In just a few short days of its announcement news of the Forrester CEP Wave has
spread to all corners of the globe. From trade magazines, online
journals and blogs to Facebook and Twitter, the headlines are
everywhere. A Google search yields thousands of hits. "Independent Research names Progress® Apama® as a Standout Leader in CEP ..."
The Forrester team of Mike Gualtieri and John Rymer state 'The Fledgling CEP Platform Market Is Vibrant, Competitive, And Dynamic'.
Of course those of us that have been immersed in event processing for
the past few years already knew that. It was our job to convince Mike
John. On behalf of Progress Apama and the CEP community, I would
like to extend a word of thanks and appreciation to both
of them for their efforts, diligence and patience in putting this Wave
An enormous task given they reviewed 9 CEP products and vendor
strategies in depth. Considering this was the first CEP Wave they also
had to define an initial blueprint on CEP by which to evaluate vendors,
they did a commendable job. Well done. You
can get a complimentary copy of the pdf version from us here.
It was quite a few months ago when I and a few of my esteemed
began the CEP Wave process. In the abstract it was not too much
different from responding to the questions in a
prospect's RFP/RFI, for which I and my colleagues have much practice. However, a difference that I
found unique was the format. A client proposal is generally
a Word document where one can provide plenty of written detail, and
depict product architecture and function. Forrester Waves are MS Excel
spreadsheets. Vendor's responses to the Wave's questions are to fit into
Excel cell. Being a long-winded person, it was a challenge to have the
necessary succinctness dictated by the confines of a cell. My
colleagues were quite helpful to this end.
In short order, it became clear as to the benefits of the spreadsheet
format. While many documents - proposals, reviews, evaluations or
other become static paper the moment they're published that is not the
case with Forrester's Wave. There is a clear intent behind Forrester's
use of the spreadsheet format; it creates a living/dynamic
document for their clients. Spreadsheet's by their very nature
can be interactive. Spreadsheet formula's can accept user input and
recalculate. This capability is exactly what Forrester leverages in the
The Forrester CEP Wave is divided into three categories:
Within each of these categories is an entire litany of subcategories
containing features and criteria by which the product and vendor are
measured. Each is assigned a weight as deemed appropriate by
Forrester in reviewing the CEP industry at large. Each vendor is
by their merits and scored. The most important aspect of this is the
weighting. This is the key that gives the Wave that dynamic
nature. From a client perspective, the weighting can be adjusted to
your specific requirements. If for example, your shop is Windows-only
you don't need to have a high weight on multi-platform support, you can
lower that value. Likewise, if you have strong need for high
availability/disaster recovery you can increase that weighting. Making
these adjustments will tune
the Wave for your specific requirements. You will then see how vendors
stack up against each other with your customized weights. By doing so, what you will find is that the Apama platform pops to the top of the list all too often.
Once again thanks for reading, you can follow me at twitter, here.
View all posts from The Progress Team on the Progress blog. Connect with us about all things application development and deployment, data integration and digital business.
Subscribe to get all the news, info and tutorials you need to build better business apps and sites
Copyright © 2019 Progress Software Corporation and/or its subsidiaries or affiliates.All Rights Reserved.
Progress, Telerik, Ipswitch, and certain product names used herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of Progress Software Corporation and/or one of its subsidiaries or affiliates in the U.S. and/or other countries. See Trademarks for appropriate markings.