A Startling Look at IBM and the Future of Search, IBM?

November 16, 2009

I find it amusing when “the future of search” is invoked. When that phrase occurs when discussing IBM, I enjoy the remark because IBM and search are not synonymous in my experience. Sure, IBM was * the leader * in search with its original STAIRS product. But since that golden era, IBM has floundered in search, buying companies, cutting deals with Endeca and Fast Search & Transfer, among others, and then embracing the Lucene open source search solution. I wrote about IBM’s commerce search recently and then did a search on IBM India’s eCommerce Web site. I reported that IBM’s own search products could not be located. So, that’s the future of search? I hope not.

A youthful looking person, Kas Thomas, who is an “analyst” begs to disagree with my view of IBM’s information retrieval capabilities. Navigate to “IBM, Lucene, and the Future of Search”. Mr. Thomas wrote:

A lot is at stake for IBM, too: The key pieces of IBM’s information-access strategy — including InfoSphere Content Assessment (ICA), InfoSphere Content Collector (ICC), and InfoSphere Classification Module (ICM) — all employ the OmniFind Enterprise Edition search infrastructure in various ways. With Lucene and UIMA occupying center stage, IBM is betting a lot on this technology.

I am not sure IBM is a betting organization. Lucene and other open source products are [a] lower cost and [b] a hedge against Microsoft and Google. IBM is in an information retrieval bind, and I don’t think Lucene is going to do much to release the pressure.

IBM is hunting for its search “ball”. Without a ball, IBM is not in the search game. Source: http://www.desbrophy.com/images/gallery/LostBall.JPG.JPG

Here’s why in my opinion:

IBM does not understand search. The lead it enjoyed in the STAIRS era has been eroded because IBM focused on other types of systems. Since STAIRS version III (now devolved into SearchManager/370) was dumped to IBM Germany for revision, the commitment to search, information retrieval, and sophisticated content processing technologies has been pushed into a secondary position. IBM could have been the leader. Instead it is a partner to any company that supports UIMA. On the path to UIMA, IBM has purchased search technology lock, stock and barrel. Anyone remember iPhrase?
IBM now finds itself struggling with Microsoft’s resurgence in search even if Microsoft’s best bet is the aging Fast ESP technology. IBM also sees that its “partner” Google is pushing into areas that IBM once considered beyond IBM’s core competence. (Think data management and collaboration.) Now IBM is without its own search technology and it has embraced open source as the path forward. My research indicates that this is a “cost based decision”. Open source is a wonderful idea for the IBM MBAs, but when applied to IBM’s own products, the Lucene search implementation is not up to par with offerings from such companies as Coveo or Exalead, for example.
IBM has wizards working at its labs on very sophisticated content processing and information retrieval systems. In fact, Google’s current system owes a tip of the hat to the Clever system, which IBM did little to commercialize in a meaningful way. In addition, Google’s semantic context technology is from none other than former IBM Almaden researcher, Ramanathan Guha. IBM is, in my opinion, on a par with Xerox Parc in the ability to generate continuing revenue from content processing innovations.

To sum up, IBM and the future of search don’t go together flow trippingly on the tongue. IBM is increasingly a consulting company that is still hanging on to its software business. IBM, like SAP, is a company that is search challenged. The notion of “prospective standards”, another phrase used by Mr. Thomas, analyst, baffles me.

IBM—just like Google, Micr5osoft, and Oracle–is at its core a vendor of proprietary products and services. Search is a placeholder at IBM. If it were more, why didn’t IBM do something “clever” with Dr. Guha’s inventions? What’s happened to Web Fountain? Where’s the SearchManager/370 technology capability in Lucene? Answer: Lucene is a toy compared to SearchManager/370. IBM has dropped its ball in search in search. Now it is hunting for that ball in a dark, large, hot IBM conference room in White Plains. The future of search at IBM until that ball is found again.

Stephen Arnold, November 16, 2009

I want to disclose to the Treasury Department that I was not paid to point out that IBM uses software in order to generate vendor lock in to its proprietary software and systems. Why would a market driven company pay me to point out that Lucene is a means to an IBM end, not an example of the success of open source software?

Written by Stephen E. Arnold · Filed Under Business strategy, Enterprise, News, Open source, Search, Semantic, Technology, Text processing

Comments

Comments are closed.

Search the site
Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive

Stephen E. Arnold monitors search, content processing, text mining and related topics from his high-tech nerve center in rural Kentucky. He tries to winnow the goose feathers from the giblets. He works with colleagues worldwide to make this Web log useful to those who want to go "beyond search". Contact him at sa [at] arnoldit.com. His Web site with additional information about search is arnoldit.com.