Facebook and Social Services Value
January 6, 2011
BusinessWeek is raining on the Facebook / Goldman Sachs’ parade. My view is that whatever Goldman Sachs does is about money. Some folks forget that in my opinion. “Facebook at $50 Billion Looks More Like Tencent Than Google” is a pretty clever write up. First, the title makes the casual reader think of a cheapo metaphor. Tencent is a company, but I am not sure how many folks in Harrod’s Creek know that. Second, BusinessWeek thinks that the $50 billion valuation and the general hoo-hah about the Facebook / Goldman Sachs “deal” is “Buzz, Bloom, Hype.”
I don’t want to hop on the bandwagon. The more I think about deal, the more I think that the two best friends are taking steps to make sure that there is a big pay day. In addition, I think the BusinessWeek story and the other write ups are unlikely to do much more than fan the flames of excitement over Facebook.
The economic climate still troubles me. Bank types need deals. Facebook needs to keep rolling and grabbing mind share. I am not sure Facebook can pull off a deal with China. Russia already seems to be slipping away.
Get the money while the getting is good. The tactics unfolding now are tailored to the present economic climate. I am not sure there is much more to the valuations, the chatter, or the tie up beyond money. I will know if I am right or wrong soon enough.
The Facebook / Goldman Sachs’ affair may end up benefiting other social network services. Compared to the so so news from the consumer electronics show, at least the Facebook / Goldman Sachs’ tie up is interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2011
Freebie
Search and Flexible IT
January 6, 2011
I read “McKinsey: Run IT Like a Flexible ‘Factory‘”. I generally pay some attention to the musings of a blue chip consulting firm. Heck, years ago I did a tiny bit of work for McKinsey in London. This write up shakes my confidence in the wisdom of the blue chip poobahs, however. Keep in mind that I did not chase down a McKinsey partner, nor did I make any effort whatsoever to obtain a copy of the McKinsey research findings. I read the words “flexible factory” and experienced a kidney stone type of pain.
McKinsey is a global outfit, but the methods were honed in the USA that had resources to fuel its MBA economy. Right now, the USA is not number one in my book in designing, building, operating, or managing factories that make stuff. If I want a “flexible factory”, I snag my Chinese business associate and head to China with a stop in Taiwan as a jet lag shaker.
The notion that search and content processing vendors can “run IT like a flexible factory” is interesting, but I don’t think the analogy or the suggestion is on point.
Here’s why:
- Software is more like making art or making an episode of 30 Rock. There are some general guidelines and then all bets are off. Management intervention often guarantees a disaster of one sort or another. A factory, on the other hand, makes stuff. The key is repeatable processes, not art.
- Search and content processing are shipped in a broken state. Yep, I can hear the bleats from those who think commercial search and content processing software is perfect. Some search vendors and search licensees already operate in outsource mode, and I am not sure that it is working much better than the old style method of having a building stuffed with programmers.
- The buzz words sound great but “industrializing” information technology has already happened at Apple, Amazon, Google, and many other places. Industrializing search, like consumerizing search, does little to address the hard problems in information access.
Net net: cost reduction and zero commitment to human resources. No fancy talk needed.
But if a blue chip consultant articulates it, many senior managers will emit a sheep like bleat and follow the sheep herder and his faithful dog.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2011
Freebie because I am no longer a blue chip consultant, just a rental goose in rural Kentucky
IndexPing: A Useful Thing
January 6, 2011
Short honk: A reader sent me a link to IndexPing.com. The free service will send an email to a Web master each time the Googlebot nuzzles that Web site. Quite helpful because, despite the chatter at conferences about the utility of Web logs, not too many people pay attention to them. An arts-and-craft Web traffic report is today’s preferred way to keep tabs on a site’s exit pages.
IndexPing is easy to set up. Plug in your name, email, and Web site. Then within a half hour, maybe less, you will start getting emails that tell you when the Googlebot shows up. I contacted the developer of the site and found him enthusiastic and responsive, two qualities that other tech companies might do well to cultivate.
How does the site make money? You get a couple of sites free, then you pay. The goslings here in Harrod’s Creek were impressed with this useful service. Navigate to www.indexping.com and give it a whirl.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2011
Freebie unlike the SEO crowd’s graphically rich reports about baloney
Manifold CF for Open Source SharePoint Search
January 6, 2011
Although we think Microsoft Fast is the cat’s pajamas for enterprise search, some Microsoft SharePoint admins may want have an interest in an open source alternative. Manifold CF (formerly known as Apache Connectors Framework) is undergoing incubation at Apache. If you’re not familiar with this project, it is explained as follows: “ManifoldCF is an effort to provide build and support an open source framework for connecting source content repositories like Microsoft SharePoint and EMC Documentum, to target repositories or indexes, such as Apache Solr.” One of our open source contacts reminded us that ManifoldCF was the Lucene Connectors Framework.
The ManifoldCF splash page says that the project is in incubation:
Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects. While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
The info page adds, “There are currently no released versions of ManifoldCF available, although one is planned However, a trunk svn checkout has been built and successfully hand-tested. Nightly builds and online javadoc will be coming shortly.” Worth watching.
Alice Wasielewski, January 6, 2011
Amazon Moves to Fill a Google Gap
January 6, 2011
The articles about Amazon’s up market Android store caught my attention. I found “Amazon Preps Up market US Android App Emporium” spot on. The story said:
Amazon is inviting Android developers to upload their applications for listing in a better class of app store, at a price set by Amazon and only available within the USA. The application store will launch later this year, but developers who sign up now get a free year before they have to start stumping up the $99 annual fee. For their money, developers get listed in a store that reviews every application submitted, and rejects the tat as well as the unstable or inadequately tested, but more importantly Amazon can offer access to shoppers who only dropped in to buy a book.
Seems harmless enough, but I don’t think it is a harmless move and I think this app store marks the beginning of more skirmishing between Amazon and Google.
Here’s why:
- Google, despite a ream of ecommerce patent documents and technical papers, is still breathing Amazon’s exhaust fumes in ecommerce. Amazon is just being Amazon or what I characterize as Bezosly. Moving quickly with only a modest incremental investment required.
- Google has not been able to get much traction for its own app stores. The Chrome app store seems like a close out at a Border’s book store. Not much excitement in my opinion. The Android app store is more lively, but the quality of the products make shopping as risky as buying from a street vendor in Cartagena, Colombia.
- Amazon is hedging its bets. Striking at the Google when it is not laser focused on value added software sales could ace Google out of a potentially hefty revenue stream. If one of those apps takes off, Amazon might step in and engineer a deal. As I said, a Bezosly move.
What will Google do? Gee, I don’t know. Read the book with a similar title.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2011
Freebie
Google May Go Even FAR-ther
January 5, 2011
Short honk: I read a news item in the online Wall Street Journal with the title “Google Wins One Against Microsoft.” The link may have the life span of a may fly. Nevertheless, if accurate, Google’s challenge to a statement of work that stipulates Microsoft technology has been stamped “A Okay.” Wow. My view of the Google challenge was that Google should get involved in the Request for Information process and assist government agencies in formulating their SOWs. Guess I was wrong. The implications of this victory are significant. Will Federal contracting methods get out of the traditional hiking paths? With the law on its side, the Google may be even more formidable.
Stephen E Arnold, January 5, 2011
Freebie
Naming Search Systems: The False Hit Challenge
January 5, 2011
Run a query for Thunderstone, the pioneer in search appliances and highly configurable systems. You get links to a rock and roll band. Our Brainware feed reader returns stories that hit on crazy videos and not too much information about the trigram technology that distinguishes Brainware from other search vendors.
The name of a search system is important. Get the name wrong and it becomes difficult to locate specific information about a search system. From the number of inquiries I get about search vendors, I think the names are becoming a more significant part of the company’s presentation of its capabilities.
A recent example is Mindbreeze, the search arm of Fabasoft in Austria. Now the Mindbreeze search product must contend with the disambiguation challenge: the picture.
For anyone considering a name for a search technology, checking for overlaps is a useful step. Then once a name is in hand, that name has to be managed to ensure that a person looking for the company can locate relevant information. In the new world of non objective search, the name is the thing. For search, marketing–not technology–is the differentiator in 2011 in our opinion.
Whitney Grace, January 5, 2011
Freebie
The Facebook – Goldman Sachs Tie Up
January 5, 2011
The pundits are on the move. The cattle prod was the deal between Facebook and Goldman Sachs. Sure, a Russian outfit had its beak in the bird bath, but the real action was Goldman’s alleged $450 million. You can read “What Everyone Seems to Miss In Facebook’s Private or Public Debate…” and learn the real secret behind the deal: Accountability to its customers. Okay. The Reuters’ take is that the New York Times’s analysis is wrong headed. Interpretation of SEC rules, guidelines, and letters is a tricky even when the SEC tries to explain a point clearly. “Why Facebook Won’t go Public” makes the deal an exercise in fortune telling.
The view from Harrod’s Creek is different. Facebook is hot. Goldman Sachs wants a piece of the action and to be in a position of control or at least to have a shot at control. The reason for the deal is money. Mr. Zuckerberg and his band of Xooglers understand Goldman Sachs’ magic when it comes to money.
Customer care, SEC prose, and other explanations of the deal are groupthink. Why make more of the deal than it is: A deal about money for Facebookers and Goldman Sachs. What about the other investors? Maybe.
Stephen E Arnold, January 5, 2011
Freebie
Deinstalling Oracle Text
January 5, 2011
We received an email from one of our two or three readers asking about this link to Oracle’s own documentation for deinstalling Oracle Text. The link is to Oracle’s Help Web site, but when you click the link to the deinstallation information, you are greeted with a log in screen.
What does one do if the engineer working on the deinstallation does not have a user name and password. Clients have been known to lose track of these items in our experience. Trial and error is not a recommended approach. Oracle Text works its way into the “Oracle environment” and can become irritated if tasks are not undertaken in the prescribed order. Fooling around can create quite a bit of excitement. Data corruption, anyone?
If you need deinstallation information, you may want to navigate to Net Cry. There is a non password protected guide to walk you the process: “Manual installation, deinstallation of Oracle Text 10gR1 and 10gR2.” We can’t guarantee that it is congruent with Oracle’s method, but you will find a step-by-step description without any frills and if you read carefully, it should answer all your questions.
Whitney Grace, January 5, 2011
Freebie
OpenText Cares
January 5, 2011
Vendors claim that their clients are the most important parts of their companies. They back up this claim with automated customer service hotlines and technical support that creates more answers than questions. OpenText/NStein has released a press statement to assure their clients that they will be treated with respect and care: “OpenText/Nstein’s ongoing commitment to our WCM’s customers.” Here’s a snippet:
“When you contact your Customer Care Center, we readily check for improvements that may have been made for your version of WCM and often customize existing patches for your needs. These patches and fixes are all based on improvements built in the newer versions of WCM; they were ultimately inspired by your ideas and suggestions to the Customer Care Centre and our long experience in content management.”
We find that statements about ongoing commitments are thought provoking. Why make them if the commitment is evident to licensees? Just a question to consider.
Whitney Grace, January 5, 2011
Freebie
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
