HP: Ink or Information?
March 30, 2010
I have commented about Hewlett Packard’s push into content centric activities. The deal that made me sit up and take notice was the purchase of Exstream Software for more than $1.0 billion a year or two ago. There have been moves in other content areas, including records management. Seeking Alpha caught my attention with its article “Hewlett-Packard: Printers More Valuable Than PCs” and its nifty interactive graph. The main point of the write up is that HP, despite its efforts to make its bottom-line as fat as a French-government, certified goose destined for paté, HP is a printer and ink/toner company. With much of its printing technology influenced by Canon, I wondered about HP’s innovation as well. For me, the most interesting comment in the write up was:
HP’s stock is more sensitive to changes in its printer business than changes in the notebook business. A 5% increase in HP’s printer market share will lead to a 4% upside to $53 Trefis [analyst outfit] price estimate for HP’s stock, while a 5% increase in HP’s notebook share will result in less than a 3% upside.
HP may be big but the company has to find a way to generate more bottom-line impact from its other businesses before the printer and ink business softens.
Stephen E Arnold, March 30, 2010
No one paid me to write this about HP.
One UK Media Companies Pays Tribute to Two US Media Companies
March 18, 2010
Read “How the New York Times and CNN Try to Keep Up with the Tech Companies.” No, not the article. The title. First, the notion of “try”. The write up makes clear that the NYT and CNN are in try mode. Calvinistic? A less gifted pair trying to cope with Sergey and Larry? In French, “to make an often tentative or experimental effort to perform”.
Second, notice the phrase “keep up with”. Not “lead” or “change the game.” The notion is that a couple of 40 year old former high school stars are in fantasy camp with a bunch of retired pros and some college players. Yep, “keep up with”, not go “toe to toe” or “push the boundaries.” The details of the write up are interesting, but what is omitted are:
- Explanation of what Facebook has done to become one of the largest sites on the Web and a preferred source of news for lots of folks in some tasty demographics
- How these two sites plan to leapfrog Google and Yahoo
- Where the money will come from when it becomes necessary to build software, implement enhancements, and do big time research.
- What about that traffic challenge? Eyeballs are needed, then more eyeballs.
I think these questions make clear the challenges traditional publishing companies face as they try to learn new tricks, make them work, and find ways to pay for the costs that software and systems for the Web bring to the party.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2010
Free, uncompensated information. I will report this writing for no money to the Jefferson County shelter manager.
Microsoft Fast on Linux and Unix Innovation
February 15, 2010
It’s Valentine’s Day. I feel quite a bit of affection for the system professionals who have licensed Fast Search ESP, and I hope each finds search love. I think there will be a “tough” element to this love. And like other types of love, there will be ups and downs. Microsoft practiced some “tough love” for licensees of the Linux and Unix versions of Fast Search & Transfer’s Enterprise Search Platform recently. I am in a discursive frame of mind, and I will share my opinion about the “tough love” for the Linux and Unix licensees of the 1997 technology that comprises some of Fast Search & Transfer’s system.
The not-too-surprising announcement that Microsoft would stop supporting Fast Search & Transfer’s Linux and Unix customers surprised some folks. I think a handful of resellers were delighted because customers with non-Windows versions of Fast Search cannot change horses in the middle of the Tigris River, as Alexander the Great discovered in 331 BCE. Some poobahs pointed out that open source search would become a hot ticket for Fast Search Linux and Unix licensees. Others took a more balanced view of figuring out whether to rip and replace or supplement the aging Fast Search system with one of the more specialized solutions now available; for example, Exalead’s system could be snapped in without much hassle, based on my research for Successful Enterprise Search Management, published by Galatea in the UK last year. (Martin White was my co-author.)
Source: http://www.zastavki.com/pictures/1024×768/2008/Saint_Valentines_Day_St.Valentine_004959_.jpg
What I found interesting is that the Microsoft Enterprise Search blog contained some information from Bjørn Olstad, CTO, FAST and Distinguished Engineer, Microsoft. The write up’s title is “Innovation on Linux and Unix,” and it appeared on February 4, 2010.
Mr. Olstad wrote:
When we announced the acquisition two years ago, we said that we were committed to cross-platform innovation—that we’d “continue to offer stand-alone versions of ESP that run on Linux and UNIX,” and that we would provide updates to these versions to address customer concerns and add new features. Over the last two years, we’ve done just that.
The deal was consummated in April 2008. In October 2008, the Norwegian authorities seized some company information, but there has not been much news about the investigation into the pre-acquisition Fast Search & Transfer’s activities. At any event, it is now February 2010, so Microsoft has been operating Fast Search for the period between April 2008 and February 2010. That’s not quite two years, which is a nit, but software works when details are correct. What’s clear is that Fast Search and its Enterprise Search Platform or ESP is pared down and focused on the Windows platform.
I also noted this passage:
When we announced the acquisition two years ago, we said that we were committed to cross-platform innovation—that we’d “continue to offer stand-alone versions of ESP that run on Linux and UNIX,” and that we would provide updates to these versions to address customer concerns and add new features. Over the last two years, we’ve done just that.
Cloud Performance
December 5, 2009
After the endnote session at the International Online Show, Charlie Hull, Lemur Consulting, and I were talking about various aspects of open source technology. Mr. Hull has a positive view of open source, and I try to be disputatious whenever possible. Since Mr. Hull purchased my hot chocolate (small hot chocolate, in point of fact), I pushed back a bit. I focused on the issue of performance of certain open source software. Committee built gizmos may lack the trim tummies found in some commercial software solutions. I recalled seeing a performance comparison of some open source and commercial cloud solutions, and I said that I would dig up the article and post a comment.
The write up was “VPS Performance Comparison” in the Journal of Eivind Uggedal. You can see what fun it is to have a hot chocolate with a Lemur and a goose! The guts of this quite interesting piece of research are spilled in several charts. The systems put through their paces via scripts and some test data included:
The results, thoughtfully accompanies by some useful fee metrics, were interesting. The data revealed that both Mr. Hull (the modest lemur) and I (the addled goose) were both correct. He and I also like Banksy, the street artist, and we have several other areas of agreement in common as well. Quite depressing I might add.
I want to urge you to read Mr. Uggedal’s essay, so I will point out one chart that I found illuminating:
I know the lines are difficult to see but the point is that Amazon is predictable if pokey. Several vendors consistently lag others and the top performers in this test which is close to a Web application’s load are zipping right along. The speediest, are summed up by Mr. Uggedal this way:
Linode. 32-bit gave the best results on the Unixbench runs while 64-bit was fastest on the Django and database tests.
Quite a nice piece of work. Lemurs and geese agree that analyses like Mr. Uggedal can shed light on certain technical issues. Nevertheless, I assert that a wet goose is more sleek than the average dry lemur.
Stephen Arnold, December 5, 2009
Oyez, oyez, I wish to disclose that I wrote this essay and referenced Lemur Consulting because I was paid off with a cup of hot chocolate. Small cup, mind you. To whom do I report this commercial transaction. I think the US Federal Aviation Administration has jurisdiction over addled geese. Must comply, of course.
Wired Fraying and Shorting Out
May 19, 2009
Making money with electronic information is tough. Making money writing about the wired world is also difficult. Joel Johnson’s interesting “Welcome, Wired. We Call This Land Internet” here provided me with a useful anecdote for an upcoming talk I will be giving at an NFAIS conference at the end of June 2009. Mr. Johnson informed me that Wired Magazine may be killed off. No surprise. The magazine business was challenging when readers did not worry about dead trees and the chemicals in ink, distribution costs, and the millions of direct mail solicitations required to build a subscription list. In May 2009, the magazine business is different from those salad days between the late 17th century and 2008. Mr. Johnson wrote:
Wired is great print, but if the magazine can’t make money and is shuttered, taking the website down with it, I’m going to be livid. Not that making money online is easy—it’s not, especially without sacrificing your ethics and your voice—but if any mainstream outlet should be able to make the transition, it should be Wired. I fear that may be impossible, not just for Wired but for all these old brands, because they can’t accept that the work at which they have excelled for years will be just as important when it’s online—and online only.
I bought two magazines at the airport news kiosk this morning. The total price was about $14. I paid for them, but I was the only person in the shop in Washington Reagan Airport buying magazines. With buyers like me in short supply and advertisers trying to figure out how to maximize their ad dollars, Wired is not the only traditional publication to face a problematic future.
I also thought about the Wired wizards who described the brave new digital world. It is one thing to write about electronic information. It is quite another to make money from a print publication that contains information about online. I don’t think the Wired Web site can survive in its present form, regardless of the fate of the print publication.
Again. That pesky writing and doing problem.
Stephen Arnold, May 19, 2009
Migrating SharePoint Objects
April 27, 2009
I like the notion of federating; that is, leaving information where it is and then pulling what’s needed without crating a duplicated source store. I was interested in this Web log post “Migrating SharePoint Content between Different Site Templates and Preserving all the Necessary Metadata” because the approach ran counter to my method. Migration is sometimes necessary; for instance, a merger requires that the acquired firm’s information be placed under the control of the purchaser’s information technology department. If you need a method to migrate SharePoint, you will want to navigate to Boris Gomiunik’s article here and download the steps. There are eight steps, and I did not see a quick and easy way to automate this set of procedures. Like much in the SharePoint environment, a human must enter values and make decisions. The approach is great for the billable SharePoint consultant and makes a SharePoint administrator a must-have headcount. But for the senior manager, the costs associated with this somewhat tedious procedures are likely to be an issue. In my experience, the more manual intervention in a method, the greater the chance for mistakes. SharePoint may be a candidate for the cloud because in today’s financial climate eliminating headaches, errors, and expenses may reduce on premises software installations magnetic appeal. There was no reference to what fixes had to be made to get the SharePoint search system to rebuild its index and point to the correct instance of the migrated and potentially duplicate content. I wonder if that requires another multi step process involving lots of human fiddling?
Stephen Arnold, April 26, 2009
Consultant Tells Vendors Not to Push Unneeded Products
April 22, 2009
Now that’s quite a statement from a consulting professional. Many consultants make a living selling and upselling services that clients don’t need, don’t want, and didn’t know existed. Once I fought past the irony of the advice giver, I concluded that a mini trend is building. You will want to navigate to ZDNet here and read “Enterprise Software: Are Customers Being Pressured So Vendors Can Make Their Numbers? here. At this point, you may want to answer, “Yes.” I did. Well, that’s the story. For me the most interesting comment was:
Governor says enterprise customers should get aggressive as well. They can pay more attention what their developers are says, to avoid buying software that will end up as shelfware. Also, many open source solutions may be just as good as their commercial counterparts. And take advantage of the cloud. “Focus more on work and less on dog and pony shows. If its going to take 18 months to decide what platform to adopt you’re doing it wrong.”
I have highlighted the operative phrase “open source”. The financial crisis is going to force organizations to rethink certain technical decisions taken in the past. The trend is open source. The expert delivering this message got the main part buried but at least the idea is there. Oh, put your valuables in a locked drawer when meeting with azure chip consultants. Come to think of it, the suggestion may have applicability in other software related situations, particularly search, content processing, and data management.
Stephen Arnold, April 22, 2009
SharePoint Round Up
April 13, 2009
Here in Harrod’s Creek, the annual spring festival includes bunny hunting. I am floating in the pond, listening to the rat tat tat of small arms fire. Nothing beats a rabbit hunt in the spring. I am not into pumping lead in fuzzy bunnies so I am engaging in what is now a Sunday ritual: A romp through the SharePoint information that clogs my newsreader. I prefer to write about search in SharePoint, but a number of interesting, content related items caught my attention.
The Budget Black Hole
SharePoint Reviews ran a story called “How Long Is a SharePoint Project.” You can read it here. The author said: “Of course, a SharePoint Project is never complete as it keeps growing and changing…” Ah, a never ending project. But in today’s lousy economic climate I wonder what the appetite of the CFO will be for a techie who sucks money with no end point in sight. Sort of a problem, perhaps? The author includes the 14 stages in a SharePoint project. I would insert a 15th. Seek a new job.
Azure Portal
Gunnar Peipman wrote “Azure Developer Portal: Some Screenshots” here. I find much about the Azure project confusing, but the screenshots shows two application instances which then become one application instance. This is not an error. Azure allowed Mr. Peipman was allowed one instance. Bug? Feature? Conservation of energy? The screenshots are a bit confusing and I don’t know if Azure caused the problem. I appreciated his comment: “Sorry for the mess.” I can’t wait to see how search runs from Azure in a high demand environment. Will that one instance haul the water?
Third Party Tools in SharePoint
Quite a few SharePoint clients use third party tools to find information in SharePoint. The solutions I find work pretty well include but are not limited to Coveo, Exalead, and ISYS Search Software, among others. There are some useful facts that can make life with these third party systems happier for the SharePoint administrator who wants to leave early and have free weekends. First, click here and read “Using Third Party Tools in SharePoint”. Second, save the file and keep in handy for future reference. Among the useful tips is this one: “Understand in detail what it will take to provide an evaluation & test of the third party tool(s) assuming you will set up an separate environment to do it.” Good round up of what most system pros learn in training.
Product Wackiness
Finally, I want to call your attention to “SharePoint Designer and Expression Web – Separated at Birth” here. I have seen copies of Expression Web in the local Office Depot. The SharePoint designer is a freebie. This article takes a run at explaining the “difference” between the two products. These bastard spawn of the aging FrontPage have one big difference when it comes to SharePoint. Expression Web can’t edit SharePoint sites. Pretty wacky to me. Oh, don’t forget VisualStudio. We have needed that tool to go where the SharePoint Designer fears to tread. Nice.
Microsoft Fast
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to a news item here pointing out that Microsoft Fast Norway wants to hire some “Live Search” type people. Must be the same manager who cooked up Expression and Designer.
Stephen Arnold, April 13, 2009
Cutting Information Technology Costs
April 1, 2009
I read CIO Magazine’s “Five Things You Need to Know: Budget Cutting” here and realized that there are journalists and their are more sophisticated financial types. Before you read the article, click here and learn how Qantas slashed its information technology costs.
Now you can romp through the tips and come away vulnerable to the machinations of a cost analyst. These tips provide a sense of false security which may give way to some even bigger organizational realignments in certain situations. One realignment may be suggesting the person who followed these tips find his or her future elsewhere. In short, there’s more to cost cutting that the tips suggest.
I don’t feel comfortable parroting the five tips. I want to highlight one and offer a few comments. Let’s look at item three:
Break down exactly how you spend your budget. Start by identifying your expenses. A CIO might know she has employees with BlackBerrys, but how much is each person spending on their phone bills? With more specifics, you can set more accurate goals for saving.
Sounds pretty safe, right? The problem is that analysis of a segment of a budget means that the numbers reflect the person’s understanding of costs. Most information technology managers are clueless about the secondary costs triggered by routine information technology actions.
Let’s look at one example. A marketing team must produce a proposal. The marketers named Trent and Wendy need to output the document in two forms: PDF and to an ftp server. The client wants to get ftp access on a Monday and receive the FedEx package with the six copies of the proposal no later than Tuesday, before 5 pm. The Trent and Wendy duo understand the PDF part, but neither knows how to move files to the organization’s ftp server. Trent calls the information technology department and asks for help. The IT person says, “We’ll be there before 2 pm.” The IT person does not arrive. At 5 pm, Wendy calls. The phone rings in space. Trent and Wendy call a consultant, explain the problem, agree to a fee for the ftp part of the job, and complete their work. The cost for the ad hoc consultant is lost in the organization’s budget. The IT manager and the CIO are clueless about the cost their unit created.
Sound familiar?
The problem with the recommendations is that the actions will not return a comprehensive picture. A true cost analysis will surface dependent costs and indirect costs, not just the obvious direct costs. Once tallied, these costs can be tracked back to the root cause of the over or under run.
In my experience, that’s too much work. As I learn about companies going out of business, the casual approach to cost analysis bites back and bites hard. Read the five tips. Track down a cost analyst and enlist his or her help. The present financial climate does not look kindly on those involved in projects such as search. It’s easy to blow through $500,000 in a matter of three or four months and have a non functioning system. Undisciplined thinking about enterprise systems and their costs can crush a career and an organization. The five tips omit that point.
Stephen Arnold, April 1, 2009
Journalists Struggle with Web Logs
March 30, 2009
Gina M. Chen asked, “What do you think?” at the foot of her essay “Is Blogging Journalism”. You can read her write up here. My answer is, “Nope. Web logs are a variant of plain old communications.” Before I defend my assertion, let’s look at the guts of her essay is that “fear of change” creates the challenge. She asserted that blogging is a medium.
Web logs are not causing traditional media companies to collapse. Other, more substantive factors are eroding their foundations. Forget fear. Think data termites.
Okay, I can’t push back too much on these points, which strike me as tame and somewhat obvious. I also understand the fear part mostly because my brushes with traditional publishers continue to leave them puzzled and me clueless.
The issue to me is mostly fueled by money. Here’s why:
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
