Industry analysts tend to classify vendors into technology "buckets" and create "labels" for each of them, as that makes it easier to compare products, capture key trends and provide context around problems that these products are addressing. This method also resonates with some technology marketers, as it allows them to partially benefit from promotions that other vendors and media are conducting around a label of a technology bucket their product was put into.

The term "application performance management" (APM) has been one of the hottest technology "labels" over the last few years. Performance of enterprise applications impacts nearly all of the key business goals, and it shouldn't come as a surprise that technology solutions for managing performance of these applications has been very high on IT agendas. With that said, it should be even less of a surprise that technology vendors, who are involved in managing the delivery of applications to business users in any way, realized this opportunity and started calling themselves "APM vendors". However, every "hot" industry term has an expiration date attached to it and sometimes it doesn't take long for a company to go from being one of the biggest promoters of an industry term to getting to the point where it doesn't even want to be associated with it.

Back in 2008, there were more than 50 technology vendors that used the term APM to position products that they provide and that number is now down to less than 30. So, had these 20+ companies gone out of business or completely changed their product portfolios? No, but they had realized that the term APM got diluted and that it is in their best interest to separate themselves from technologies that address the same problem as they do, only from a different perspective.

Emergence of new categories

Being thrown into the same technology bucket with companies that are addressing a similar problem from a different perspective could be a major challenge for many technology companies. Organizations that are in this position typically have two options: 1) wait until the market matures to the point when it becomes obvious that their solution is significantly different than other products in the same "bucket", or 2) coin a new term to describe a category in which their product belongs, promote the heck out of it and hope that it will become an industry accepted term. It took a combination of these two approaches to somewhat change the boundaries of the APM "bucket". That resulted in more market awareness about the differences between two groups of products that are also addressing challenges of managing application performance, but doing it from different perspectives: end-user experience monitoring and business transaction management (BTM).

The increased interest of end-user organizations in having visibility into how their applications are performing, not only from the perspective of their IT departments but from the perspective of business users, resulted in more market awareness about the role that end-user experience monitoring solutions are playing in managing application performance. The market matured enough to become more aware of the fact that different flavors of technologies for monitoring the quality of end-user experience, such as those provided by Aternity, Knoa Software, Coradiant or AlertSite, do not compete against, but complement vendors such as OPNET, OpTier or Quest's Foglight.

On the other side, vendors that specialize in managing application performance from a business transaction perspective also found a way to raise awareness about the differences between their solutions and many other APM products. This resulted in an increased adoption of the term BTM when describing capabilities of these solutions. These solutions are taking a different approach when addressing issues with application performance, as compared to some other APM vendors, and enable organizations to monitor the performance of applications across an entire transaction flow. Some of the vendors that fall in this group include OpTier, Nastel, INETCO, Correlsense, Precise Software, dynaTrace and AmberPoint (acquired by Oracle).

End-user organizations are looking to take more of a service-centric approach when managing IT performance, and management vendors, for the most part, have done a good job of adjusting to this trend. Recently, I had the chance to see a number of demos of IT performance monitoring products that are based on different underlining technologies for collecting performance data, are being sold to different job roles within the organization, and even competing in different markets, but they all had something in common. The first screen of their performance dashboards looks almost identical. And products that are based on network monitoring technologies, data center management or application monitoring all of a sudden have the same look and feel:

To continue reading, click here

On March 10th, 2010 CA announced that it had agreed to acquire Nimsoft, an IT service management company, for approximately $350 million. The acquisition is expected to close by the end of March of 2010, and Nimsoft will operate as a separate business unit. The goal of this report is to examine the impact of this acquisition on the IT service delivery market and the impact it could have on customers and prospects of CA and Nimsoft.

Click here to download a complimentary copy of the report

One of the key questions in IT performance management is: Does an improved ability to collect more performance data generally lead to an improved performance of IT services? The answer is: No, not necessarily. Actually, a number of end-user organizations that I have spoken with reported that their ability to prevent and resolve performance issues deteriorated after they invested in additional monitoring tools. As new challenges of managing application performance “jump out”, organizations tend to deploy new point solutions that are addressing each of these problems. This does allow them to collect more information about these specific problems, but it doesn’t necessarily allow them to have  better control of the overall IT performance.

Managing application performance is one of the key IT initiatives for end-users, but there is not a single class of technology or solution provider that can address every single issue of managing the performance of business-critical applications. Some major IT management vendors are investing significant resources in acquiring companies to enhance their product offering and enable them to tackle more performance challenges. However, the capabilities needed for end-to-end management of IT performance are rapidly changing and companies that are looking to provide capabilities for addressing each of the major IT management challenges are likely to keep playing “catch-up”. End-user requirements are changing at a pace that is faster than product development cycles or times needed for acquisitions to be initiated, agreed on and completed. So, are organizations that are looking to access all relevant IT performance data through a single platform are out of luck?