Performance Fireworks: Microsoft Fast Fizzles, Google Explodes
July 4, 2009
I was sitting in an airport, and I clicked on a link for Microsoft Fast ESP. A video ran and presented me with a couple of professional fellows talking about Microsoft Fast search. The video was interesting, but I went back and snagged one screen frame from the presentation because it struck me as a way to explain the distance between the performance of Microsoft Fast and the performance of Google’s system. Now performance data for search systems is a murky area. I don’t want to get into a squabble about something being five times faster. The difference here makes a point, and I will leave it to Googlers and Microsofties to post corrected performance data in the Comments section of this Web log, assuming those companies’ professionals have time to read the thoughts of the addled goose.
First, the Microsoft data. Here’s the screenshot, and I want you to notice that the performance that is presented is five to 20 queries per second. That is pretty modest for a performance threshold even for a Microsoft team in Charlotte, North Carolina, where I have heard the pace of life is on par with Harrod’s Creek.
Source: http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=kTbcCNby8xE
I ask you to click here to look at the performance data I calculated for Google. The key point is that if the Google data are reasonably accurate, the Google is cranking along about about 1,700 queries per second. Even Yahoo appears to perform better than Microsoft Fast. See my write up here.
That’s a big gap. Assume the Google data are off by a factor of four. The Google is handling 400 queries per second. If we boost the Microsoft Fast performance by a factor of four to 20 queries per second to 80 queries per second, the Google appears to be the speed demon.
If you want performance fireworks, my thought is that the Google is the fire cracker if the data are correct.
Stephen Arnold, July 4, 2009
UFC 2010: HTML 5, Air, and Silverlight
July 3, 2009
Mary Jo Foley opened my eyes to a new unlimited online fighting battle in 2010. Her story with a lamentably cryptic headline appeared on June 11, 2009 as “Microsoft .Net RIA Services: Not until 2010.” You can find the article here. He story revealed that Microsoft will try to push its Rich Internet Application technology into the market in 2010. She wrote:
.Net RIA Services is designed to allow coders to bring together the .Net programming model with Microsoft’s Silverlight competitor to Adobe Flash. Microsoft made a Community Technology Preview (CTP) of the technology available in March, but didn’t provide any final availability information.
The RIA acronym means stuff like Adobe Flash and Google’s HTML 5 methods. The idea is that a computing device with an Internet connection can look and feel like a traditional application, a DVD player, or an immersive game. The end of shrink-wrap software and the money machine that made Microsoft and Adobe the big dogs each is today is likely to whine and stumble to a limp along, not a footrace.
I want to capture my thoughts about the dust up:
- I think Adobe is the weakest of the three combatants in the UFC 2010 digital slugfest. Adobe’s pushing the envelope with its license fees now. The sudden spate of security problems coupled with the balky nature of some Adobe Air implementations means that whatever cash Adobe has will not be enough to cope with the GOOG and the Softies.
- The Google team has a quasi-open source angle. The Microsoft team wants everyone to get with the Windows agenda, memorize it, and live it. This is a toss up because Google has been stumbling of late with regard to security, government regulations, and that old annoyance copyright. Microsoft is Microsoft, so it is a force no matter how wacky the Silverlight code may be.
- The financial climate, despite the sunny news from TV commentators, looks bleak to me. As a result, each of these UFC 2010 fighters will be ready to rumble. I think fingers in the eyes, low blows, and blows to the back of the neck will be entertaining tactics to watch.
In short, Ms. Foley reminded me to make time in 2010 for this traveling road show.
Stephen Arnold, July 3, 2009
Google Books: Legal Eagles Carry On… Er, Carrion
July 2, 2009
It is official. an investigation of Google Books is stumbling forward. You can get “D” word on this by reading DOJ Confirms Antitrust Investigation Into Google Book Settlement. Will this be Google’s Salamis? Exciting times for the Google, those who are parties to the signed contract, those who are excluded, those who are fearful, and those who don’t see what the Google has been doing for more than a decade. As I said in my study The Google Legacy, “Lawyers can kill the GOOG.” Was I prescient? Just plain wrong? We’ll know in three or four years I suppose.
Stephen Arnold, July 2, 2009
Bing.com Tweets
July 2, 2009
Short honk: I noticed on July 1, 2009, that Bing.com has begun adding Twitter messages to its search results. The Google looks a bit flat footed in this area, although Google Wave was a good demo. Bing. Is it the real thing? You can find more information in IT Pro’s “Bing Integrates Twitter Data into Search”.
Stephen Arnold, July 2, 2009
Great Google Quote
July 2, 2009
Short honk: The Christian Science Monitor snagged a great Google quote from the lips of Eric Schmidt. The quote appeared in “Bing Nothing to Worry about, Yet” here.
Mr. Schmidt allegedly said:
“Google is about getting all the information and organizing it,” he said. “Yahoo has a different strategy. We think ultimately Bing will evolve to a different strategy as well.
Let’s see. If Google gets “all” information, what’s left for the Redmond crowd and the Yahooligans. Logically, the addled goose thinks, nothing.
Stephen Arnold, June 14, 2009
Bing.com Search Share
July 1, 2009
Short honk: I relished the write up in Digital Trends about Microsoft’s share of the Web search market. The title of the article was “Bing Boosts Microsoft Search Share One Percent.” The data were interesting, but the segment I liked was:
Globally, Microsoft also saw gains from Bing’s debut, seeing its share of global Internet search jump from 3.08 percent in April to 3.30 percent in June; however, most of that gain appears to have come at Yahoo’s expense, which saw its global share decline from 5.48 percent to 5.15 percent over the same period. Google almost completely dominates the global search market, with a share of 89.80 percent.
Progress but the “dominates” was amusing.
Stephen Arnold, July 1, 2009
Oracle Salesforce Rumor: A Summer Thriller
July 1, 2009
I heard chatter at the Gilbane conference in San Francisco on June 4, 2009. I did not know the slick, 20 something who was explaining over his Pop Tart that Oracle was interested in Salesforce.com. Now the story “pops” into my feed reader with a Reuters’ logo, a byline for Jim Finkle, and the rumor elevated to the status of mainstream media “story”. You can try to locate the Reuters’ story “Sales Force CEO Downplays Chatter of Sale to Oracle” but I have had some 404s of late. These Reuters’ stories are too valuable to be left where my feed reader first pointed. Go figure. Anyway, Mr. Finkle wrote:
Salesforce.com Inc Chief Executive Marc Benioff downplayed persistent speculation that bigger rival Oracle Corp may buy his Web-based software company. Oracle CEO Larry Ellison was an early investor and one-time board member in San Francisco-based Salesforce but Benioff told Reuters on Monday [June 29, 2009]: “If he wanted to buy it, he would have.”
A couple of thoughts flapped through the addled goose’s tiny brain:
- Google has been a cheerleader for Salesforce.com for quite a while. Google, however, has not made overt moves to acquire Salesforce.com. If Oracle shows interest, might that urge Googzilla to snap up Salesforce.com along with its real sales team and its customers.
- Despite Mr. Ellison’s investment in Salesforce.com, I have sensed some cattiness about Salesforce.com’s success with its off premises, cloud based service. Even though Oracle beats at the heart of the Salesforce.com system, the model challenges Oracle’s on premises approach. A purchase might lead to some sudden changes in Salesforce.com. I think of this management approach as oncology management.
- With a great deal of cash slopping around in some investment firms’ wallets, if Salesforce.com is in play, there may be some left field buyers in the game.
Nothing like a buy out rumor to add zest to the summer financial drama. My hunch is that this thriller may have a touch of Hollywood, however. Whatever happens, I think Google benefits. That company’s search and glue code makes contributions to both Oracle and Salesforce.com. Neither company has a search system that rises above unsalted popcorn. Google may end up a winner by providing search and other services no matter how the script unfolds.
Stephen Arnold, July 1, 2009
Google and Data Object Visualization
June 30, 2009
The USPTO published US7555471 B2 on June 30, 2009. The Beyond Search goslings think this is a reasonably important Google disclosure. The investors include one super Googler and clutch of other Google rock star engineers. Andrew Hogue is a Googler to watch. If you find his official Google page opaque, try this link. He and his band of engineers have received a patent for “Data Object Visualization.” Don’t get too excited about the graphics. The system and method applies to a core Google system for cleaning up discrepancies in fact tables. If you are a fan of Dilbert, this is the invention that describes one of Google’s smartest agents the official descriptor “janitor”. How smart is the janitor. Smart enough to make dataspaces closer to reality. The USPTO system is sluggish today, so you can get info from FreePatentsOnline.com or one of the other services that provide access to these public documents. I love that janitor lingo too. Googley humor for big time inventions makes clear that the 11 year old Google still possesses math club whimsy. Those examples for atomic mass and volcano are equally illuminating.
Stephen Arnold, June 30, 2009
Google Creates Spanish Site for Entrepreneurs
June 30, 2009
Short honk: Speak Spanish? Google’s new site for entrepreneurs may be for you. You can check out the basics by reading “Google Crea Portal Para Emprendedores”. The site itself is on Google.es.
Stephen Arnold, June 30, 2009
Google and Big: The Roman Crowd Sees One Thing, Caesar Another
June 29, 2009
I read the New York Times’s story “Google Makes a Case that It Isn’t So Big” when it plopped into my newsreader sometime after I tucked my head under my wing. I awoke to the story referenced in a number of Web articles. I enjoyed the analysis in Tech Generation “God Is Out on Whether Google Is Good or Evil” because it mixed math and morality. C Shanti wrote:
Consumer Watchdog managed to get hold of the slides that Google is touting around earlier this month, and it’s clear that Google wants us all to think that it’s just a minnow compared to giants like Microsoft and IBM. Interestingly, it doesn’t include Intel in the figures - Paul Otellini, Intel’s CEO is on Google’s board. One key message Google wants you and me to understand that “competition is just a click away” - that means that if something comes along that’s better, like Microsoft’s Bing, for example, arguably - Google stands the risk of being toppled off its search perch.
The addled goose wishes to honk respectfully:
- Search and other computer centric activities are a combination of mental habits and motor skills. As a result, switching is not the easy-as-pie action that most observers assert. I have said in many venues “habits are like a soft bed. Easy to get into and hard to get out of.”
- In the scheme of things, Google wants to be IBM-sized. I think it was in 2006 or 2007 that I first heard the $100 billion figure offered as a revenue target for Google. In Google Land, $100 billion is a one followed by 11 zeros or 2^11*5^11 if you are Google grade. The Google ad revenue is a mere $20 billion or 2^11*5^10. That an order of magnitude and a big number. Ergo: Google is small.
- The Google game plan means that Google will explain its position over and over again. Say something enough times to those who don’t dig into the argument and the Google position starts to sound pretty darned reasonable; “Google has many competitors” and you can see how Google presents its challengers in the image from the Google game plan deck below:
© Google via Computer Watchdog at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/Googlepresentation.pdf
Yep, in semantic search Powerset and Hakia are going to be a real challenge for Drs. Norvig, Guha, Halevy, and Pereira and the others in the Google semantics vineyard.
My take on this big small argument is that it depends on the seat in the arena from which one observes the action. Think about Rome. Some of Google’s “competitors” are huddled in the tunnels in the Amphitheatrum Flavium (named after my hero Nero’s modest statue). Other competitors are in the arena; for example, Microsoft and maybe Amazon. Others are sitting in the Emperor’s box; for instance, IBM (a Google partner for now), Oracle (a semi pal), and other companies attracted to Google because its aura invokes victory.
The observers don’t see the dynamics of the Google ecosystem. The main action takes place in the sand of the battle ground. I think that is the wrong place to look. Honk.
Stephen Arnold, June 29, 2009
