Browse > Home / Enterprise search, Feature / Enterprise Search: The Last Half of 2015

Enterprise Search: The Last Half of 2015

June 16, 2015

I saw a link this morning to an 11 month old report from an azure chip consulting firm. You know, azure chip. Not a Bain, BCG, Booz Allen, or McKinsey which are blue chip firms. A mid tier outfit. Business at the Boozer is booming is the word from O’Hare Airport, but who knows if airport gossip is valid.

image

Which enterprise search vendor will come up a winner in December 2015?

What is possibly semi valid are analyses of enterprise search vendors. The “Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Search” triggered some fond memories of the good old days in 2003 when the leaders in enterprise search were brands or almost brands. You probably recall the thrilling days of these information retrieval leaders:

  • Autonomy, the math oriented outfit with components names like neuro linguistic programming and integrated data operating layer and some really big name customers like BAE
  • Convera, formerly Excalibur with juice from ConQuest (developer by a former Booz, Allen person no less)
  • Endeca, the all time champ for computationally intensive indexing
  • Fast Search & Transfer, the outfit that dumped Web search in order to take over the enterprise search sector
  • Verity, ah, truth be told, this puppy’s architecture ensured plenty of time to dash off and grab a can of Mountain Dew.

In 2014, if the azure chip firm’s analysis is on the money, the landscape was very different. If I understand the non analytic version of Boston Consulting Group’s matrix from 1970, the big players are:

  • Attivio, another business intelligence solution using open source technology and polymorphic positioning for the folks who have pumped more than $35 million into the company. One executive told me via LinkedIn, that the SEC investigation of an Attivio board member had zero impact on the company. I like the attitude. Bold.
  • BA Insight, a business software vendor focused on making SharePoint somewhat useful and some investors with deepening worry lines
  • Coveo, a start up which is nudging close to a decade in age, and more than $30 million in venture backing. I wonder if those stakeholders are getting nervous.
  • Dassault Systèmes, the owner of Exalead, who said in the most recent quarterly report that the company was happy, happy, happy with Exalead but provided no numbers and no detail about the once promising technology
  • Expert System, an interesting company with a name that makes online research pretty darned challenging
  • Google, ah, yes, the proud marketer of the ever thrilling Google Search Appliance, a product with customer support to make American Airlines jealous
  • Hewlett Packard Autonomy, now a leader in the acrimonious litigation field
  • IBM, ah, yes, the cognitive computing bunch from Armonk. IBM search is definitely a product that is on everyone’s lips because the major output of the Watson group is a book of recipes
  • IHS, an outfit which is banking on its patent analysis technology to generate big bucks in the Goldmine cellophane
  • LucidWorks (Really?), a repackager of open source search and a distant second to Elastic (formerly Elasticsearch, which did not make the list. Darned amazing to me.)
  • MarkLogic, a data management system trying to grow with a proprietary XML technology that is presented as search, business intelligence, and a tool for running a restaurant menu generation system. Will MarkLogic buy Smartlogic? Do two logics make a rational decision?
  • Mindbreeze, a side project at Fabasoft which is the darling of the Austrian government and frustrated European SharePoint managers
  • Perceptive Software, which is Lexmark’s packaging of ISYS Search Software. ISYS incorporates technology from – what did the founder tell me in 2009? – oh, right, code from the 1980s. Might it not be tough to make big bucks on this code base? I have 70 or 80 million ideas about the business challenge such a deal poses
  • PolySpot, like Sinequa, a French company which does infrastructure, information access, and, of course, customer support
  • Recommind, a legal search system which has delivered a down market variation of the Autonomy-type approach to indexing. The company is spreading its wings and tackling enterprise search.
  • Sinequa, another one of those quirky French companies which are more flexible than a leotard for an out of work acrobat

But this line up from the azure chip consulting omits some companies which may be important to those looking for search solutions but not so much for azure chip consultants angling for retainer engagements. Let me highlight some vendors the azure chip crowd elected to ignore:

  • Antidot, a French outfit which began a push into the US a couple of years ago. By the way, how is that US push working out?
  • dtSearch, a reasonable approach to basic search for Microsoft Windows’ lovers
  • Elastic, the big dog in open source search. Maybe a bigger dog in December 2015?
  • Funnelback, an near invisible government spawned search system which works for certain applications
  • MaxxCat, a better search appliance
  • SRCH2, an outfit that “needs no marketing.” Okay, confident, Xooglers.
  • Solcara (Thomson Reuters). Now about that license fee?
  • Thunderstone, an old timer still alive and kicking
  • X1, a wild interface and dreams of enterprise dominance.

I have other vendors in my list, but let’s move on to the question about the last half of 2015. Which of these vendors will hit the big time; that is, become a solution with surging sales, generous margins, and happy, happy, happy licensees.

Which company will be the winner at the end of December, surrounded by revelers wearing hats and tooting tiny horns?

I predict the following in the next six months:

  1. A number of these outfits will merge, go out of business, or reinvent themselves as something other than enterprise search vendors
  2. The Elastic search juggernaut will keep on mowing down proprietary vendors
  3. The big boys like Google, Hewlett Packard, IBM, and Lexmark will continue to rack up disappointing sales and generate considerable angst within their respective management suites. Sorry, spreadsheet fever works in business school, not in the search market
  4. Lots of same old, same old; that is, half of these firms will make zero technological progress and manage to keep their heads above water

The notion that the enterprise search sector is going to catch fire is nuts. Since the flame outs of Convera, Delphes, Entopia, Fast Search, and other firms in my search vendor dead pool, the notion of enterprise search information access has demonstrated that it does not work.

The market wants point solutions that do specific things at a reasonable price.

The vast majority of enterprise search vendors are going to face strong headwinds in the last half of 2015. The push back from prospects, the brutal cost of research and development, the disappointment of most system users, and the constant demand for technical support cause most of this crop of vendors to long for a new line of work.

I assume that the azure chip consultants, the failed webmasters now posing as search experts, and the failed middle school teachers responsible for business strategy will see the world differently.

Written by Stephen E. Arnold · Filed Under Enterprise search, Feature 

Comments

Comments are closed.

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta