PageZephyr 2.0 Searches Popular Desktop Publishing File Types
March 12, 2010
Desktop search products typically support the popular formats of PDF, RTF, and text files, but it is the proprietary formats, such as Microsoft Publisher files, that companies must go to great lengths to index. Enter PageZepyhr 2.0, Markzware’s new flagship product, completing by-passing the original content creation application while capturing, indexing, and delivering the results businesses need in real time. “Markzware’s Deep Desktop Search Finds Smoking Gun,” highlights the top three file formats that PageZepyhr now supports: QuarkXPress, Adobe InDesign, and Microsoft Publisher. In addition, Page Zephyr 2.0 allows content merging, editing, and even Boolean search commands to round out its robust package. While not expensive (currently on sale at $149), PageZephyr 2.0 is aimed at a niche market: those interested in the searching, viewing, extraction, and distribution of these unique file formats. If getting inside those proprietary files is crucial, Markzware’s new product could be the ticket. If you use Framemaker, you are still out of luck for most search and query needs.
Sam Hartman, March 12, 2010
ArnoldIT.com paid Mr. Hartman for this write up.
SSN Minute and Information Governance Goofs
March 11, 2010
The March 10, 2010, SSN Minute looks at two cases of information governance gong wrong. Goofs. One could have cost lives and compromised operational security in a military action. The other is the surprising rate of problems with social media. To watch this two minute video navigate to http://ssnblog.com and click on the SSN Minute logo or click here.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
I paid myself to write this item about my SSN Blog’s SSN Minute. Upfront marketing is my motto, not that faux “real” marketing.
The New MSN
March 11, 2010
Short honk: Just ran the demo for the new MSN at http://www.tourmsn.com/SL/. I clicked on Go to MSN Now. Dead link. Interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Since I mentioned “dead link” I will report this state of non payment to the folks who used to manage CompanyCommand.com.
Google, Data, and Owning the Golf Club
March 11, 2010
I remember when I first interviewed with Barry Bingham Jr., then the boss of the Courier Journal & Louisville Times Co. The newspaper was a monopoly and it had a document from a government official saying it was okay for us to own the morning and evening newspaper, the top TV station, the top AM and FM station, and to have other information related businesses such as high volume printing, door knob ad packet hanging, a ham company, and, oh, yes, an electronic information publishing company. That unit was also number one in revenue per record on the big commercial online systems.
One of my recollections of that interview was my question about revenue and profits. I spoke with him in 1980, so my memory of that meeting in his sunny office looking down Broadway in Louisville from the Courier Journal’s main building was along the lines: “Don’t worry. When people spend money for advertising in this area, we get most of it.” He went on to point out that he would subsidize my riding the bus to work because after working in New York and Washington DC, I was not an automobile buff. He also pointed out that I was expected to volunteer in various civic groups, which for me included helping with youth soccer and contributing to the Chamber of Commerce’s first “Advanced Technology Council.” Yep, 30 years ago I thought Louisville was an advanced technology center. Go figure.
After that initial meeting, Mr. Bingham and I became friends. When he had a computer problem, he would come over to my house and we would fix his Mac. After the sale of the Courier to Gannett, he and I would have lunch at least once a year. I had to make sure I had my wallet because Mr. Bingham would often arrive in his beat up Datsun without any money even though he worth was in the big money.
At one of those lunches, he made a comment about owning the country club. My memory locked on to this analogy, and I want to share it before I suggest you spend some time working through a Google presentation about newspapers and advertising. Here’s the country club story. His view was that newspapers were the owners of the country club. The newspapers decided what to emphasize and in the case of the Courier Journal what issues to push. The Courier Journal, when I joined as an officer of the company, was ranked on a couple of lists as among the Top 25 news papers * in the world *. The Courier Journal employee ID pass was a sure fire ticket to many events. When I wanted carpet samples from the now defunct Stewart’s Department Store, I showed my Courier Journal ID and was able to haul off a dozen carpet samples. The salesperson told me, “I will come by your house, answer questions, and pick up the samples.” Now that’s power. In New York, a carpet sample to go required a driver’s license, a credit card, and a one page form. In Louisville, the Courier Journal was the owner of the country club, employees were members, and the influence of the company, its employee practices, and its reputation in the community was remarkable. I joined the Courier Journal after a stint at Booz, Allen & Hamilton and (if you can believe this), the Courier Journal had a bigger stick that the venerable firm founded in 1917 by George Booz. Amazing. What’s become of the Courier Journal? It has been Gannettized, and I don’t recall the paper’s receiving any big writing awards. Most of the special sections are recycled wire service stories and photo essays showing people with shoes or Derby hats.
Now navigate to Scribd and download Google Newspaper Economics: Online and Offline by Google’s chief economist Hal Varian. After you work through the data, ask yourself these questions:
- Who owns the country club? Traditional newspapers or the “flat” world of Internet content?
- Who are the caddies in the age of the “digital Gutenberg”? Internet companies or newspaper publishers?
- What must newspapers to do to regain their revenue flows?
- What can newspapers do to regain their commanding position in the information food chain?
I have my answers. Please, post yours in the comments section of this Web log. I won’t grade your responses, but I will look at them and see if I have missed anything in Dr. Varian’s data centric description of a business sector struggling to find a revenue stream.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Since the presentation was given for an FTC group, I will just say, “Freebie.”
Cisco Throw Down: Accelerating the Internet
March 11, 2010
I keep track of the network hardware folks, but I don’t write about them in Beyond Search. Most of my readers are interested in search, content processing, and electronic information. I am pretty confident about what my readers want because I only have two or three readers. One is my assistant and the other two people are actually Internet café terminals I hacked to get my RSS feed. So, I’m unpopular. No problem for the addled goose in rural Kentucky.
I read “Cisco Shows Off Super Router” and because the article gets close to what will be an interesting front in the traditional networking sector’s battle with Google. Yep, I know. Google is a search and advertising company. Save that for the search engine optimization crowd and the azure chip crowd.
The core of the story is the statement allegedly made by John Chambers, Cisco CEO:
“Video is the killer app,” Chambers said. “Video brings the Internet to life.”
The idea is that textual information is yesterday. He is right even though I hate to see the end of an era. I regret the loss of mainframes and the wonderful revenue stream those gizmos delivered to me, but time moves on.
What the article triggered in my thinking was that Hewlett Packard and Cisco had a love spat. Now Cisco is going to find itself going where the money is, and that means into traditional telco land. The problem is that the Google with its own home brew telecommunications capabilities, the stuff it has acquired, and the technology in which it invests is going to a much larger factor in Cisco’s future. I think that may be bad news for Cisco and for some telcos. The reason is that the Google is pushing toward efficient, automated, lower cost methods.
To learn about one of Google’s little adventures, check out my KMWorld column about a company with “wireless networks that simply work?. Who will win the next series of battle in this coming collision of Google and outfits allied with traditional telecommunications companies? I don’t know, but I wager that the “real” consultants, the poobahs, mavens, and self appointed experts will discover this skirmish soon enough.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
I was paid for the KMWorld article, but I was not paid for this reference to the KMWorld article. So, this write falls into the category of shameless marketing and self promotion. I love it.
Walled Gardens, Robert Frost, and Online
March 11, 2010
I find the write ups in Gigaom (free version) interesting. I rarely agree or disagree. The business spin on the articles is solid. I did balk at “A Belated New Year’s Resolution: No Walled Gardens” by Jim Louderback, one of the former Ziff people. I think former Ziff people are wonderful, but I was disconcerted by the article. The idea is a little Platonic for me. The ideal world is definitely not one that I inhabit. Reality is proprietary systems, clever plays for vendor lock in, and outright duplicity.
For me, one of the more curious passages in the write up was:
Well basically it means to eschew controlled environments, whatever the cost , and to embrace open platforms with all your heart.
Let’s think about this walled garden stuff.
First, code something for Google. Now try to repurpose the code; that is, get the code out of Google. Nope. One way street. All that open source razzle dazzle is subject to the same vagaries as Google Gadgets were. One day something is there; the next day that something is gone. Not long ago a query for “skin cancer” and “recipe” produced glimpses of a more sophisticated Google results list. Poof. Gone. Google wants to be the big dog, and I think that a person who sees Google as open may want to spend some time poking around Google’s patent documents and the firm’s technical papers. Hurry. Some of these disappear pretty quickly now. Google is more locked down than most companies. Walled garden is a gentle description of Google’s set up in my opinion.
Second, Apple. Here’s a way to see how Apple runs its railroad. Deauthorize a computer from your iTunes account. Now plug in your iPod. The system removes certain content from the iPod. Now that’s an open system. I hate the hassle of deleting a podcast from iTunes. I hit delete and then I have to hit M. I want to delete not do two things. The App Store? Even worse. Just ask a WiFi app developer. Apple is a one-way street, and I think Google has decided to emulate Apple but with an even more New Age spin.
Third, Cisco. Example. Hewlett Packard and Cisco are no longer pals. Why? Well, neither outfit wants to be open. What about other plumbing companies. The same. Get a Meraki device. How open is that? In my opinion, it is not open. What’s open are the marketing assertions. The reality is that Meraki wants to nuke Cisco, Alcatel, and any other network vendor. Once everyone is in Meraki-land, the walls will become more visible in my opinion. (Keep in mind that Google is an investor in Meraki.)
Finally, let me highlight a couple of other closed outfits. Both practice lock in but in idiosyncratic ways. IBM is focused on keeping customers on the reservation. IBM talks about open source, but when you want to make something work, you don’t get too much open source code to help iron out the many glitches in Filenet in my experience. Microsoft? Closed. The “open” aspects of a Microsoft system are a result of security bugs. Oracle? You want a fast Oracle database, buy the Oracle-Sun hardware solution.
In short, today’s IT market is about lock in, walled gardens, and keeping competitors out and customers in.
Maybe in Alice in Wonderland, not today’s IT market. I think good fences make good neighbors.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Because I mentioned Alice in Wonderland, I will report non payment to the Office of Management and Budget, where the reality of numbers is the essence of life.
Google Flat: Is the Microsoft Kryptonite Weakening Google?
March 11, 2010
Web search share data are subject to the old plus or minus gambit. A share of 60 percent could be 50 percent or 70 percent, maybe more, maybe less. Most write ups skip the details of method, variance, and any “shaping” done to create a nice, tidy report.
But Web share data are fun. Navigate to “Bing Gains US Search Market Share for Ninth Straight Month” and join in the game. Here’s the passage I found interesting:
February was the ninth consecutive month of slight gains in search share for Bing, which Microsoft unveiled in June accompanied by a 100-million-dollar advertising campaign in a bid to challenge search juggernaut Google.
That is some pocket change. The payoff has been a jump from “11.5 percent in February from 11.3 percent in January, the Web analytics firm [comScore] said.” Maybe Microsoft has found a way to suck the juice from Google with Bing-flavored Kryptonite?
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this. With the cost of that 0.2 jump in mind, I know I have to report this to the Department of Treasury, which does understand money and its value.
A Fading Buzz
March 10, 2010
Google, like most math clubs, is indifferent to jibes and the comments from lesser mortals. I wonder how long that indifference can continue. consider “Google Buzz Could Have Dominated Location. (And Snuck Up On Facebook And Twitter.)” The write up makes the point that Buzz, which is about 30 days in the rough-and-tumble world of “real” products is, according to the article, “a mess.” I don’t have much of an opinion about Buzz. I leave that work to the young goslings who take to social media the way a young goose does to water. For me, the more telling comment in the write up is:
As a sharing service within Gmail, Buzz isn’t ready for primetime yet. As a location service, Buzz could have been a serious challenger to Foursquare, Gowalla, Brightkite, Loopt, and all the others preparing for big launches at SXSW later this week. Imagine Buzz as a location-based iPhone and Android app (or even just a web app). It still could have been linked to your Google Profile and perhaps would have even been a better gateway drug to making Google more social because it would have been a more gradual build-up. And to ensure some usage beyond Google Profiles, Google could have put Buzz in Gmail Labs, as an option for Gmail. As a broken social sharing service, Buzz in Gmail is annoying. But as a location-based stream of check-ins (that people could still comment on and like), it’s potentially interesting.
When I read this I think that Google’s tactical plans are not working particularly well. The issues range from a flawed view of the market to timing and sequencing. With the mounting legal troubles and the push into some tricky consumer sectors, Google’s management may have to step back and ask, “Now what?”
Stephen E Arnold, March 10, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Since I mentioned “buzz,” I think OSHA is in charge of noise-related regulations. Okay, I report receiving no money for this item.
Google and Cracks in Its Armor
March 10, 2010
Short honk: If you want a run down of Google’s weaknesses, navigate to “Criticism of Google”, a Wikipedia article. Interesting although some Googlers may take exception to the some of the items on the list. The number one “criticism” is copyright; number two, privacy. A happy quack to to Google Blogoscoped for this link in its “Criticism of Google at Wikipedia” post.
Stephen E Arnold, March 10, 2010
No one paid me to write this item. I don’t know to whom to report because the US government knows quite a bit about Google and in general has the warm fuzzies for the company. I will report to the next Microsoft person with whom I speak.
Vivisimo Rivets Social Search Deal
March 10, 2010
Vivisimo and its Velocity Enterprise Search Platform is versatile. I read “Vivisimo Powers Social Search for the Industrial Research Institute” and learned more about the Velocity social search capabilities.
IRI is “a leading research organization representing industrial and service companies that have a common interest in technological innovation and invest billions on research and development annually.” IRI wants to maximize the value of social media for its lead generation activities.
According to the new story:
…Members are able to use the search interface as a single collaboration point, fostering knowledge sharing among users and optimizing information…RI members using Velocity are utilizing a rich set of discovery, personalization and collaboration functionality, empowering them with greater control over their search experience. Rather than just being able to search and find information, users can tag, rate and annotate documents and search terms to optimize future results all aimed at improving collaboration, innovation and productivity.
Approximately 1,000 IRI members will use the new search service.
My definition of social search is more narrow than that presented in the news story. The idea that search is a collaboration tool because a user can add a tag is more in the Microsoft SharePoint approach to information management. If you want more information, point your browser to Vivisimo’s Web site.
Stephen E Arnold, March 10, 2010
No one paid me to write this article. I will report non payment to the social secretary for the White House and if the position is not yet filled, I will report when the new person is on the job and screening invitation lists.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
