesome for the quality assurance process IBM uses to release new software. It turns out that the license agreements were not aligned properly with the different versions available for download. So they pulled the code without this explanation.

Clarification was not posted until late this afternoon, but the damage had been done. IBM had handed FUD fuel to their competitors and it does not matter what official reasons come out or how good the actual product is. Perceptions and the FUD associated with the action will dominate the trade rags and analyst reports. Should Volker and Chris have written what they did, when they did? Some might disagree, but I say yes. We need to hold all vendors equally accountable for missteps.

The bottom line is that the downloads are back online, and if had been problems in the code, it would not be back so quickly. Let's hope IBM has learned a lesson from this episode.