Nstein Explains Its To-Be System
June 6, 2009
I have difficulty categorizing the Canadian company Nstein. Several years ago, I understood the company was in the content processing business. Then the company moved into digital asset management. DAM is a method of handling images and videos. I spoke with an Nstein manager or consultant at the Boston Search Engine Meeting in April 2009, and I learned that indeed Nstein offered each of these services. Okay, I thought. The company is doing what it has to do to meet the needs of customers.
Today I received two news releases, so I assume I am on the media list twice. The only problem is that I am not media. I am an addled goose, and I read these unsolicited messages with a critical eye. Here’s what jumped out at me:
- This phrase struck me as silly: “announced the planned release of TME 5, a feature rich upgrade to its award-winning Text Mining Engine.” Nstein is telling me that it is planning a release of its text mining engine or TME. But TME is not just a text mining engine. It is an award winning engine. And the upgrade is “feature rich”. Wow. I remember studying the Latin verb for this type of wild future perfect projection of intent. Dead language and dead assertion for me.
- The news release said, “TME 5 gives them unprecedented flexibility and control to support any business model, and to reap highest premium ad rates possible through the micro-segmentation that TME allows.” I like the categorical affirmative. Before I flunked logic, I thought categorical affirmatives were possible. My best friend informed me that categorical affirmatives are risky business in logic class. Black swans, mathematical proofs, and other aberrations have to be considered. No wonder he got an “A”.
- The upgrade * will * include hooks to the Semantic Web, taxonomy administration, methods to determine the “aboutness of a document”, etc. These are complicated issues, and I have to remember that when I ground out the first three editions of the Enterprise Search Report (2004 to 2006), Beyond Search (2007), Successful Enterprise Search Management (2009) and three Google monographs—whew—no vendor delivered this line up of text processing functionality. The reason? The cost, time, babysitting, and computational cost were too rich even for government agencies. Some vendors overambitious systems just caused their search supertankers to run aground.
My suggestion to search vendors is to keep the news releases for members of the news media. I am an addled goose who is sometimes lucky enough to get paid for his analyses. I don’t send vendors unsolicited news releases. I have a 20 something use a PR distribution agency or I let my publishers flog my work. I don’t need multiple copies of news releases. In fact, with my Overflight system, I don’t need or want any news releases from search and text processing vendors.
But if you want to read this news release in full and talk to the Nstein sales professionals about their super system, click here. You can’t read my copies. I deleted them.
Stephen Arnold, June 6, 2009
Comments
7 Responses to “Nstein Explains Its To-Be System”
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
You might enjoy these:
http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/02/19/a-reply-to-all-pr-people/
http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/03/10/more-adventures-with-pr-people/
But have mercy on the Nstein marketing people. They do have a good product. I’ll stay away from any categorical affirmatives, lest I be ensnared by a categorical imperative.
Daniel Tunkelang,
Spare me. I get baloney with unsubstantiated assertions without my asking for the information the way I do with Search Wizards Speak. As I recall, I asked Endeca for info and permitted a pre publication review. For spam to my main email addres, I am * not * going to roll over and play puppy. The fix is to quit sending me unsolicited emails or write a news release that does not press my hot buttons. AIso, I do love the Spanish Inquisition touch of “have mercy” in your comment. Problem: I am * not * Mother Theresa. Aim your injunctions for mercy at targets likely to listen. Wrong angle of approach for me.
Stephen Arnold, June 6, 2009
We know that you are sold to a few (e.g. Marklogic, etc.) that gives you what you ask for: $$.
Spare us the baloney indeed.
Bob W. Arnold,
Please, check out the About link here: http://www.arnoldit.com/about. Want to be a Search Wizards feature, drop me a line? In the meantime, help me stop vendors from spamming me with multiple, unsolicited emails. Keep in mind this is a free, marketing Web log. No effort on my part to make this addled goose publication anything other than a marketing mechanism. But I don’t spam people like some vendors spam me. Maybe I should start? Maybe I should use categorical affirmatives? Maybe I should change my feathers?
Stephen Arnold, June 7, 2009
There is a real lesson in here for PR people: (1) make sure people on your list want to be there, (2) never accidentally spam it, and (3) know who you are dealing with. Stephen calls himself “addled” 804 times in this blog so if you’ve not picked up on the curmudgeonly tone, then you’re not looking very hard. And when spam a curmudgeon, well, expect what you get.
A good lesson for some PR person out there and I hope he/she learns it.
PS: Bob W. Arnold is both incorrect and hiding — he’s got the NY Times as his site so he’s commenting anonymously in fact.
Stephen Arnold ended up on the wrong list. It happens to us all. Yet that was enough to fill a page for a blog about it? I came to this site looking for useful opinions about TME5. If this is it, I will spare myself from such deep meaningful logic about Stephen Arnold’s distaste for spam. Also, give Bob W. Arnold his due, Stephen Arnold does not deny selling out to Mr. Kellogg’s company (Marklogic) and the like. Seems those leaving comments are not “addled” about that.
Adipex….
Adipex-p. Phentermine adipex. Adipex p home. Adipex. Adipex online no prescription. Adipex overnight….