How do you analyze platforms in terms of your ability to build for the future? Jason: Ideally, we would like to have end-to-end support for our solutions we deploy. When I say end-to-end, I'm talking about the entire stack, from the data layer all the way to the presentation, productivity software, and of course development software. We knew there would really be some product synergy, and we would have more seamless integration of products if they were all from the same supplier. During the course of our evaluation process, it became evident Microsoft was one of the few companies that could offer the comprehensive end-to-end support we wanted.
When you evaluated Linux and Windows, what did you find regarding the skills and expertise available? Jason: We discovered the Linux community was significantly smaller and somewhat divided into camps, as opposed to Microsoft's ecosystem. Many of the Open Source advocates seemed emotionally attached to their particular flavor of Linux, and there are so many different flavors. We saw strong and varied ideologies espoused on web forums, which was the type of mentality we were striving to abandon.
Kelly: A cornerstone of Altair's business model is redundancy. It is evident in all areas especially staff skill sets, infrastructure and supplier partnerships. Selecting and utilizing Microsoft technology has insulated Altair from limited technical resources. It has provided us with an available talent pool and a robust network of partners who consult on cutting edge business solutions.
You switched from Novell to Microsoft. How has that affected recruiting? Jason: Certainly it's been easier to locate infrastructure people. Our job postings include preferences for professionals who have Microsoft Certifications. The certifications have helped us distinguish and evaluate what skills candidates truly possess. With the number of Microsoft-based professionals available in our market we have the luxury of hiring the very brightest, the cream-of-the-crop.
Could you provide numbers to show what you mean? Jason: I am notorious with our recruiters for being picky. In three weeks, we had over a 100 resumes of candidates who met our selection criteria for a senior web development position. Of those, we chose around 20 for phone interviews. From those, we did 15 in-person interviews. Then we narrowed down to five candidates. We were requiring five years experience. The candidate we ultimately selected had ten years, specifically with Microsoft technologies. In short, the abundant number of professionals with experience in Microsoft technologies allows us to select professionals who are a great fit for Altair, both in terms of cultural fit and skill level.
Does the homogeneous nature of Microsoft products lead to a quick ramp-up? How does it compare to giving everyone complete freedom, and letting them choose different tools? Kelly: What you just asked encapsulates our exact debate related to selecting our technology platform and product base. The initiative Jason and I were advocating was not well received initially. Gone are the days of sole ownership and maintenance. We can ramp up and be productive 75% to 80% faster, not to mention our ability to scale which has been tested repeatedly based on Altair's consistent growth.
In the open-source world, MySQL is built in isolation from Linux, Apache, etc. With Microsoft, products tend to be interdependent. How do you view that? Jason: It goes deeper than that. At Microsoft, if someone is on the SharePoint team today, there's a chance they could be on the SQL team a year or two from now. My observation has been people move within Microsoft, and when doing so they carry their experience with them. We think that by doing that, best practices filter through the company, and the products naturally interact in a more seamless manner.
If you look at the open-source community objectively, you have a handful of very skilled developers providing the bulk of the programming for the major open-source projects. You have different developers working on MySQL, Apache, etc. People don't often move from MySQL development to Kernel or Apache development. As a result, I would suspect best practices aren't always carried from product to product in the same way. Thus, you would likely end up with very different methodologies and philosophies on those projects.
With open source, core developers can stop working on a project and there's no guarantee someone else will fill that position, which can lead to projects stalling or stopping altogether.
When you were looking at open source vs. closed, how easy did you find it to compare and contrast? Jason: In my experience, open-source project documentation is typically inferior to the documentation provided by traditional software companies.
One of the things that impressed us about Microsoft is the sheer amount of information available on Microsoft.com. There are white papers, best practices, full product documentation, online courses, training videos, etc. There's so much there, not to mention the huge number of Microsoft bloggers. They're blogging about their products, giving advice, things of that nature. The Microsoft staff seems to be engaged and plugged in to their own ecosystem. There's rarely something I can't find in just a few seconds of searching. Altair customers expect to receive best practice recommendations from us, just as we expect those from our partners.
Why isn't the source code for open-source projects valuable to you? Jason: It's real simple for us. We're running a relocation business, not a software business. We look for a company to provide the software, and we'll use that software to the best of our ability. We have our own staff, a skilled staff, but at the end of the day, there is absolutely zero interest for us in actually reading the source code. We're more interested in whether the products work as prescribed.
It doesn't sound like open source makes much sense for Altair. Do you use open source at all? Jason: We have open source in the 10 percent of our IT that's not built on Microsoft. We evaluate it on a case-by-case basis. It's just not the best choice most of the time.
What value do Microsoft partners provide to your organization? Kelly: Microsoft partners give us what I call "prescription" information on product life cycles and upgrades. We don't have to rely on "over the counter" knowledge of the next release, planned evolution or capabilities. Partners keep us current which helps us affect decisions on when to replace, when to upgrade, and when to migrate to the next product in order to offer our customers the best possible solutions.
So partners fill the role of "Trusted Advisor?" Kelly: Yes, very much so. We can focus our efforts on strategies and solutions to benefit Altair customers.
Jason: Our staff and our internal developers are able to collaborate and receive additional training just by working along side our Microsoft partners.
Certifications were mentioned earlier. Do you see a value in those? Kelly: Today's corporations do more diligence when selecting suppliers. More scrutiny is applied to technology and security than ever before. Microsoft certifications help evidence Altair's experience and competence.
|