UC Davis Maybe Not Googley
May 5, 2010
No details but the University of California – Davis may not be Googley. “Exclusive: Gmail Ditched By Major University” reported in an exclusive, which is important, that:
In a joint letter last week to employees, University of California-Davis CIO Peter Siegel, Academic Senate IT chair Niels Jensen, and Campus Council IT chair Joe Kiskis said the school decided to end its Gmail pilot, which could have led to campus-wide deployment, because faculty members doubted Google’s ability to keep their correspondences private. Many faculty “expressed concerns that our campus’s commitment to protecting the privacy of their communications is not demonstrated by Google and that the appropriate safeguards are neither in place at this time nor planned for in the near future,” the letter said.
Is the school admitting it is not Googley? Not sure, but the privacy thing. Ouch.
Stephen E Arnold, May 5, 2010
Freebie, gentle reader, freebie.
Google and Its Handset Management Challenges
May 5, 2010
I worked at a couple of reasonably good management and technology consulting outfits. One was a unit of Halliburton, yes, that Halliburton, and at a blue chip consulting firm. I learned from the git-go that management was not an instinctive skill. I suppose there is a Mozart of management playing gigs at big companies, but most managers struggle with management. Need I mention Enron or Tyco? What is the difference between John Deere and Komatsu? I suggest management.
When a company is growing, the method of management is often chaotic. When a company gets some miles on its chassis, management takes a different turn. People have to hired. Bills paid. Laws and regulations followed. The excitement of reacting to rapid growth and unexpected challenges wanes. Meetings have to be held. Priorities set and hooked to a budget. Resources deployed and monitored.
In short, management is hard work. If a company lacks management skill, little problems can become big problems. In other cases, opportunities can be overlooked or ignored. Pals can become non-pals. You probably have first hand experience in your own work career when management ceases to solve problems and starts to cause problems.
I read “Why Google’s Open Handset Alliance Has Been A Disappointment” and thought about management. The write up sent some warning flares my way. You may read the article and have a different impression. In my opinion, this passage points out some issues with Google’s open handset alliance:
In fact, the OHA is already showing signs of strain, reports Bloomberg. OEMs are continuing to fragment the user experience for Android by swapping out applications and creating various combinations of pre-loaded applications for purpose-built devices. The report suggests that Google is struggling to maintain partner interest in the loosely structured Alliance, citing the recent decision by Verizon Wireless to back out of the decision to sell the Nexus One. Verizon Wireless is perhaps a prime example of the Alliance’s struggles. While Verizon has launched a handful of Android devices, and has backed them large marketing campaigns, it is not a member at all.
Good management can convert the implosion of this type of group. Bad management can create some consequences that are difficult to pin down. In general, non pals can do unexpected things. Can Google keep this alliance on track? Does Google want to keep it intact?
Only Google management can answer these questions. With Google saddled with its one trick revenue pony, excursions outside of advertising may be secondary or tertiary concerns. Nevertheless, management, not technology, will be needed to handle these non algorithmic, very subjective situations.
The pivot point for Google is now management, not technology in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, May 5, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Twitter Bent to News
May 5, 2010
Researchers classify Twitter as more of a news source than a true social media site. Is that a good thing?
Part of the analysis reported by PCWorld in their article, “Twitter: More a News Medium Than Social Network” refers to the low percentage of reciprocal “follows”. Only 22% of Twitter users choose to include their followers’ tweets on their page.
The high number of celebrities utilizing Twitter also makes it weigh heavy in the new source category versus a social media, i.e. two-way, interactive, etc. site. Because of their dual personalities, Twitter gets a pass on the quantity of marketing that it shares. News sites that share marketing information tend to be more tolerated by users than a pure social networking site. So this makes it good for the marketers, what about the users?
Melody K. Smith, May 5, 2010
Note: Post was not sponsored.
Yahoo and Facebook Envy?
May 5, 2010
The Financial Times doesn’t seem impressed with Yahoo’s moves to integrate Twitter and Facebook in “Yahoo Wants to Do What Facebook Did, Only Slower.” Trying to capitalize on the social search phenomenon, the search giant will soon add social capabilities to the address book, showing you when your Yahoo! friends “comment on Yahoo News stories…rate a song or movie, or otherwise interact with Yahoo content.” Are they too late? Or do they just want to grab some of the social search pie? The FT agrees that it makes sense to keep people engaged with the site longer, but points to a four-year quote from a Yahoo exec about social search’s “power by virtue of tapping untapped authority”. Maybe, secretly, they wish they had come up with a social network for college students.
Samuel Hartman, May 5, 2010
Note: Post not sponsored.
Big Data, Big Problems
May 5, 2010
Short honk: Not all data are created equal. Understanding the difference can also help understand the privacy issues involved. Danah.org took the time to explain the complexities of data, its origin and impact, in “Privacy and Publicity in the Context of Big Data” () They identify big data as the type of data that marketers and researchers and business folks deem valuable – data about people, their activities, their interactions, their behaviors. One of the pertinent points they make is that “big-ness and whole-ness are NOT the same.” In other words, quantity doesn’t equal quality. Think Google? Think Facebook? Worth a read.
Melody K. Smith, May 5, 2010
Note: Post was not sponsored.
IBM and Its Meta Cloud Aspirations
May 5, 2010
IBM is big. One hundred billion in revenues and counting. For a company of its size, IBM has to aim high. The cloud is a potential gold mine for IBM’s consulting divisions. But once the clients have been studied up, IBM wants to sell technology in its many guises. Enter the idea to integrate disparate clouds. I call this a meta-cloud play.
The IBM of today is a cloud in formation. The meta-cloud play is on the horizon. To speed the formation of the meta cloud, IBM acquired Cast Iron Systems. You can get the details in “IBM to Boost Cloud Services with Cast Iron Buy.” Cast iron will add technology and expertise to the IBM arsenal. The play is to put in place a service that hooks different clouds together; hence, a meta play. Integration can be lucrative. Look at Microsoft’s revenues from rolling up word processing and a spreadsheet. IBM wants to follow this type of model. For me the key passage in the write up was:
Cast Iron uses prebuilt software templates for integration rather than writing custom code. This allows cloud integrations to be carried out in days, as opposed to weeks, whether using physical appliances, virtual appliances or a cloud service, according to IBM.
IBM and its meta cloud play. A view from orbit. Source: http://ultraorange.net/media/2008/03/science-earth-from-space-clouds.jpg
My take away is that IBM wants to change the way it deploys cloud services and create an opportunity to build on the hybrid clouds. IBM will sell consulting, software licenses, and custom services. In short, if the plan works, IBM outflanks some pesky competitors and Google, instead of being a near equal, becomes one service provider. Neat.
The challenge will be to make the meta cloud work. In the good old days, clients were rolling in dough and no one ever got fired for buying IBM. Today, cash can be tricky. Sometimes it’s available. Sometimes it’s not. And customers are looking for ways to tap into the promise of the cloud without losing sales, momentum, and data.
The challenge to IBM may come from some unlikely competitors. For example, “do it on a shoestring” Amazon is flexing its cloud muscles in the US Federal market. IBM considers the Federal sector its stomping grounds. There have been some open source wizards poking around cloud solutions that challenge the commercial software model. And there are folks at Google and Microsoft and Oracle who are in the clouds as well.
What about search? If IBM pushes into the meta cloud, my hunch is that IBM may drag Lucene/Solr along and then open the pearly gates to third party vendors who are IBM partners in search and content processing. Will IBM win? It won’t lose.
Stephen E Arnold, May 5, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Mark Logic, Content Automation: Flexibility and Lower Costs
May 4, 2010
I just sat in a technical presentation by Mark Logic wizards (Mark Walsh and Mary Holstege). The highlight was the explanation of Mark Logic enhancements that promise more flexible content automation and lower costs to Mark Logic’s customers. Other points I noted included:
- “Smart” interaction between XQuery and XSLT
- More flexibility in repurposing content
- Lower costs for certain content transformations.
The payoff is that revenue opportunities go up for Mark Logic licensees and the costs of performing certain content transformations goes down. More information is available from www.MarkLogic.com. My impression: important step forward.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2010
Tough Old Birds
May 4, 2010
I am going to be 66. I am a spring chicken compared to two tough birds: Sumner Redstone (films and TV) and Rupert Murdoch (newspapers and Fox News). What could be more enlightening to those under 25 than these roosters opining about content, online, and anything in between? Not much.
First, navigate to “Sumner Redstone Says Murdoch’s Newspapers Will Fail.” The harpoon struck here:
“He [Mr. Murdoch] lives in ink, and I live in movies and television,” Redstone said. “Ink is going to go away, and movies and television will be here forever, like me.”
Spicy? For sure.
Next, point your browser at “Fox News, Rupert Murdoch… All Pirates.” Here’s the passage I noted:
It seems that Murdoch has a double standard when it comes to copyright infringement. Apparently it’s not that bad if he’s the one making money from it.
What I learned was:
- Don’t irritate Mr. Redstone
- Don’t expect consistency from News Corp.
- Steer clear of both outfits.
And search? Not an issue of significance to either top dog.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2010
Unsponsored post.
eBooks and Mobile
May 4, 2010
“Paper View”, which appeared in Mobile Entertainment, provides an interesting glimpse of eBooks in the UK market. For me, the most telling comment in the article was this passage from the CEO of Mobcast:
There was a good deal of support for the no-DRM idea at the Mobcast event. Tony Lynch, CEO of Mobcast, was quite forthright. He said: “The current level of DRM is problematic. But ultimately, obscurity is a bigger problem than piracy. People need to be able to find what they want, and if they can they will buy. The single biggest complaint we get is about availability. That’s what we need to focus on.” Evidence suggests that removing DRM can work and may indeed become the norm in e-books as it is in music. In the 18 months since O’Reilly, the world’s largest publisher of tech books, stopped using DRM on its e-books, sales increased by 104 per cent. Hard to assess how much of that growth was organic, but it’s still a thought-provoking figure.
Common sense may not prevail. The stakes are sufficiently high that companies perceiving themselves as kingpins want control. Right now, I am looking at any reference to open, open source, and standards to try and figure out if these are marketing words or something else.
Apple is the poster child for control. When Apple talks about “standards” and an “open Web”, I have some disambiguation to do.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Simplifying Search, Is It Possible?
May 4, 2010
“iPad Guts Approach to PC Design, Says iSuppli” triggered a thought about enterprise search. The article points out that the iPad eliminates the complexity from personal computers. The interface dictated the operating system. In an effort to create a fool proof system, which required a different approach to a computer. The key passage in my opinion was:
…these design changes will have profound implications for manufacturers. As shipments of the iPad are expected to rise to about 20 million in 2012 up from 7 million forecast in 2010, the “question of which companies in the supply chain will capture the profits (from tablets) will be of major importance in the coming years.
The Google Search Appliance implemented a similar design philosophy. Other vendors offer appliances that eliminate the complexities of configuring dozens if not scores of settings.
Try and tinker with this.
Will enterprise search be simplified? There may be a race between the appliance crowd and the vendors who want to embed search in other applications. This embedding angle is similar to the plastic covers that auto manufacturers put over their engines. Blocking the Saturday mechanic minimizes problems. Will this “blocking” be enough to keep the complexity of search and content processing systems manageable and affordable.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2010
Unsponsored post.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
