DataStax Brings Enterprise Security to NoSQL
February 4, 2013
The next generation of the DataStax data management platform will be made available at the end of February. DataStax Enterprise 3.0 attempts to tie the flexibility of NoSQL databases to the security features enterprises have come to expect. Kristen Bent covers all the details for CRN in her story, “DataStax Merges Enterprise Security, NoSQL In Big Data Platform.”
The new platform is described:
“The new platform, dubbed DataStax Enterprise (DSE) 3.0, is targeted at organizations looking to adopt NoSQL databases — a type of next-generation, non-relational database optimized for big data — without sacrificing the robust security features native to more traditional SQL databases, explained Robin Schumacher, vice president of products at DataStax.“
While DataStax Enterprise 3.0 may be the latest in security technology for NoSQL-based solutions, some would still say that it is not quite as secure as more traditional options. Apache Lucene and Solr are the standards in the world of enterprise search, and provide a stable and predictable environment upon which to build. Industry trusted solutions like LucidWorks, which utilize the power of Lucene and Solr, might be a less risky solution for security in the enterprise.
Emily Rae Aldridge, February 4, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
Google Wants To Turn The Music Up
February 4, 2013
The Internet rests in the hands of a few powerful companies and each has successfully dominated their own corner. While each company continues to seek to outdo its rivals, they are also moving onto another mass media tool: television. Users are as addicted to television as they are to social networking. Whoever can conquer the dish and cable companies will be a champion, but the Internet moguls have to start small…like music videos. Readwrite explains that “Google/YouTube To invest In Music Distributor Vevo?”
Google already dominates Internet video distribution with its YouTube acquisition. YouTube also houses music videos of popular artists, but Google wants more than illegal uploads. Vevo already distributes popular music videos through YouTube and Google is expected to invest around $67 million in it.
“If it happens, the deal will solidify a shaky, three-year relationship. Vevo is a top traffic driver on YouTube, the largest video site on the Web and second-most-popular video search engine. Vevo, a joint venture between Universal Music, Sony Music and Abu Dhabi Media, threatened to remove its videos from YouTube last July unless Google’s YouTube fees were lowered, and even went so far as to pursue publishing arrangements with Viacom’s MTV and Facebook.”
The deal guarantees that Vevo will not withdraw its content and keep users flowing to the Web site. It’s great for users too, because Facebook’s player sucks. Are music videos the first battle to be won in the upcoming TV wars? We think so.
Whitney Grace, February 04, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
Microsoft Wants In On Social Search
February 4, 2013
Facebook’s Graph Search launched recently and quick as a hare Microsoft follows with its own social search. ZDNet reports that “Bing And Beyond: How Microsoft Is Attacking ‘Social Search.’” Microsoft is not a social networking company, but it does use Bing’s social sidebar to sync with Facebook. Microsoft now allows more Facebook content via the social sidebar. How much? An average of five times more information from links, status updates, photos, and all the usual Facebook content.
Microsoft and Facebook already have an ongoing deal and the PC-maker wanted to remind users of its existence:
“Microsoft officials played up the increased Facebook integration in a January 17 Bing Community blog post. Two days ago, when Facebook announced its Graph Search technology, the Bing team reminded users that Microsoft is still providing Web search for Facebook. Bing isn’t providing any of the back-end search for Graph Search, however.”
Microsoft and Facebook may be partners right now, but judging how Facebook is trying to compete with Google search by developing an in-house search tool. They might be closer to a dissolution than we think. Microsoft sounds like the gold star student, who is suddenly replaced by a new kid. Microsoft is standing in the back and waving its hand, “I can do that too! Don’t forget about me!”
Whitney Grace, February 04, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
Foursquare Emulates Google PageRank
February 4, 2013
Let’s all copy Google! Not really, but many Web sites are trying to follow Google’s success by emulating them in as many was as possible. Sometimes it creates a direct carbon copy (or copy and paste file for the younglings), but other times it creates something even better. The Next Web reports that “Map 500M Foursquare Checkins Demonstrates How They Built A ‘Google PageRank For The Real World.’” Foursquare is a social networking site dedicated for the active user to rank and find interesting places in their hometown or anywhere else. It has practical uses that one may find more useful, because the information is constantly changing:
“Foursquare says that it likes to think of its recommendation system as a “Google PageRank for the real world.” The PageRank system is a closely guarded algorithm that determines the worth of pages based off of a bunch of mutable and constantly being tweaked factors. That worth valuation is what surfaces one link over another when you plug something into a Google Search box.”
On the business end, Foursquare is also good for marketing and boosting sales. Businesses can use it to get in touch with customers and let them know about the latest news. Real world information in a snap! This is what mobile marketing and social networking was designed for.
Whitney Grace, February 04, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
A Search Death Report a Decade Too Late
February 3, 2013
I wrote a feature for Searcher Magazine in 2003 called “In Search of…the Good Search.” The original title was “Search Is Dead.” I picked up the theme in a number of Beyond Search articles; for example, “The Search Is Dead Question.”
I was interested in the February 2013 write up “The End of the Web, Computers, and Search as We Know It.” The main idea is that search is dead. I am okay with the premise. I did find the following statement interesting in light of the explosion of interest in making information in academic papers free which is bubbling along with the Google agreement to pay France for links.
Here’s the passage I noted:
But it’s about time: “Bring me what I want” is almost always more useful than “Let me rummage around and see what I can find.” No matter how fast it seems, most search is a waste of time. In a way, we are using time (i.e., the time-based structure) to gain time. Instead of doing an endless series of separate searches, we tune the knobs on our stream-browser to continuously feed us just the information we need. This future doesn’t just kill the operating system, browser, and search as we know it — it changes the meaning of “computer” as we know it, too. Whether large or small (e.g., a smartphone), a computer’s main function in the near future will be tuning in to — as a car radio tunes in a broadcast station — the constantly flowing global cyberflow. We won’t care much about the computer devices themselves since we’ll be more focused on the world of information … and our lives as attached to it.
My thought is that the subtext for this remark rests upon the chronological approach in Scopeware. But when I ran a query for the system, Google had nothing substantive but Bing.com produced a reference to LegalTech.com and a download link on Softpedia.
My view:
- The death of search took place with the rise of pay to play services. Online advertising is the main engine of growth. As pay to play grew, the likelihood that different types of retrieval systems would become the next big thing has dwindled. After Google went public, the old precision and recall model ended up in the morgue.
- Search has been devalued by the systems marketed aggressively by the Big Five in search. These were Autonomy, Convera, Endeca, Fast Search, and Verity. Each installation left licensees with some surprises. None of these outfits exist as a self standing multi billion dollar, absolutely essential solution. Vestiges of the legacy of these breakthrough systems may be seen in the HP Autonomy dust up in my opinion.
- The stampede to predictive analytics, business intelligence, and personalized systems is little more than a way to get ride of the hassle of making the user craft a query and using smart software to tell the hapless what he or she needs to know. Do these systems work? In my book, the marketing is better than the technology at this time. Licensing pure search is not what most vendors do. The pitch is for customer support, Big Data, and sentiment. Search is a tough sell in 2003 and is even a tougher sell today.
I am okay with brave new worlds, nifty technology, and total immersion in pay to play. I just want to shift the moment of death back a decade. Reporting about a death long after it occurred is similar to the disappearance of content in a Web centric world. Maybe the Library of Congress will save the day with its archive of Twitter messages.
Stephen E Arnold, February 3, 2013
Embracing Open Source Only To Make Money
February 3, 2013
Open source offers companies many advantages: software tailored specifically to their needs, no licensing fees, and the support of an entire community. IBM was one of the big companies who adopted an open source policy and others have been following suit. According to Marketwire, Expert System is another business adding open source says the article, “Expert System Announces Integration With Apache Solr For Enterprise Search.”
Expert System is a semantic software company that provides insights into its clients’ information. For its Cogito semantic platform, Expert System installed Apache Solr, an open source enterprise search platform. The goal is that Apache Solr will give clients more precise search results and access to big data and enterprise content.
“’As more organizations recognize the opportunity presented by their information streams, it is important they understand that there are advanced tools that can improve the performance of their existing enterprise content and search investment,’ said Luca Scagliarini, Vice President of Strategy & Business Development, Expert System. ‘Semantic technology not only excels in making search and information management more accurate, but it also allows organizations to improve the quality of their information for use in the decision making process.’”
Great! Take advantage of open source and use it to deliver a better quality product to customers. That is how open source should be used (as long as Expert System gives something back in return), but there is a problem here. As more companies follow IBM’s open source approach, they seem to be forgetting that IBM is a consulting company and not a software/hardware company. Adopting open source may not build revenue, instead (without the right plan) it will simply create bigger IT headaches.
Whitney Grace, February 3, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
eDiscovery: A Source of Thrills and Reduced Costs?
February 2, 2013
When I hear the phrase “eDiscovery”, I don’t get chills. I suppose some folks do. I read after dinner last night (February 1, 2013) “Letter From LegalTech: The Thrills of E-Discovery.” The author addresses the use of search and content processing technology to figure out which documents are most germane to a legal matter. Once the subset has been identified, eDiscovery provides outputs which “real” attorneys (whether in Bangalore or Binghamton) can use to develop their “logical” arguments.
A happy quack to
One interesting factoid bumps into my rather sharp assessment of the “size” of the enterprise search market generated by an azure chip out. The number was about $1.5 billion. In the eDiscovery write up, the author says:
Nobody seems to know how large the e-discovery market is — estimates range from 1.2 to 2.8 billion dollars — but everyone agree it’s not going anywhere. We’re never going back to sorting through those boxes of documents in that proverbial warehouse.
I like the categorical affirmative “nobody.” The point is that sizing any of the search and content processing markets is pretty much like asking Bernie Madoff type professionals, “How much in liquid assets do you have?” The answer is situational, enhanced by marketing, and believed without a moment’s hesitation.
I know the eDiscovery market is out there because I get lots of PR spam about various breakthroughs, revolutions, and inventions which promise to revolutionize figuring out which email will help a legal eagle win a case with his or her “logical” argument. I wanted to use the word “rational” in the manner of John Ralston Saul, but the rational attorneys are leaving the field and looking for work as novelists, bloggers, and fast food workers.
One company—an outfit called Catalyst Repository Systems—flooded me with PR email spam about its products. I called the company on January 31, 2013. I was treated in an offhand, suspicious manner by a tense, somewhat defensive young man named Mark, Monk, Matt, or Mump. At age 69, I have a tough time figuring out Denver accents. Mark, Monk, Matt, or Mump took my name and phone number. He assured me that his boss would call me back to answer my questions about PR spam and the product which struck me as a “me too.” I did learn that he had six years of marketing experience and that he just “push the send button.” I suggested that he may want to know to whom he is sending messages multiple times, he said, “You are being too aggressive.” I pointed out that I was asking a question just like the lawyers who, one presumes, gobbles up the Catalyst products. He took my name, did not ask how to spell it, wrote down my direct line and did not bother to repeat it back to me, and left me with the impression that I was out of bounds and annoying. That was amusing because I was trying hard to be a regular type caller.
A happy quack to Bitter Lawyer which has information about the pressures upon some in the legal profession. See http://www.bitterlawyer.com/i%E2%80%99m-unemployed-and-feel-ripped-off-by-my-ttt-law-school/
Mark, Monk, Matt, or Mump may have delivered the message and the Catalyst top dog was too busy to give me a jingle. Another possibility is that Mark, Monk, Matt, or Mump never took the note. He just wanted to get a person complaining about PR spam off the phone. Either way, Catalyst qualifies as an interesting example of what’s happening in eDiscovery. Desperation marketing has infected other subsectors of the information retrieval market. Maybe this is an attempt to hit in reality revenues of $1.5 billion?
The Hamilton Book Company And Its Web Site
February 2, 2013
When it comes to purchasing a book, most people visit Amazon for its deep discounts and fast shipping. A smaller player in the game is the Hamilton Book Company. This book company specializes in bargain books on a range of subjects from fiction, crafts, military history, cookbooks, arts/entertainment, and science/nature. There are DVDs to browse through, though the selection is limited to the less than popular DVDs you find in a Wal-Mart $5.00 bin. The same can be said for the CDs, which are categorized by theme rather than artist. Browsers can search through seventy-five different categories.
You probably will not find any of the current bestsellers at Hamilton Book Company. Most of the contemporary literature has been resigned to the books popular or were mentioned around ten years ago; although there are some exceptions if you dig through the search results. The best things about the Hamilton Book Company are its prices, but its weakest are the selection and the Web site itself. While using the Web site, one has to navigate through the subjects before even finding any of the products. The biggest fault is that when one clicks on a topic heading on main page, a PDF downloads rather than taking the user to a different part of the Web site.
The final verdict is a basic Web site for cheap and basic books.
Whitney Grace, February 02, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
Arnold Books Not Where They Should Be
February 1, 2013
An unexpected comment surfaced on the Beyond Search blog today. From Casey Anderson:
Mr. Arnold bring up some good points about Google concept of empathy. His seminal works, Google 2.0 http://content.yudu.com/Library/A21hyu/GoogleVersion20TheCa/resources/index.htm and The Google Legacy http://content.yudu.com/Library/A21hzu/TheGoogleLegacyHowGo/resources/index.htm truly help shad light on Google’s business model
Quite interesting and with unusual spelling too. Info would be appreciated.
Stephen E Arnold, February 1, 2013
Funding and Start Ups: Why Pour Money into Search?
February 1, 2013
“Most Tech Startups Acquired in 2012 Had No VC Funding” contained an interesting factoid. Here’s the key passage in my opinion:
A total of 2,277 private tech companies from around the globe were acquired last year, according to a new report by researcher CB Insights. A “big surprise,” according to the company, is that 76 percent of these firms had not raised venture capital or private equity. This, it said, suggests a lot of tech companies are able to sustain themselves on profits and other sources, such as angel financing.
The information triggered a question which I cannot answer; to wit: Why are search vendors chasing money? If a search vendor has not flipped to profitability after a few years in business, will another infusion of cash jump start the company?
The big dogs in search have been acquired. In two notable cases the founders have departed and may have sufficient resources to fund another company. But for the companies in search which have been around for two, five or in case of one outfit 10 years, more funding may not translate to a big payday.
More data are needed. I will put on our 2013 research agenda the hypothesis that late stage funding does not return a payoff to the investors who take a chance on a search vendor of a certain age. The thought is that more money does not translate to either growth or a buy out. Companies looking to buy promising firms may be looking for smaller deals for targets which do not have help from venture funding sources. Thoughts? Share them in the comments section of the blog, please.
Stephen E Arnold, February 1, 2013
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
