Eucalyptus: Can Open Source Grow a Flammable Tree
May 4, 2009
I could not resist the reference to the Eucalyptus tree. In a forest fire, the Eucalyptus tree has the capability of exploding and igniting other plants or structures. The notion of the for fee Eucalyptus cloud computing platform setting the cloud computing sector on fire struck me as relevant. Here’s the scoop: TheStandard.com reproduced a story from Network World. You can read the story here. “Open Source Cloud Platform Is Commercialized by Its Creators” reported that
The creators of Eucalyptus, an open source platform for building private clouds, have launched a company to sell products based on the software and have landed US$5.5 million in first-round funding.
Will the business model work? Benchmark Capital and BV Capital bet $5.5 million that it will.
Stephen Arnold, May 2, 2009
Encarta: The Price Curve of Death
May 4, 2009
I found Randall Stross’s “Encyclopedic Knowledge, Then vs. Now” in the New York Times here interesting. The article provides a useful supplement to my comments about online pricing in my “Mysteries of Online” series here. What struck me as I read the essay was the need for what I call “the curve of death”. The idea is that researchers probe the “market”, determine a price range, and then over the life of the product adjust the prices to covert the idea into a gusher of cash. As Mr. Stross pointed out, Encarta was unable to make headway, first, against the $129 Compton’s Interactive Encyclopedia and, second, against the Wikipedia. The numbers he provided, when converted to a simple line chart, provide a textbook example of what I call the “curve of death”. In today’s online marketplace, one “can’t make up the investment on volume when the price is forced ever lower.” Here’s what the curve looked like when I toyed with Mr. Stross’s data:
Once the curve starts to nosedive, in this particular instance, Microsoft killed the product a quarter century after Encarta started through its lifecycle. What I concluded was that once a product fails to generate traction, further price cuts do not mean the product will become successful. I recall a lecture by an ivory tower type who explained economies of scale and the wisdom of cutting prices as the manufacturer moved “up the experience curve”. Didn’t seem to work for Encarta. My experience suggests that the ongoing cost of information products is a killer. Automation offers one way out of the box. Shifting production to volunteers may be another. The traditional approach and the traditional wisdom, in the case of Encarta, did not work even with the marketing muscle of Microsoft behind the product. Persistence is often an excellent characteristic. I wonder if the curve suggested an earlier exit from the Encarta business?
Stephen Arnold, May 3, 2009
Page of Google: UMich Commencement Speech
May 3, 2009
Short honk: you can read the text of Larry Page’s commencement address at the University of Michigan here. For me the most intersecting comment in the talk was this passage:
When I was here at Michigan, I had actually been taught how to make dreams real! I know it sounds funny, but that is what I learned in a summer camp converted into a training program called Leadershape. Their slogan is to have a “healthy disregard for the impossible”. That program encouraged me to pursue a crazy idea at the time: I wanted to build a personal rapid transit system on campus to replace the buses. It was a futuristic way of solving our transportation problem. I still think a lot about transportation — you never loose a dream, it just incubates as a hobby. Many things that people labor hard to do now, like cooking, cleaning, and driving will require much less human time in the future. That is, if we “have a healthy disregard for the impossible” and actually build new solutions.
The GOOG has built new solutions. No doubt.
Stephen Arnold, May 4, 2009
Container Vessel Vertical Search
May 3, 2009
Short honk: MarketWatch here reported here that a free vertical search system for ocean going container vessels has been launched. The story “Linescape Launches a Free and Independent Ocean Container Schedule Search Engine” pointed to http://www.linescape.com. For me the most interesting comment in the description of this vertical search engine was:
Linescape has introduced several advanced features unique to its search engine, including an innovative “Route Planner” that presents users with a matrix of all the possible port combinations between two geographical areas and which carriers serve those routes. This very powerful and easy to use feature will simplify one of the most difficult tasks of a user — trying to choose the best possible origin and destination ports. A unique aspect of the website is the visibility of the number of transhipments in a journey, allowing a user to balance journey times with numbers of tranships to keep risks of delay to a minimum. Another advanced feature is the innovative “Multiple Lines” feature, whereby users are able to automatically build routes via transhipments, even between two unrelated shipping lines.
Linescape is a leading online provider of comprehensive ocean container shipping schedules for shippers and freight forwarders worldwide. Headquartered in Burlingame, California, Linescape was created in 2008 by a team of professionals who have spent many years in industries that require the shipping of goods to customers all over the world.
Google Has a Moat
May 3, 2009
Short honk: The billionaire has it right. The GOOG has a “huge moat”. You can read his view of Google’s competitive advantage here. The story “Buffet, Munger Praise Google’s Moat” appeared in MarketWatch.
Stephen Arnold, May 3, 2009
Merck Elsevier Confused about Information
May 3, 2009
At a Derby party yesterday, a number of still working journalists asked me about the “integrity” of a Web log. The idea was that working for a big publishing company conferred some seal of approval. There are Web log writers who purport to bring a standard of excellence to Web logs. My view is that any information regardless of publisher or medium has to be viewed with a “trust but verify” mind set. Sure. That requires work on the part of the reader, but in today’s world, trickery is not just easy, an indifferent reader makes discovery unlikely. At the party, I explained that the Web log you are reading is a marketing effort. I don’t charge. I have a policy of recycling information that is either old or not in my for fee work. I write columns for money and those get more of my attention than a Web log post commenting about a wacky explanation abut enterprise search by a business intelligence professional or a SharePoint certified professional.
What I lacked yesterday was a recent, concrete example of big companies getting cute with information. I now have a good example. I don’t know if it is true, and I don’t have an easy way to determine if Merck and Elsevier were confused or dabbling in disinformation. You can read the item and draw your own conclusion.
The story “Merck Makes Phony Peer-Review Journal” in the Bioethics.net Web log here reported:
The Scientist has reported that, yes, it’s true, Merck cooked up a phony, but real sounding, peer reviewed journal and published favorably looking data for its products in them. Merck paid Elsevier to publish such a tome, which neither appears in MEDLINE or has a Web site, according to The Scientist. What’s wrong with this is so obvious it doesn’t have to be argued for.
A big publishing company took money from a big drug company. Now what about the integrity of a Web log? My thought it that one cannot trust information from any source. Reader beware.
Stephen Arnold, May 5, 2009
Real Time Conversations: The Next Big Big Thing
May 3, 2009
Short honk: real time conversation is the next big thing. You will want to read Marshall Kirkpatrick’s “The Man Who Made Gmail Says Real Time Conversation Is What’s Next” here. The source is the person who coded up Gmail in one day and then knocked off AdSense. (My hunch is that he had help from other Googlers.) Now Paul Buchheit is a Xoogler, working at FriendFeed. For me, the most interesting comment in the article was:
The father of the best web email program on the planet believes that a real-time streaming interface for simplified aggregation of conversation and content from all around the web is going to join the handful of tools we use regularly, like email, IM and blogging.
After reading the article, I had three questions. First, why hasn’t Google been more aggressive in this market space? Maybe Mr. Buchheit was a voice unheard? Second, will services such as FriendFeed leapfrog Google the way Google hopped over Yahoo a decade ago? Finally, maybe Google knows something about the fragility of real time conversation systems that elude lesser minds?
Stephen Arnold, May 3, 2009
Google and Book Scanning: 2004 Invention Discovered
May 3, 2009
Short honk: I enjoyed the “revelation” that National Public Radio (a “public” broadcasting entity that runs ads) discovered the secret of Google’s book scanning “machine” via an article in another publication. You can read the story here. The article points out that Google has a patent for this invention. There’s an image from the patent that shows one of Google’s helpful diagrams. A couple of points that merit a comment: First, the patent application was filed in September 2004. Assume that the Googlers Messrs. Lefevere and Saric started work on the project nine to 12 months before the application was filed. Google’s “machine” has been grinding away for six, maybe seven years. Hardly news unless one was ignoring the significant technical challenges Google had to overcome to make it possible for a small crew and part time workers to process documents in a wide range of form factors. Second, the reference patent US7508978 “Detection of Grooves in Scanned Images” is one component of a mosaic of inventions germane to the book scanning project. In short, there’s more to the Google scanning “machine” than one invention designed to correct for curvature of the source. You can explore a subset of Google’s patent documents here. Note that this set covers only 1998 to December 31, 2008, and is not a replacement for searching the USPTO collection.
Stephen Arnold, May 3, 2009
LexisNexis, Its Data and Fraud
May 3, 2009
Robert McMillan’s “LexisNexis Says Its Data Was Used by Fraudsters” here caught my attention. The story reported that “LexisNexis acknowledged Friday [May 1, 2009] that criminals used its information retrieval service for more tan three years to gather data that was used to commit credit card fraud.” Mr. McMillan added that “LexisNexis has tightened up the way it verifies customers.” The article noted that LexisNexis “was involved in other data breaches in 2005 and 2006.” Interesting. So 2005, 2006, 2009. Perhaps the third time will be the charm?
Stephen Arnold, May 2, 2009
The Individual: The Fount of Crime
May 3, 2009
Most people don’t think of bad guys as the fellow who lives in the next flat or the nice girl with the lawn service. Those in bank security, law enforcement, and insurance investigators know that the individual is the key to certain interesting activities. The numerous comments about Spock’s sale to the Naveen Jane, the founder of Intelius and InfoSpace, were quite tame. You can read “Intelius Buys Spock, the People Search Engine” here. My thoughts on this deal included these musings:
- Mr. Jane is a canny lad. I think he senses that the value of a people-centric service will rise. If this takes place, Mr. Jane could make a tidy profit
- In the near term, the market demand for people information is likely to rise
- People data can be sliced and diced, and I think that Mr. Jane will make an attempt to generate some revenue from this property.
And crime? Well, I don’t have much to say about that.
Stephen Arnold, May 2, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
