LotusLive iNotes

Companies like IBM and Microsoft love to confuse their customers with numerous services and titles. Not so long ago IBM launched the new mail service LotusLive iNotes, that costs $3 per month per user and provides corporate e-mail, contacts and calendar. And today IBM has unveiled another service called LotusLive Notes, that costs $5 per month and also includes e-mail, contacts and calendar. At first glance, the only difference is the price, but in fact the latest service is a multitenant SaaS version of Lotus Domino (Domino - is the name of server software in the traditional in-house Lotus Notes system). How it differs from LotusLive iNotes?

IBM has signed a contract with Panasonic, according to which 300000 company employees will use the LotusLive SaaS services (email, calendar, web-conferencing, messenger, file storage). Neither Google, nor Salesforce have no deployments of such  scale. Sure, this deal will warm the SaaS market and strengthen the trust in SaaS scheme. Especially, taking into account the fact that Panasonic moves to SaaS system from Microsoft Exchange. Though we were not impressed with LotusLive and email service LotusLive iNotes, but the Japanese giant considered it a better option than Exchange and Google Apps. Apparently, the decisive factors were the price (LotusLive costs from $ 3 per user per month) and IBM brand.

When early this year IBM released their new SaaS platform, LotusLive, they promised to add Email to its suite. Today this promise is realized: the brand new SaaS email service LotusLive iNotes is available for business-users. IBM pushes it as a new alternative to Google Apps. Why Google Apps, but not GMail? Because, except the email tools, iNotes contains calendar and contact manager. IBM reps say that Google can't understand the difference between consumer web-services and business apps, and IBM has a vast experience in creating and supporting complex enterprise systems. So, it's just a question of time, when iNotes will drive away Google Apps users, moreover it costs only $36/user/year against Google's $50.