Quote to Note: Google and Its View of Exchange
March 21, 2010
ZDNet’s “An Interview with Timothy Bray” softened the new Google evangelist’s rhetoric. But the “interview” contained a quote that I don’t want to misplace:
For small and medium businesses, Microsoft Exchange is a “soft target”, Bray noted.
A soft target. I wonder how Microsoft will react.
Stephen E Arnold, March 20, 2010
An unpaid news item. I will report this to the local commandant of the National Guard. Here in Kentucky there are lots of soft targets I think.
Microsoft Fast Customer Support
March 20, 2010
Short honk: Got your Microsoft Fast installation up and running but have a wee question? You will want to keep this information handy:
- FAST standalone technical support assistance, navigate to http://support.microsoft.com/oas
- FAST telephone support: +1 866-922-5260 (8:00 AM – 8:00 PM Eastern Time)
Enjoy!
Stephen E Arnold, March 19, 2010
A freebie pure and simple.
Comets and Dinosaurs
March 16, 2010
I wrote about “newsosaurs” over the weekend, and this article caught my eye: “NetSuite Calls Microsoft ‘ERP Dinosaur.” The write up is not about search, although it could have been shaped to cover that technology as well. I wanted to capture this line from the write up:
The memo, with the subject line “The Netsuite comet officially hits the Microsoft ERP dinosaur,” calls Microsoft’s announcement “an obvious act of desperation as Microsoft’s customers and partners defect en masse for NetSuite and the cloud.” Microsoft’s bid, Nelson wrote, “tries to convince NetSuite customers to move backwards 20 years to try Great Plains, Navision or Solomon”– the names of Dynamics GP, NAV and SL before Microsoft acquired them. “Microsoft has no cloud-based ERP answer to NetSuite, and Microsoft’s statement that ‘hosting’ Great Plains is their response to the cloud is so absurd as to be laughable,” Nelson said in his memo. “This is the old ‘ASP’ approach of hosting client/server products that failed as a delivery mechanism even before we entered the Year 2000.”
Stong words. Ever try to find an item in Microsoft’s ERP solutions?
Stephen E Arnold, March 16, 2010
Free, free as a bird. No one paid me to write this. Since it is an uncompensated bit of work, I must report this to the zoologist responsible for the National Zoo’s aviary ad unit.
Limitations of MSFT Exchange 2010
March 16, 2010
I am not sure how one of my goslings came across this spreadsheet tucked away on the Microsoft Exchange Web log. When I tried to access the file, the system did not recognize my “official” Microsoft MSDN user ID nor my Windows Live credentials. So you may have to register to access the blog. Once there, you need to look for the download section and visually inspect the file names for the one that points to the Exchange Performance Excel spreadsheet. Running a query in the blog’s search box produced zero hits for me. But with some persistence and patience I was able to get a copy of the spreadsheet. Latency was a problem when I was fiddling with this download. (Note: if the link is dead, write one of the goslings at benkent2020 at yahoo dot com, and maybe he will email you a copy of this document.)
Once you get the document “Scalability Limitations”, you will see some pretty interesting information. One quick example is that the spreadsheet includes three columns of specifics about scaling amidst the more marketing oriented data on the spreadsheet. These three juicy columns are:
- Limitation
- Issue
- Mitigation.
Here’s the information for the row Database Size:
- Limitation–Exchange 2007 – 200GB; Exchange 2010 – 2TB or 1 disk, whichever is less
- Issue–The DB size guidance changed from 200GB (if you are in CCR) to 2TB or 1 disk, whichever is greater (if you have 2+ copies of the DB in question)
- Mitigation—Blank. No information.
Okay.
I hope you are able to locate this document. For those of you eager to install Exchange 2010, SharePoint 2010, and Fast Search 2010, you will want to make sure you have these type of spreadsheets at your fingertips * before * you jump on the Microsoft Enterprise steam engine. The information in the spreadsheet makes clear why some types of email content processing may be expensive to implement.
Stephen E Arnold, March 16, 2010
This is the equivalent of the free newspaper Velocity in Louisville. Read it for nothing. I will report working for no dough to the Jefferson County agency that thinks I work in Louisville when I spend most of my time in the warm embrace of airlines.
BA-Insight: New Angle on Lead Generation
March 13, 2010
The Microsoft Fast search road show was in New York this week. I stayed in rural Kentucky watching the acid run off trickle into my goose pond. I took time out from this strenuous activity to read “BA-Insight Announces New Direct Access to Free Information and Resources for SharePoint Search and Fast.”
BA-Insight develops software, including Longitude which “helps people find an analyze relevant information across the entire enterprise independently of format or location.” The firm’s Web site has been revamped and features “an enhanced support portal and new free resource library specially designed for enterprise evaluating SharePoint or Fast Search or engaging in SharePoint or Fast Search deployments, including Fast ESP.”
I took a look at the site. The splash page is below, but you will see different graphics because the rectangular area features a slide show of information.
Source: http://www.ba-insight.net/Pages/Home.aspx
You can download white papers, get inks to videos, and access the company’s Web logs. One of the documents is the Microsoft Enterprise Search 2010 Roadmap. When I clicked on that link, I saw another link and the icon labeled premium shown below.
In order to access that document, I was given an option to fill in a form with my name, title, organization, phone, email, and interests. The angle seems to be that to get this document, one must go through a vendor like BA-Insight.
One of the goslings filled in the form and the road map is a single page that explains Microsoft’s five search technologies and lists the capabilities, repository indexing, and manageability features of each product. Interesting stuff.
Here’s one snippet of the roadmap, which is more of a table than a map in my opinion:
Interesting stuff. Particularly with regard to scaling, I wonder if organizations will have the appetite for this type of hardware footprint on site. Will enterprise Fast ESP work from the cloud? © Microsoft 2010.
Several questions:
- Will more search vendors shift into education or missionary marketing mode to move their systems?
- In today’s financial climate, will the portal approach supplant the more traditional features-benefit type of marketing that characterizes some search vendors’ Web sites?
- Has the complexity of the product offering broken the back of the adage “KISS” for business oriented communications?
I will watch to see if other vendors embrace the educational portal approach to sales and lead generation. The addled goose just makes information available via a blog, assuming that content with an edge will generate inquiries. Perhaps once again I am wrong?
Stephen E Arnold, March 13, 2010
No one paid me to write this short article. Because of the references to Microsoft and its five search options, I will report non payment to the Department of Defense, an organization with an interest in Microsoft’s technology.
The New MSN
March 11, 2010
Short honk: Just ran the demo for the new MSN at http://www.tourmsn.com/SL/. I clicked on Go to MSN Now. Dead link. Interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Since I mentioned “dead link” I will report this state of non payment to the folks who used to manage CompanyCommand.com.
Google Flat: Is the Microsoft Kryptonite Weakening Google?
March 11, 2010
Web search share data are subject to the old plus or minus gambit. A share of 60 percent could be 50 percent or 70 percent, maybe more, maybe less. Most write ups skip the details of method, variance, and any “shaping” done to create a nice, tidy report.
But Web share data are fun. Navigate to “Bing Gains US Search Market Share for Ninth Straight Month” and join in the game. Here’s the passage I found interesting:
February was the ninth consecutive month of slight gains in search share for Bing, which Microsoft unveiled in June accompanied by a 100-million-dollar advertising campaign in a bid to challenge search juggernaut Google.
That is some pocket change. The payoff has been a jump from “11.5 percent in February from 11.3 percent in January, the Web analytics firm [comScore] said.” Maybe Microsoft has found a way to suck the juice from Google with Bing-flavored Kryptonite?
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this. With the cost of that 0.2 jump in mind, I know I have to report this to the Department of Treasury, which does understand money and its value.
Microsoft SharePoint: The CMS Killer
March 7, 2010
I read “Interesting Perspective on How SharePoint Is Capturing the ECM Market.” The write up references a post by Lee Dallas who writes the Big Men on Content blog. The idea is that SharePoint works seamlessly with Active Directory. As a result, access and identity are part of the woodwork, and no information technology staff have to futz around so employees can find and manipulate documents, presentations, or spreadsheets. Furthermore, SharePoint put a stake in the heart of enterprise content management systems by adding collaboration to the create it, find it, and use it approach of the traditional content management vendors. SharePoint won because it added these features and did a great job marketing.
I agree that Microsoft SharePoint seems to be everywhere. I also know that Microsoft has pumped Tiger Juice into its partners and resellers to push the SharePoint solution. The marketing message is reinforced with zeal and great prices. Keep in mind that SharePoint requires a dump truck full of other Microsoft software to deliver on the bullet points in the SharePoint sales presentation.
Now my view on this brilliant success is a bit different.
First, Microsoft SharePoint has been around a long time. It is a combination of products, features, functions. When I hear SharePoint, I see the nCompass logo, circa 2001. I also think “content server”. The current incarnation of SharePoint is a bunch of stuff that requires even more Microsoft stuff to work. A number of Microsoft partners have built software to snap into SharePoint to deliver some of the features that Microsoft talks about but cannot get to work. These range from search to content management itself. I wrote about a SharePoint expert who uses WordPress because SharePoint is too much of a headache. Age can bring wisdom, but I think SharePoint’s trajectory has been one that delivers mind boggling complexity. SharePoint consultants love the product. Addled geese like me see it as one more crazy enterprise solution that today’s top managers just pay for reflexively.
Second, the world of content management has become mired in muddy road after muddy road. Some projects make travel by donkey delightful. CMS was created to help outfits without any expertise in producing information post Web pages. Then the Web morphed into an applications platform and the CMS vendors were like the buggy whip manufacturers who thought horse powered carriages were a fad. Big CMS projects almost never worked without application of generous layers of money and custom engineering. At the same time, information management became important due to the fine work of the SEC, Enron, Tyco, and other outfits. Now many organizations have to keep track of documents, not lose them like White House email. It turns out that managing electronic information is pretty difficult. The bubble gum approach of Web CMS won’t work for a nuclear power plan engineering change order. Some folks are discovering this fact that a Web page is different from tracking the versions of a diagram for a cooling pipe in an ageing pressurized water reactor. Imagine that!
Third, companies lack the dough to spend wildly for information technology. The financial challenges of many organizations have not been prevented by fancy systems. Some might argue that fancy systems accelerated the impact of certain financial problems. The reason there are the alleged 100 million SharePoint users is a result of really aggressive marketing and bundling. If SharePoint provides job security, go for it. I have heard this sentiment expressed by an information technology company in Europe on more than one occasion.
The net net of SharePoint is that Microsoft is going to make a great deal of money, but there will be a gradual loss of customers. The reason is partly due to demographics and partly due to what I call SharePoint fatigue. When users discover that the fancy metadata functions don’t work, some will poke around. Metadata must be normalized; otherwise, fancy functions don’t work very well. Fixing metadata is expensive. When a cloud service comes along with the function that normalizes metadata transparently, then SharePoint will be behind an eight ball.
SharePoint, like other Microsoft software, is reaching a point where moving forward becomes more difficult and more expensive. That’s the signal for outfits like Google to strike. The death of CMS has given SharePoint a good run. Now that SharePoint may be difficult to scale, stabilize, and extend, SharePoint becomes catnip for Googzilla. Just my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, March 7, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Since I mention Microsoft, I think I have to report non payment to the many SharePoint fans at the Department of Defense.
Microsoft and a Slow Recovery
March 7, 2010
I attended a conference last week and quite a few people in the information sector indicated to me that 2010 looked pretty good. Okay, nine weeks into the new year and “pretty good”. Then I read ChannelInsider.com’s “Microsoft COO Kevin Turner Predicts Slow Recovery.” Microsoft is somewhat optimistic, but the word “slow” is either a conservative spin on the Windows 7 cash bonanza or a hedge. For me, the most interesting comment in the article was:
In his speech, Turner said it was “time to get back to business” after what Microsoft has repeatedly called an economic reset, rather than just a recession from which the world economy would simply recover. He said Microsoft’s own spending would not return to previous levels in many areas after cost cuts, but Microsoft was at the same time increasing research and development spending to a record $9.5 billion this year, more than any company.
Seems reasonable. I suppose the realignment of the Microsoft Fast search project is part of the cost cuts.
Stephen E Arnold, March 7, 2010
No one paid me to write this. With my reference to cost cuts, I will report my unpaid status to the Office of Management & Budget.
Clouds: Fast, Slow, Broken
March 6, 2010
Measuring cloud speed is one of those chores aspiring meteorologists must endure. Here’s a snapshot of what’s involved. My source is Charles F. Brooks, The Use of Clouds in Forecasting, page 1167:
The quickest way of getting cloud motions is with a window-sill nephoscope consisting of a plane, black, horizontal mirror of eight to ten inches diameter, with- out markings on the mirror other than a depression at the center, and a peephole eyepiece through which the observer can watch the motion of the image of a cloud and follow it with a small marker. When followed for a standard period (or easy fraction or multiple), the direction and relative speed are determined with a single placement of a ruler,
Whew. That’s going to take some hunting here in Harrod’s Creek. I wonder if the gun and ammo shop has a nephoscope.
I was thinking about cloud speed when I read “Steve Ballmer’s Memo To Microsoft Staff: “We Must Move At Cloud Speed”. I think the idea is for Microsoft to move quickly. As I said in my SSN Minute today, Microsoft is turning to Cray to help Microsoft with its data center issues. My hunch is that if Microsoft moves too quickly its plumbing might not be able to keep pace. Here’s the snippet that caught my attention in the write up:
We have strong competitors. We need to be (and are) willing to change our business models to take advantage of the cloud. We must move at “cloud speed,” especially in our consumer offerings. And we need to be crystal clear about the value we provide to all our customers. To drive our message home even further, today you will see an ad campaign in the U.S. focused on our commercial and government businesses, a new website with consolidated content and case studies, and ongoing emphasis on the cloud from me and other members of the SLT in our upcoming speeches and presentations.
I will be most interested to see how Microsoft Fast, the enterprise search product, performs as a cloud service. I recall the good old days of the application service providers (ASP) and hosted Exchange. The cloud was moving slowly. Will Microsoft Fast move quickly as indexes update and queries get processed? There are fast clouds and there are slow clouds? Which will be the cloud for Microsoft Fast?
Stephen E Arnold, March 6, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I have to report unpaid writing to NOAA, an outfit that understands but is not yet able to control clouds. Someday I expect. Someday.
