Big Enterprise Open Source Tactics Questioned
June 5, 2011
The H Open asks, “Time for Amazon to Pay Its Dues to Open Source?”
We are starting to lean in the direction of agreement with writer Glyn Moody’s question. Big companies are more flamboyant than Lady Gaga when it comes to their open sourciness.
Moody opens with a reference to Google’s successful Summer of Code program, which funds student developers who write open source code. This is an example of the right way to approach the open source community. If you take, you must give back. Not legally, but morally. And in the interest of public relations.
Apparently, Amazon doesn’t share this belief. The article goes on at length about that company’s weak return to the open source community. It does acknowledge a small, old contribution to source code from 2004. Moody is disappointed in particular that Amazon has failed to release the source code for the Kindle.
In summary, he writes:
Like Google with its Android system, Amazon too has a Linux-based product that promises to turn its market completely on its head. . . .Amazon’s contribution to the open source world seems pretty minimal. That’s not only ungrateful, it’s unwise. It’s in Amazon’s best interests that the projects it depends on thrive: the better they become, the better Amazon’s infrastructure and products will work.
Amazon is taking an interesting path in open source. We’ll see where it leads them in the long run. Our hunch is that the path will head toward the walled garden in the hamlet of Profit.
Cynthia Murrell, June 5, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Cloud Crashes: Just One Villain!
June 5, 2011
The article “Cloud Outages: Why Storage Is the Real Villain” surprised me. My understanding of the high profile cloud problems is that there were different types of problems. Some of these were external such as Sony’s inability to keep hackers from penetrating the once proud manufacturer of the Walkman.
Amazon had intraprocess issues. Google’s Blogger went south due to a process issue. The recent Gmail problem is, according to probably specious news reports, China. (Google blames China, which is okay, just a bit repetitious in my view.) Microsoft Exchange did those wild and wonderful Windows ME sorts of things just in Microsoft hosted services, not on my neighbor’s computer.
Here is the passage that caught my attention in the ZDNet write up:
But first and foremost, we have to recognize that the real issues with storage-as-a-service are caused by inadequacies in storage technology, not by the concept itself. We have to address those problems rather than lay responsibility at the feet of cloud computing.
I agree that since Amazon Web Service’s flamed out in April 2011, the cloud looks less like a solution and more like YAP (yet another problem).
Considering the number of companies which are testing and using “cloud computing”, these issues may give some customers a sleepless night or two.
When I worked through the ZDNet write up, I was interested in boiling down some quite different problems to storage. Sure, storage is an issue and it may have been the problem at Amazon. However, the article casts a wider net and catches a whopper, letting the other and tastier fish slip through the weave in the logic. I
If anything, we should be examining the current model of cloud computing more, not less. Tightening the logic net around cloud computing seems like a reasonable step. If one is looking for information, and the cloud based enterprise search system fails, what then? Storage is not the problem, is it?
Stephen E Arnold, June 5, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Do Not Compete with Google Maps: Okay, Apple, Roll Over. Die.
June 5, 2011
I write columns for money. I try to come up with new angles because the amount of information, the number of pundits, and the near instantaneous musings of SEO experts, fan boys, and cats’ paws leaves few rhetorical stones unturned. As a result, I point out some wacky ideas, offer my views, document the source, and move on.
The article “Google Maps: Five Reasons that Apple, Others Shouldn’t Even Try to Compete” reminded me of some of the campaign rhetoric from the last presidential election. On the surface, the idea seems worth considering. Then, after a few moments of thought, the assertion is downright crazy. More about this wackiness in a moment.
The gist of the write up is that Google is the Amerigo Vespucci of Silicon Valley. If you are not Amerigo, find a new line of work. The dude is the cartographer to die for. Here’s a snippet that captures this notion:
Google has raised the bar to a level where any other mapping product that hits the market will have to invest in building something that’s more than just a map and more like a map platform. It would be a rough road – and a silly one to venture on for Apple – seeing how Google has raised the bar so high.
This logic ranks with such gems as “Everything that can be invented has been invented,” attributed to Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, in 1899.
Assume the logic of this write up is spot on. Then why is Google emulating Apple, trying to catch Facebook, and working to insinuate itself into the enterprise? Oh, maybe that’s different?
My thought is that a little Google love may be noticed in Mountain View. Here is Harrod’s Creek, the write up is one indication why “real” journalists should run for office. The verbal approach is darned similar. What is good for the goose is just good for the goose. Apple, just get out of Google’s way. Better yet just give up. Roll over. Die even. I wonder who wants a gig at the GOOG?
Stephen E Arnold, June 5, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Caller ID and the Smartphone
June 4, 2011
With the infiltration of smart phones, this app was just a matter of time. True Software has created TrueCaller, which brings caller-id functionality to smart phones.
Because it searches “Yellow- and white-pages from around the world,” it not only lets users know who’s calling, it can update phonebook contacts. TrueCaller includes an extensive filter for fraud, spam, and unwanted calls.
While there are other caller-id apps out there, the additional functionality in this one makes it stand out in the crowd. These are features users have wanted when it comes to any kind of phone. It’s a nice example of technology meeting a need.
Another enhancement for mobile findability.
Rita Safranek, June 4, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Google Strikes Sparkbuy
June 4, 2011
Search Engine Watch reports “Google Buys Electronics Search Engine Sparkbuy.” The innovators behind the young startup seem surprised at their success. Though declining to reveal details about the deal, the company has posted a giddy letter to its customers on its Web site.
The Search Engine Watch article explains Sparkbuy’s service:
Built in late 2010 and launched just two months ago in March, Shapiro created the VC and angel-backed Sparkbuy because ‘using traditional search engines such as Bing and Google to search for laptops, TVs or other electronics is kind of like trying to find a needle in a haystack.’ Sparkbuy is to consumer electronics search what Expedia or Kayak are to travel search.
The news was timely for the Sparkbuy team, because they had begun to grasp how widely their methodology could apply if they but had the resources.
Voila! Now they will be working at Google to bring their algorithmic talents beyond electronics, starting with Advisor, Google’s new mortgage, credit card, and bank account comparison site.
Congratulations, guys. Will you work on your product or are you Google human resources?
Cynthia Murrell, June 4, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Libraries: Another Plea
June 4, 2011
In his “The Future of the Library” essay, Seth Godin highlights the roots of public libraries and librarians and their future.
He aptly points out that
the librarian isn’t a clerk who happens to work at a library. A librarian is a data hound, a guide, a sherpa and a teacher. The librarian is the interface between reams of data and the untrained but motivated user.
I am not too keen on the sherpa thing. But the point is one with which the Beyond Search team agrees.
With the rise of services like Netflix and technologies like ebooks, libraries are no longer just about lending books and movies. They need to re-imagine their mission to stay relevant. He notes:
Just in time for the information economy, the library ought to be the local nerve center for information.
The library of the future features ”a librarian who can bring domain knowledge and people knowledge and access to information to bear.” Information overload is real. Microsoft tapped into the frustration to market its Bing search engine. Godin presents exciting future for both libraries and librarians if both are willing to change.
Rita Safranek, June 4, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Apple versus Google: Whose $100 Million Worked Harder?
June 3, 2011
I just finished reading “Google’s CEO Steps into Spotlight.” There was one item that jumped off the page in my opinion; to wit:
For the media, “it’s much more interesting — what is the latest crazy thing that Google did,” Page said. “It tends to be like three people in the company, keep that in mind. We are not betting the farm on a lot of those things. That’s not what we are doing.” Still, Page said, now-crucial products like Android and Chrome started off as technological long-shots, and there were few hostile questions from the roughly 250 shareholders who attended the annual meeting. “We don’t want to choke innovation. We want to make sure we have a lot of things going on at the company that are maybe speculative,” Page said, quickly adding, “we spend the vast majority of our resources on our core businesses, which are search and advertising. … That’s our core focus.”
The number of articles about the shareholders’ meeting and the comments of Google founder and CEO cover most of the angles. There is little that I can add other than point out the use of the word “crazy” in the phrase “the latest crazy thing that Google did.” Oh, I want to mention that my reading skills are not so hot. I thought I detected an interesting logic stream in the comment about “technoloigcal long shots”, “choke innovation”, and “our core businesses, which are search and advertising.” I interpreted these phrases as suggessting that Google does need crazy things.
The more pragmatic “thing” today is the news that Apple’s $100 million was different from Google’s alleged $100 million to music companies. Here was Google talking about the core of search and advertising, and at roughly the same time, Apple seemed to cement its grip on music in the cloud. Here’s a comment from “Major Labels, Music Publishers Lining up behind Apple’s iCloud” from the Los Angeles Times with the part I noted in bold face:
Apple, whose iTunes music store is the dominant purveyor of music downloads with between 75% and 85% of the market, has been carefully monitoring moves by rival Amazon.com as well as newcomers to the digital music space, including Google and, in Europe, Spotify.
Google has not been able to marginalize Apple. The notion of having apps in the cloud is a good one. What Apple has achieved is getting money directly from people via its walled garden approach. I don’t think of Apple doing “crazy” stuff. I don’t think of Apple taking long shots in today’s unsettled financial climate. I don’t think of Apple mired in legal hassles worldwide. I don’t think of Apple accusing countries of trying to access user data. In fact, I see Google as a company working hard to explain that online advertising and search are the foundation of Google.
I do not disagree. Google is an extension of AltaVista.com and other precursor search systems. Google is an evolution of Yahoo’s Overture (GoTo.com) ad business. The challenge for Google is to find a way to cope with the world beyond AltaVista.com search and beyond the online ad models from the traditional world of online.
Android is a start. It is arguably more successful than Apple’s mobile platform. Chrome is a start. It is arguably more successful than other cloud netbook operating systems if there are any.
Shareholders want Apple style revenues and profits. Shareholdeers want excitement too. But shareholders want performance. Me too plays, non magnetic $100 million deals, and long shots that become winners do not seem to be operating at the level of efficiency that an Indianapolis 500’s race car engine requires. Google is in the race. Can it make up lost time and, if it does, can it retain the lead in hot new markets where advertising may be only part of the revenue model and search is vastly different from the AltaVista.com method from the mid 1990s.
Apple’s $100 million may have worked harder. Google’s may not have worked yet. What is interesting is that Google’s future may be increasingly shaped by Amazon, Apple, and Facebook, not “crazy” stuff.
Stephen E Arnold, June 3, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Disinformation: A Useful Factoid
June 3, 2011
When can too much information be bad? When it comes to a group, so says Wired Science in “Sharing Information Corrupts Wisdom of Crowds.”
Newly-released research on crowd wisdom finds that “when test participants were told about their peers’ guesses,” test results when awry. It appears that “knowledge about estimates of others narrows the diversity of opinions to such an extent that it undermines collective wisdom.”
The results confirm one of James Surowiecki’s tenets behind crowd analytics from his 2004 book “The Wisdom of Crowds.” In it, he discusses four conditions necessary to promote the phenomenon, one of which is that each individual in the group should have private information.
The news that the information people receive influences their decision making is no revelation to advertisers and educators, who have relied on it for years. In theory, members of the group would come to valid conclusions based on good data. However, the crowd can just as easily be influenced by bad information, giving a new meaning to garbage in, garbage out.
Disinformation has another tool methinks.
Stephen E Arnold, June 3, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Does Money Mesh with a Moral Operating System?
June 3, 2011
Does high tech need a moral compass? Google director of engineering and in-house philosopher Damon Horowitz’s presentation at TEDx Silicon Valley is detailed in VentureBeat’s “Google’s In-House Philosopher: Technologists Need a ‘Moral Operating System.’”
Instead of addressing questions that philosophers like John Stuart Mill and Emmanuel Kant have wrestled with for centuries, technology makers don’t “think about the morality of their products — they just build stuff and let other people worry about the ethics.”
Being on the wrong side of ethical issues is nothing new for high tech companies. Recently, Cisco, which claims that “A strong commitment to ethics is critical to our long-term success as a company,” was sued for allegedly supplying the Chinese government with computer-networking equipment used to spy on and persecute members of the Falun Gong spiritual movement. Facebook’s privacy issues are well-documented. IBM is so committed to the idea that it created a strict code of ethics that is monitored by the IBM Professional Practices Committee.
I submitted a column to Information Today about Google’s shift from search to knowledge. That’s a pretty philosophically-charged move. I am not sure when that write up will appear in print. Publications seem to cut issues and revamp with a nimbleness that reminds me of my slow but sure ossification.
The problem with a giant company getting into the philosophy business is that it is mostly PR. The objective of a commercial enterprise is to make money, generate a profit, and survive. Morality? I find the notion of morality somewhat interesting but not much of a factor when competitors threaten, a core revenue stream experiences low blood pressure, and lawyers circle, flap, and drop paper like rain on a mid April afternoon in the Ohio Valley.
So, when it comes to an American enterprise’s moral operating system, I just ignore the pitch. Irrelevant but invigorating to the alphabet generations.
Stephen E Arnold, June 3, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Microsoft and Facebook: More Pain for the Google
June 3, 2011
In the latest shot across the bow in the war between Microsoft and Google, Wired is reporting that “Bing Bumps Facebook Options to Outsocial Google.”
Now, “when you search Bing after associating your Bing account and Facebook accounts, you’ll see more faces of your friends.” “Microsoft, a minority shareholder in Facebook, is betting that data from Facebook will make its search superior to Google’s dominant search engine.”
ZDNet’s “Bing Adds More Facebook Features to Social Search” details five Facebook-related Bing updates, which include shared shopping lists and expanded Facebook profile searching. The write up asserts:
“Microsoft data shows that nearly half of people say seeing their friend’s Likes within search results could help them make better decisions.”
It’s interesting to consider all this information sharing in the context of crowd wisdom. In our opinion, the real point of these innovations is to keep Google looking at tail lights in the race to social content’s 24 hour hamburger joint.
Rita Safranek, June 3, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
