Vivisimo Now at Version 8 of Velocity
October 11, 2010
The news release fooled me. The title was “Vivisimo Releases Velocity 8.0, New Version of Its Market Leading Information Optimization Platform.” (News release links can go dark. You may have to poke around for the source document.) I continue to think of Vivisimo as a company with an on-the-fly clustering function that makes results from metasearch results useful. No more. Velocity 8,0 is an “information optimization platform”, a phrase that means about as much to me as “taxonomy governance,” about which I commented on Linked In last week.
Terminology aside, the new release of Velocity includes:
- Hit boosting. The idea is that a certain piece of information can be placed at the top of a results list
- Support for Microsoft SharePoint
- Tweaks to scaling
- A query auto complete function.
There are other enhancements. You can find these described at www.vivisimo.com. Hmmm. “Information optimization platform.” Another platform, another interesting way to describe information retrieval. Whatever works is okay with me.
Stephen E Arnold, October 11, 2010
Freebie
Quote to Note: Time Warner on Content vs Interface
October 10, 2010
I spotted a quote to note in the Hollywood Report’s story “time Warner CEO Calls Google an Ally.” That is a high potential phrase “Google an ally”. What caught my attention is that statement in the write up:
Said Bewkes [Time Warner big dog]: “When all of the content on the big screen works like the content on the little screen, what will happen? The programming will trump the interface.”
Yesterday we dusted off our old Apple TV and fired up two iPads, an iPhone, and two desktop Macs. We wanted to see what happened when we tried to use the iPads and the iPhone to control the Apple TV. Now I have some reasonably alert goslings helping me with this type of one in a million test, but we were indeed puzzled. The big iMac lit up and showed what looked like an iTunes interface and then closed the app. The little iMac took over. The Apple TV and the iMac auto discovered the iPhone, but the two iPads required some fiddling to get the codes into the Apple TV.
No big deal, but we concluded:
- If the auto-magic stuff doesn’t work, most folks are going to be baffled
- The interfaces across the Apple computers, the iPad and the Apple TV were different enough to give us some serious hunt and browse work.
- The potential for major home entertainment chaos is pretty high.
In short, the quote to note makes clear that a content company (albeit one in a state of change) sees the world as hungry for content. The hapless user may indeed want to watch content but if the interface sucks, no joy.
Like any complex system, the components have to work seamlessly. At this time, not even Apple has the rough edges polished. Does this tell us anything about the rush of new “consumer” add ons for one’s TV entering the market? I still can’t use my remotes without a magnifying glass and the Windows Office ribbon continues to baffle me. I must be one in a million goose.
Stephen E Arnold, October 10, 2010
Google Oracle and a Cup of Java
October 10, 2010
I don’t understand how the legal methods work in the US. Oracle files suit. I read in Digital Daily that Google has responded with its own request. “Google Asks Court to Toss Oracle’s Android Lawsuit” informed me that
the search sovereign filed an answer to Oracle’s suit, denying all seven of its patent-infringement charges, and asking that the company’s copyright-infringement claim be dismissed because Google (GOOG) feels it is “legally deficient.”
My take on this particular matter is that Google is a big, fat, easy, rich target. The fact that a company that was a Google- Search-Appliance tolerant outfit has lost patience with Android. The vehicle for the annoyance is Java, a programming language that I had assumed was available for anyone to use. I remember of old “write once, run anywhere” pitch from my long ago tie up with Kendara. That team used Java to create a personalized experience and the technology ended up in the hot hands of the AT&T @Home folks.
Now one needs a lot of time and a lawyer sitting near by to figure out what the next move will be. Oracle and Google: A pretty interesting spat. It was until Microsoft aimed its legal eagles at Motorola in order to take a whack at the GOOG.
My question: After 12 years, isn’t it a bit late to try and corral Googzilla. I remember those briefings I was doing in 2004 and 2005. Telcos and the world’s biggest software company just snorted. Now it is not snorting it is hyperventilating.
The collateral implications of the Oracle Google matter may spill over into the Wild West of open source software. Whenever smart attorneys take over from technologists, the unpredictable becomes the new normal.
Maybe it is a bit too late. I just read Android is the most popular operating system in US among recent smartphone buyers. What happened to Apple? Research in Motion? The Kin?
Did Yogi Berra really say, “It gets late early out there.”
Stephen E Arnold, October 10, 2010
Freebie sort of like Android and its sweet names
Apple and Mirror Worlds: Seeing Double?
October 10, 2010
Short honk: The Mirror Worlds’ interface used a stack of cards metaphor. I have a screenshot floating around or had a screenshot floating around. I saw the interface in the mid 1990s. I thought it was cool because a query returned results in my favorite format—note cards in a stack. My recollection is that the most recent or more relevant items were at the top of the stack and the others receded to a vanishing point.
I read “Apple Hit With $625 Million Judgment in Patent Suit Over Cover Flow, Spotlight, Time Machine.” Apparently the US legal system saw some similarities between Apple’s technologies and interface elements and Mirror Worlds’ approach. I am no attorney, but the dust up reminds me that “new” is a matter of perspective and knowledge. When I attend a meeting with oh-so-confident 30 somethings, I am reminded that reinventing the wheel is a way of life. Sometimes the reinvention runs off the rim. More legal arabesques ahead. Now about that UX of thinking about paying those millions.
Stephen E Arnold, October 10, 2010
Freebie unlike patent litigation among oh-so-confident attorneys
A Google Triple
October 9, 2010
It has been a long day. More than 300 people coding and chatting. The goslings and I flapped around the Lucene Revolution and survived the debate among some industry big dogs.
After the crowd thinned, I flipped through my newsreader and spotted three items in quick succession. Are these true? Who knows? I did find the three items taken as a bap, bap, bap quite suggestive.
First, the Google according to one of the super confident Web traffic outfits accounts for 72 percent of searches in September 2010. The story ran in Search Engine Watch. Is that a monopoly? I sure don’t know, but that’s a hefty chunk of the market.
Second, with that many users, I assumed that happiness was a warm puppy or at least a warm Googzilla. Not according to the Better Business Bureau. “Google Gets a C-Minus for Customer Service” reports that Google, despite its A+ in math has received a dull normal in helping those customers. As a C minus goose, dull normal is not too bad or is it two bad? For the Hahvad bound, gloom falls or is it fails?
Third, “Former FTC Staffer Files a Complaint against Google” contains some allegations. The story asserts:
the search engine and advertising outfit shares data with third parties. Soghoian doesn’t mince words, asking the FTC to “compel Google to take proactive steps to protect the privacy of individual users’ search terms”. His complaint also includes the aforementioned allegations of personal information being shared with third parties.
One wonders why the US government agency fiddled while Rome smoked?
Now, assume these statements from three sources are semi-accurate. The customer thing seems to be like one of those social type things, not a math type thing. Bap, bap, bap.
Stephen E Arnold, Octobenwsr 9, 2010
Freebie or is it furby? It’s a C minus thing.
Google TV: Interesting Assessment
October 9, 2010
Short honk: The Google TV is marching to a store near Harrod’s Creek. The 20 somethings are eager. The Sony executives are more than eager. Those folks are hoping a Google Sony tie up will undo the Kutaragi era, the Apple era, and the Samsung era. That’s a lot of eras to remediate. Logitech is on board too. From mouse to big consumer sales. Quite an evolutionary path.
I found the estimable Washington Post’s article “Google Airs More Details about Google TV” quite interesting. Of course, “real journalism” is much better than blog baloney. I recall that the Washington Post once owned and maybe still does own a TV station. This quote resonated:
So it may come down to balancing two different sorts of pain: the ongoing irritation of a dumb and clumsy cable or satellite DVR interface versus the onetime frustration of setting up a Google TV box to control that DVR through an infrared remote-control relay. Which sounds like less fun to you?
I don’t know. Both choices strike me as lousy. I don’t watch much TV unlike my neighbors hanging at the River Creek Inn. Hardly a ringing endorsement for any of the tech titans consumer plays. Maybe Apple is on to something with its tiny, economical box? I will never know. TV. Wasteland for Newton and wasteland for me.
Stephen E Arnold, October 9, 2010
Freebie
Face-Oogle or Goog-Book?
October 9, 2010
I found the information in this write up fascinating–“Facebook Stealing Google’s Staff.” And consider this factoid, which may or may not be spot on, “12.5 percent of Facebookers are ex-Googlers.” Why fiddle around with a personnel or human resources function? Those Googlers know that there may be a pot of gold in the Facebook parking lot. I found this take on the Xooglers different from my reaction:
All we know for sure is that the exodus to the social networking site represents less than one percent of Google’s estimated 22,000 staff, and Google can really afford to lose a few people here and there when it’s rolling in such vast sums on money.
My hunch is that the zest of the Google is waning. “Zest” in this case includes dough or the hope of dough, birds of a feather, and some of the ethos of the pre 2007 Google. Make up your own mind. Anyone care to speculate on what impact the Xooglers will have on Facebook’s marketing methods?
Stephen E Arnold, October 9, 2010
Freebie
Oracle and Its Big Stick
October 9, 2010
Giants can be scary, but not necessarily bad. It’s natural to feel intimidated by a company larger than normal, controlling most operations around you, but then most companies vie to be in such a powerful position. Bob Evans presents such reasoning in his article “Global CIO: Oracle’s Success Breeds Fear And Loathing At New York Times,” and counters the allegations made on the tech giant Oracle.
It’s true that Oracle has been on an acquisition-spree in the past five years, buying out 66 companies in a stint to become the most-profitable and biggest tech company, displacing Microsoft. Judging by the pace of Oracle’s conquest some feel that Oracle is flexing its muscles a bit too much, and fear that they would end-up risking everything on one endeavor. However, the author feels this shouldn’t be taken as Oracle’s heavy-handed dominance. We believe it’s time we shed our dogmatic thinking, because to be big and have self-interest is no sin.
Harleena Singh, October 9, 2010
Freebie
Lucene Revolution Day 1 Observations
October 8, 2010
The Lucene Revolution is into its second day. More than 300 professionals crowded the sessions and huddled over iPads, Macbooks, and netbooks. The subject? Open source search.
Originally I wanted to summarize the presentations that caught my attention. But the slide decks will be available at www.lucenerevolution.com next week. I wanted to highlight two points that stuck in my mind.
First, the folks younger than I were chatting and coding with enthusiasm. What became clear to me is that few of these young men and women would be beating a path to commercial software anytime soon. The ethos of open source search is different from what happens at more traditional conferences. Peering into the future is pretty easy after listening to the talks at this conference. Commercial software will continue to exist and thrive. But open source is going to play a role. The only question is how large that part will be and how commercial enterprise search vendors will react.
The other thought that struck me is that many of the people with whom I spoke combined two points of view. On one hand, open source search systems provide a viable alternative to commercial search systems available from many vendors. The idea of a community was important. But the open source notion permits a number of business opportunities. These range from code components available for a license fee, consulting, training, and hybrid business models.
A couple of speakers referenced the notion of open source as disruptive; that is, newcomers taking money from the established vendors. No one laughed at these references because the notion is the underpinning of the open source business models.
My view: open source is not going away. The trajectory of open source is, however, difficult for me to predict with confidence. Surprises ahead I think.
Stephen E Arnold, October 8. 2010
Sponsored post
Sophia Embraces Semantic and Contextual Search
October 8, 2010
We came across a search that more effectively identifies and understands information based on its context, helping the users to search relevant information. This is Sophia Search, product of Sophia, a Belfast-based innovation leader in contextual enterprise search solutions, which as per the Marketwire.com press release, “Update: Sophia Launches Sophia Search for Intelligent Enterprise Search and Contextual Discovery,” is already creating waves.
We have seen traditional search solutions that use taxonomies and ontologies, but this remarkable search uses a patented Contextual Discovery Engine (CDE), based on the linguistic model of Semiotics. Summarizing about Sophia Search the press release states, “The CDE platform automatically detects relationships and themes in unstructured content to enable organizations to seamlessly search, extract, deduplicate and eliminate redundancy of content to minimize risk and reduce the cost of retrieving, storing, and managing information.”
The semantic and contextual search will go a long way, and Sophia Search is surely a good pioneering start.
Harleena Singh, October 8, 2010
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
