Microsoft and the Apple iPhone
December 2, 2009
Short honk: I am sitting yet again in the international terminal in Hotlanta’s airport. I hear a conversation between two 30 somethings about their recent Microsoft experience. One had on a Microsoft T shirt, so maybe one was a “real” Microsoft engineer. The snippet of their enthusiastic conversation was that 25 percent of Microsoft employees use an Apple iPhone. I know that the spiffy Microsoft store on the Redmond campus sells only mobile devices with Windows Mobile 6.5 living in the devices’ solidstate heart. Pretty startling market penetration if true. With an Android phone from Google heating up the blogosphere, can Microsoft make headway? I wonder if I can get paid to use a Windows 6.5 phone?
Stephen Arnold, December 1, 2009
I wish to disclose to the General Services Administration that I was not paid to write about the iPhone or the Google Android phone. I presume both of these devices will be on the GSA schedule.
Google and Mobile Index Tricks
November 24, 2009
I am steadfastly against the search engine optimization baloney. However, when a substantive article finds its way to me I want to call my two or three readers’ attention to that write up. If you have a Web site with both a “regular” Web presence and a “mobile” version, you will want to read and save “Ensuring Your Site is Indexed in Google’s Mobile Search”. The article reminded me that “regular” search and mobile search are different. Then Chris Crum goes through the specifics of getting both the “regular” and the mobile sites indexed by Googzilla. Highly recommended.
Stephen Arnold, November 24, 2009
I want to alert the Kentucky State Police that I did not write this article on my BlackBerry whilst driving. And, almost as important, I was not paid for performing this act of “safe text creation”. These disclosures are better than hitting a Catholic church for confession several times a day.
Beating Windows Mobile to Death. Stop Already
November 18, 2009
Windows Mobile 6.5 keeps popping up in my mobile search RSS newsreader. Enough. I looked at Windows Mobile with each release. The system gets better with each version, but the folks at Apple pulled a leap frog trick. Android then went with the open source angle. With Apple and Google busy working to out gun one another, the Nokias, the RIMs, the Palms, and the Windows Mobiles of the world have been falling behind.
If you want a run down of why Windows Mobile is faced with a sticky wicket, read “How Microsoft Blew It with Windows Mobile.” For me the analysis is more significant than the fact that Microsoft is behind in a key market sector. Mr. Brian X. Chen wrote:
Leaks indicate Microsoft plans to incorporate iPhone-like touch gestures. Windows Mobile 7 is scheduled for a 2010 release.
That’s the story in a nutshell. Me-too is not enough. Windows Mobile has failed to play the leap frog game. As a result the company watches from the sidelines. Marketing assurances are no longer magnetic. The game is not over, but Microsoft must play leap frog. And what about mobile search? Same story.
Stephen Arnold, November 18, 2009
Dear National Park Service, I know one can play leap frog in these natural wonders. However, I must report that I was not paid to write about leap frog in this article.
The Obvious in Mobile Land
November 16, 2009
I relish consulting firms’ reports about technology. I find that the blue chip firms and the azure chip outfits are becoming more alike. In the early days of consulting, there were a handful of firms, including ur-consultants like the Edwin Booz outfit and the Ivy Lee operation. Today, blues and azures are struggling to make business sense in areas that have left the economic landscape littered with mile markers, billboards, and neon signs blinking their messages in pink and yellow lights.
You may want to read “Windows Mobile Loses Serious Market Share”, an article that summarizes a Gartner Group report about mobile market share. Keep in mind that Gartner is a firm which does not want its information reproduced. I can’t quote from the Gartner report, but you can start your hunt for the information at “Windows Mobiles Loses Nearly a Third of Its Market Share”.
Microsoft is trying to make Windows mobile better. I think that Version 6.5 is in the phones on offer in the Microsoft store on the Redmond campus. You can buy a phone in that shop, and it darn well better run Windows mobile. Microsoft also has a Softie who is making the rounds of consultancies, handset makers, and developers. I believe this person is Jeff Paul, but I may have that mixed up.
The problem Microsoft faces with Windows mobile is, as I pointed out in Google Version 2.0, focus. The company is involved in a great many markets. So is Google, but there is a difference. Google has a relative homogeneous software platform. Although not perfect, the Google does not have to fool around with legacy software. Microsoft, on the other hand, has silos of technologies. When these have to interact, Microsoft “wraps” or “hooks” systems together. This works when the resources are available to handle the fuzz. And Microsoft is mindful of legacy customers, and some of the those folks are running older servers and want to connect those with hot, new mobile services. That’s more work.
The present situation is that Windows mobile is, like Nokia, in a world of hurt. Nokia sells lots of phones but it is not exactly a hot mobile company. Windows mobile is lagging.
The reason for this state of affairs is easy to identify. Just look at what devices people are using. The iPhone is prominent. The BlackBerry still appears in the talons of New York business mavens. The geeks, including one in the ArnoldIT.com lab, loves his Gphone. You can see him clutching his much loved device in this ArnoldIT.com developers’ video.
The consultant’s study referenced in the articles referenced in this write up purport to document the obvious. I am not sure that there’s much mystery about the success of Windows mobile. The obvious is good. I think it is a useful historical exercise, a bit like writing a research paper in sophomore Ancient Western History. Good practice. Known data.
Stephen Arnold, November 16, 2009
Oyez, oyez, Federal Communications Commission! I was not paid to write this obvious article about the obvious study of mobile operating systems market share. Oyez, oyez. Yikes, I am using a mobile device with a lousy operating system. I am paying for this communication.
Cell Phone Early Warning System
November 9, 2009
A happy quack to my colleague in the Near East for pointing me to “Cellphone Alert System Expected in 2 Yrs.” The point of the story is that Israel’s home front command “will be able to calculate the precise location of an impact zone, and alert residents in an affected neighborhood via their cellphones.” I also noted this passage:
Soffer [Israeli official] said that 90 percent of the civilian casualties sustained by Israel during the Second Lebanon War and Operation Cast Lead in Gaza involved people who were struck by projectiles while they were in open areas away from buildings. Civilians who seek cover in designated safe zones during rocket attacks are not likely to be wounded or killed…
Interesting use of “push, real-time mobile technology in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 9, 2009
I was at the Jewish Community Center last night but I had to pay to get in. I don’t think that counts as payment for this write up. To be safe, I will alert the Jefferson Country Animal Control Office.
Google Open Source or Open Divorce for Android
October 31, 2009
Laptop Magazine, a publication I once read in airport newsstands, ran a story that plopped into my RSS basket this afternoon (October 30, 2009). “Networks in Motion: Google Attacking Developer Community, Android Openness Total BS” nibbled on an important information Snickers bar. Mark Spoonauer’s story reported:
According to him [Steve Andler, vp marketing for Networks in Motion], the free Google Maps for Navigation Beta is the second time devs have been burned by Google. Latitude was the first shot across the bow when it got added to Google Maps, leaving the likes of Loopt scrambling to justify their relevance. It’s obviously in Andler’s best interest to defend Networks in Motion and the work that they do in the GPS space, but given his experience in the PC industry–including at Toshiba, Fujitsu, and Apple–he brings an interesting perspective to the debate over whether Google may be biting the hands that feed Android. Check out the interview and decide for yourself.
The balance of the article is the text of an interview with Mr. Andler. Please, read the full interview.
Let’s assume that the opinion of Mr. Andler is spot on. Will Google find itself in more hot water? Seems likely. The open source world may not be the happy campers at Google’s next developer picnic.
Stephen Arnold, October 31, 2009
The person who was to buy me lunch today forgot. I would have counted that free lunch as payment for this opinion piece.
Differentiation: The New Enterprise Search Barrier
October 30, 2009
I don’t know one tree from another. When someone points out a maple and remarks that it is a sugar maple, I have no clue about a maple and even less information about a sugar maple. A lack of factual foundation means that I know nothing about trees. Sure, I know that most trees are green and that I can cut one down and burn it. But I don’t own a chain saw, so that general information means zero in the real world.
Now consider the clueless minions who have to purchase an enterprise search system. The difference between my tree knowledge and their search knowledge is easy to point out. Both of us are likely to become confused. To me, trees look alive. To the search procurement team, search systems look alike.
I received an announcement about a search system (nameless, of course) which asserted:
[The vendor’s product] is the first mobile enterprise search server to enable secure ‘anywhere’ access to data that resides across all information sources, including individual desktops, email stores, file shares, external sites and enterprise applications. Leveraging the [vendor’s product] Enterprise Server as its backbone, [the vendor’s product] Anywhere is capable of delivering secure, immediate access to any browser-enabled device, from an iPhone to a Blackberry and beyond.
I find that this write up is * very * similar to the Coveo email search solution, which has one of its features as mobile access plus a number of other bells and whistles.
I can document many other similarities in the way in which search vendors describe their products. In fact, I identified a phrase first used by Endeca in 2003 or 2004 as a key element in Microsoft’s marketing of its SharePoint search systems. My recollection is the phrase in question is “user experience.” Endeca may have snagged it somewhere just as Mozart plucked notes from his contemporaries.
Confusion among search vendors is easy. Many recycle words, phrases, and buzzwords, hoping that their spin will win customers. One thing is certain. Vendors have the azure chip consultants in a tizzy. One prominent azure chip outfit in New York has pegged Google a laggard and a product that has yet to make its appearance as a leader.
Procurement teams? Baffled for sure. Differentiation is needed, but it doesn’t come by recycling another vendor’s marketing collateral or relying on the azure chip crowd to cook up a new phrase to baffle the paying customers, or some of the paying customers.
Vendors, differentiate. Don’t imitate.
Stephen Arnold, October 30, 2009
A former Ziffer bought me dinner this week. Does that count as compensation? I deserve more.
SEO for Bing
October 13, 2009
I don’t know too much about Bing.com’s relevance ranking algorithm. The last time I invested time in Bing.com was three months ago. I did find “5 Simple Steps to Optimize Your Website for Bing, the New Microsoft Search Engine” more evidence for following Google’s guidelines for Web sites. Regarding the point about outbound links, in our tests, outbound links are useful because such outbounds may result in a reciprocal backlink. The rest of the tips seem to come straight from the Google playbook.
Stephen Arnold, October 12, 2009
SharePoint: The Enterprise Platform
October 12, 2009
I read “SharePoint 2010: The Enterprise Platform” with an open mind. Microsoft is “all over” the US Federal government. Many of the information technology savvy folks with whom I speak point out the advantages of the SharePoint solution. Programming is getting easier. Users are comfortable with the basic features and functions of the system. Competitors’ products are often more expensive to license. SharePoint is easily shaped into what an information professional needs to solve a particular problem. Microsoft makes available a large number of software “MRE”s; that is, ready to eat, no extra effort required to get certain capabilities or functionality.
Jeremy Thake’s article provides some useful background for SharePoint 2010. This release of SharePoint adds a number of new capabilities to an already richly endowed system. He did make a comment that I found interesting:
In my opinion and a lot of others SharePoint is “a jack of all trades and a master of none”, much like most of the other vendors who played the same card. SharePoint is extremely strong in the collaboration area from an End User perspective, but is weak for example in Records Management, Business Intelligence and Digital Asset Management.The days of purchasing a product for a specific area have clearly gone which is a shame because you pick one of the Enterprise Platforms and suffer in the weaker areas.
He concludes his write up with a reference to MOSS 2007 “horror stories” and makes clear that he loves SharePoint “anyway”.
My thought is that overburdened information technology professionals may find the charms of SharePoint fading when complexity and costs begin to rise. These two issues may be the stepping stones for Google, despite its flaws and weaknesses, to make significant gains at a time when Microsoft is hoping that SharePoint 2010 blunts the appeal of Google’s enterprise offerings.
Google is no match for Microsoft in terms of marketing. But Google does a much better job with the technology for a hybrid platform in my opinion. Can Google deal with the buzz saw of SharePoint 2010? Interesting face off to watch in the last weeks of 2009.
Stephen Arnold, October 12, 2009 No dough
Coveo’s New Enterprise Desktop Search System
October 1, 2009
I have been using Coveo’s products for years. I remember the first time I fired up the original desktop search program. I found the interface intuitive and the features in line with how I looked for information. I learned from the company yesterday (September 30, 2009) that a new version of the product is now available. I noticed that the company has added several new features to its Enterprise Desktop Search application; for example:
- Search of content on my netbook, my Outlook mail store, and other applications running in my Harrod’s Creek data center.
- A centralized index of all enterprise information, including the formerly risky and elusive, cross-enterprise PC and laptop content, which is useful when I am in a meeting and need a coding gosling to locate a particular item of information that I tucked away without telling anyone its location
- Enhanced monitoring functions.
After installing the application, you will want to check out the built in connectors, the faceted “point and click” search function, and the support for access from a BlackBerry device. Nifty indeed because RIM’s search function is not too useful in my opinion.
The president and founder Laurent Simoneau told me:
With our roots dating to the early days of Copernic, a global leader in consumer desktop search, we were committed to build the cross-enterprise capability to index and provide unified access for employees to their desktop content, including their email,” said Coveo CEO and President Laurent Simoneau, who prior to founding Coveo in 2005 was COO of Copernic. “What we’ve done is elevate that access to a higher level, with unified search of not only their individual PCs and laptops, but of contextually relevant knowledge and information residing in any enterprise system, based on IT permissions. In so doing, we’ve placed control over cross-enterprise desktop content indexing, with complete security and access permissions, in the hands of IT.
The benefits of the new system struck me as reducing the time spent hunting for email. Larger organizations will be able to reduces costs and risks as well.
The Coveo Enterprise Desktop Search application is powered by the Coveo Enterprise Search 6.0 platform, which is scalable from hundreds of thousands to billions of documents, and requires approximately 20 percent of the server footprint of legacy enterprise search solutions. Our tests show that Coveo is one of the more modular and scalable enterprise search solutions. It ranks as one of the easiest to install and configure search solutions we have tested. Worth a look. Fill out the form and give it a spin.
Stephen Arnold, October 1, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
