ZyLAB Integrates Google Maps
November 8, 2009
According to Documanager.de, ZyLAB has integrated Google Maps with its ZyIMAGE Information Access Platform. Users now have the ability to identify the location of documents in a hit list. ZyLAB says that coordinates detail of the contents of a document can also be displayed on a Google Maps. The function requires no additional work on the part of the user.
Uses of the functionality range from law enforcement to eDiscovery. A user runs a query and each pin represents a document or a set of documents that are displayed on the additional metadata when you hover the mouse over it.
ZyLAB’s Rijnbeek Vincent, said:
This new functionality provides additional options to our use of visualization tools and ensuring more transparency in the information jungle. If, for example included in the context of criminal investigations coordinates of a crime scene in a document, it shows a pin exactly in these Google Maps to. But even in the building and construction sector is the new integration useful, by example, location information from complex construction plans quickly and clearly represents.
The use of visualization tools solves a major problem of the usual file structures: These traditional structures typically do not allow users to view an item that is not currently displayed on the screen. Large document sets pose a particular challenge. A collapsible folder structure is unwieldy, especially if users have to follow several nested folders. The constant scrolling, as is required in table structures, is cumbersome and not conducive to efficient and accurate data investigations.
More information is available from ZyLAB at http://www.zylab.com.
Stephen Arnold, November 8, 2009
No joy, no payment. Report this charitable act to the Red Cross.
MSN Logo Change
November 6, 2009
Short honk: This post is not about search. I wanted to document that MSN has revamped its butterfly.I read the article in Venture Beat “MSN Changes the Butterfly”. The write up included an image of the new look.
I like the look. I struggle with the different faces of Microsoft, but as an addled goose, I am easily confused. There’s Bing.com, Live.com, MSDN, Channel 9, and more. These different visages of Microsoft contribute to the firm’s online traffic. Google is a plain Jane or a plain Wayne indeed. Maybe a better UX will allow Google to catch up with Microsoft’s lead in the Internet?
Stephen Arnold, November 7, 2009
Not only did I have to pay for my Microsoft developer’s license, the last Microsoft person I emailed, ignored me. So, not a penny for this short article. I am reporting this to the Jefferson County Sheriff and the crew at Police Donuts.
Google Pressures eCommerce Search Vendors
November 6, 2009
Companies like Dieselpoint, Endeca, and Omniture Mercado face a new competitor. The Google has, according to Internet News, “launched Commerce Search, a cloud-based enterprise search application for e-tailers that promises to improve sales conversion rates and simplify the online shopping experience for their customers.” For me the most significant passage in the write up was:
Commerce Search not only integrates the data submitted to Google’s Product Center and Merchant Center but also ties into its popular Google Analytics application, giving e-tailers an opportunity to not only track customer behavior but the effectiveness of the customized search application. Once an e-tailer has decided to give Commerce Search a shot, it uploads an API with all its product catalog, descriptions and customization requirements and then Google shoots back an API with those specifications that’s installed on the Web site. Google also offers a marketing and administration consultation to highlight a particular brand of camera or T-shirt that the retailer wants to prominently place on its now customized search results. It also gives e-tailers full control to create their own merchandising rules so that it can, for example, always display Canon cameras at the top of its digital camera search results or list its latest seasonal items by descending price order.
Google’s technical investments in its programmable search engine, context server, and shopping cart service chug along within this new service. Google’s system promises to be fast. Most online shopping services are sluggish. Google knows how to deliver high speed performance. Combining Google’s semantic wizardry with low latency results puts some of the leading eCommerce vendors in a technology arm lock.
Some eCommerce vendors have relied on Intel to provide faster CPUs to add vigor to older eCommerce architectures. There are some speed gains, but Google delivers speed plus important semantic enhancements that offer other performance benefits. One example is content processing. Once changes are pushed to Google or spidered by Google from content exposed to Google, the indexes update quickly. Instead of asking a licensee of a traditional eCommerce system to throw hardware at a performance bottleneck or pay for special system tuning, the Google just delivers speed for structured content processed from the Google platform.
In my opinion, competitors will point out that Google is inexperienced in eCommerce. Google may appear to be a beginner in this important search sector. Looking more deeply into the engineering resources responsible for Commerce Search one finds that Google has depth. I hate to keep mentioning folks like Ramanathan Guha, but he is one touchstone whose deep commercial experience has influenced this Google product.
How will competitors like Dieselpoint, Endeca, and Omniture Mercado respond? The first step will be to downplay the importance of this Google initiative. Next I expect to learn that Microsoft Fast ESP has a better, faster, and cheaper eCommerce solution that plays well with SharePoint and Microsoft’s own commerce server technology. Finally, search leaders such as Autonomy will find a marketing angle to leave Google in the shadow of clever positioning. But within a year, my hunch is that Google’s Commerce Search will have helped reshape the landscape for eCommerce search. Google may not be perfect, but its products are often good enough, fast, and much loved by those who cannot imaging life without Google.
Stephen Arnold, November 6, 2009
I want to disclose to the Department of the Navy that none of these vendors offered me so much as a how de doo to write this article.
Wall Street Journal Proving that Newspaper Marketing Is Off the Rails
November 5, 2009
Okay, I am a real life subscriber to the Wall Street Journal. I have written the company, called its 800 number, and captured the spam attack on me in this blog. The Wall Street Journal simply ignores a customer’s requests to be treated as a – well – paying customer.
Today more spam. Here’s the crap that floats into my personal mail account:
This is the same annoying, repetitive, stupid offer. I am a subscriber. I paid more than $204 for my print subscription. If I am smart enough to subscribe, perhaps I am smart enough to figure out that the WSJ is low balling me. Why would I buy a second subscription at a lower price when I have learned that the WSJ gouged me earlier this year?
But that’s not enough!
The Wall Street Journal mailed me the following offer:
Note that this special offer to me, a paying customer, is yet another astounding discount. How much can I buy a second unneeded subscription to the Wall Street Journal?
The cost is only $59. Keep in mind that I paid more than the spam offer. Now this desperate, confused and inept publisher is reminding me that its premier business publication is worth $59 a year or in the $0.20 per day range.
How stupid does this outfit think I am? Pretty stupid, I assume.
To recap:
- I am a customer.
- I paid hundreds of dollars for one subscription to the Wall Street Journal
- One one day I received an offer via spam email and then a second lower ball offer via snail mail.
Folks, this marketing is a clear signal that the Wall Street Journal does not care about me as a customer. It is marketing special offers that make me feel as if I were duped. The company ignores a customer’s request to be spared unneeded, unwanted offers.
Mr. Murdoch, you have a method that angers me and demonstrates poor business judgment. Keep in mind that I am an existing customer. Amazing.
Stephen Arnold, November 5, 2009
- To the Government Printing Office: I was not paid to write this case analysis. Do you think the WSJ would pay me to do anything for them?
Maybe the Internet Was a Really Bad Idea?
November 4, 2009
I suppose that the last gasp of traditional media is to long for the days before the “Internet”. Read “The Monster Devouring Us.” Do you get the sense that the Daily Mail would be happier when paper was cheap, most folks were illiterate, distribution took place via horse drawn carts, and newspaper distributors were seven year old boys? I liked the line up of evils that the “Internet” has wrought. Even better was the spin that the wizards who created the “Internet” wish they had gone to pub and thrown darts or put that message in an envelope and dropped it in the letter box.
The problem is not the “Internet”. The challenges are more deeply rooted. Technology makes the idea of unintended consequences fun to analyze. I think it will be tough to go back in time, maybe to the halcyon days of the broadsheet. What I thought as I read the article was that if London, England’s newspapers continue on their present track, I will read about the evils of the “Internet” on a blog. Mr. Murdoch and a former official from the lands of the Tsars. Really.
The article has a great photo of the first computer used to send an email. I was hoping for the Web cam that showed the coffee pot at Cambridge University, however.
Stephen Arnold, November 4, 2009
Bet you a dime that no one paid me to write this opinion down. I am reporting this fact to the Administration on Aging.
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.
Social Media Search
October 30, 2009
“Social Media Accounts for 18% of Information Search Market” is an interesting summary of social search data. I take these types of data roundups with a dose of cod liver oil, but you may find the info tasty in their native form. What struck me as important is that social search has emerged as a specific type of search. Nothing like the provenance of info from a friend who may or may not know what the heck he / she is talking about. But in today’s world that’s close enough for horseshoes, just like these statistics.
Stephen Arnold, October 30, 2009
No one I know is sufficiently clueless to pay me for writing this item.
Educational Publishers, The Google Is Here
October 30, 2009
Google has been making baby steps into the education market. Its enterprise group has been landing sales in universities and in public schools in New South Wales. The Google has a tie up with IBM to goose (no pun intended) computer science majors into coding for massively parallel, distributed systems. Wave is splashing against some educational rocks. Google’s neighbor (NASA) is in the university business with Google and some other interesting partners. If you are not familiar with Singularity University, you may want to read the Wikipedia write up. Finally, for those really behind the curve, watch the videos on Google Video.
Now with some context, you can appreciate the story in the Los Angeles Times on October 28, 2009. “Google Co Founder Sergey Brin Wants More Computers in Schools”. The article included a passage I found interesting:
He [Brin] advocated putting all textbooks on computers, to make for easier access, and for putting high school students to work — writing Wikipedia articles, and teaching technology to senior citizens and middle school students. In teaching, they will learn. Brin spoke today at a conference on Google’s campus, Breakthrough Learning in the Digital Age, which the tech company is co-hosting with Common Sense Media and the Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. By and large, speakers passionately spoke of the advantages of equipping schools with the latest in digital technology, and of engaging students on their home turf — computers. Google has been relatively quiet in the field of education, but the company is starting to make a splash.
In my Google: The Digital Gutenberg I describe some use cases for Google as an educational ecosystem. What I find interesting is that if I were teaching a class in computer science, I would require no other resources than those available from Google. If I were a publisher of computer science textbooks, I would be asking, “Hmm, what’s my Plan B?” I discuss the business implications in my monograph.
Google’s method is to seep and surround. Once the ground is watered and fertile, new businesses grow. If you think Google’s end game is to scan library books and sell ads with some Web search functions, you are misreading the rather clear writing on the Googleplex’s big white board.
Stephen Arnold, October 30, 2009
The Google once gave me a mouse pad. Does that count as a pay off for explaining how Google will reshape education? I think not but the Railway Retirement Board may, hence the disclosure.
Microsoft and Yahoo Redo
October 30, 2009
I read “Microsoft and Yahoo Delay Signing Search Deal” and heard Yogi Berra say, “It’s déjà vu all over again”. Why am I not surprised. The post deal melt down deal involved no cash but lots of “goodwill”. How did Silicon Alley Insider learn about the “delay”? Yahoo disclosed this item in an SEC filing. Hmmm. Subtle on Yahoo’s part but not sufficiently subtle for Nicholas Carlson, who noticed the item. He wrote:
We reached out to Yahoo and got back a statement that sounds almost exactly like the SEC filing: “’Microsoft and Yahoo! are committed to this agreement and believe this is a highly competitive deal that is good for consumers, advertisers and publishers. We have made good progress in finalizing the definitive agreements. Given the complex nature of this transaction there remain some issues that need some additional clarity and definitive details. So, the teams at Yahoo! and Microsoft are continuing to work on the remaining details, and we have mutually agreed to extend the period to negotiate and execute the agreement. We plan to do this as expeditiously as possible. Both companies are optimistic that we will be able to close this deal by early 2010.’”
Actions speak louder than words. Top line revenue growth or the lack thereof speak even more loudly. Google must be giggling in the Googleplex. With each day that passes, the gap between Google and its competitors increases. Ask.com seems to be crying, “Uncle.” As I said in 2007 much to the annoyance of a 20-something, “Game over in Web search.”
Next up for Microsoft and Yahoo? Real time search. Google is lagging in this sector. Maybe that’s the future for Yahoo?
Stephen Arnold, October 30, 2009
No gifts on my Halloween skeleton for this article.
Ask.com Twisting in the Wind
October 29, 2009
Nothing like knowing a unit of a big company is on the chopping block. I flashed back to a dinner with an azure chip consultant who spent time and energy explaining that Ask.com was the next big thing in search. I listened and dismissed the fellow and his firm as a bag of goose feathers. (This is an option reserved for an addled goose.) I think that dinner was in 2006 and 2007, and Ask.com has gone nowhere. According to this Reuters’ story (“Microsoft Seen as Diller’s Best Bet for Ask.com”), Ask.com’s optimistic owner may see Microsoft as the white knight for old AskJeeves.com service. What I also recalled upon reading this story was a statement by Jason Calacanis that a one percent share of a Web search market was worth a great deal of money. I think his assertion with a billion dollars per percentage point, but I may have that wrong.)
What I do know is that whoever buys AskJeeves.com is going to make it easy to calculate exactly how much a four percent share of the Web search market is worth. My thought is that four percent won’t amount too much because Web search share in and of itself is irrelevant. What makes Web search valuable is the monetization efficiency of that share. I am a simple goose and divide $22 billion by 80 percent and come up with an efficiency score. I can do more fancy math, but I don’t think numerical recipes will add a truckload of insight. If Ask.com were pumping cash, would its owner hint that the property is for sale? Maybe? Maybe not? Ask.com—no matter who owns it—is going to be a tough bird to fatten for Thanksgiving dinner. Will Microsoft buy Ask.com? After the stunning purchase of Fast Search & Transfer for $1.23 billion I would not be surprised if Microsoft cut down Ask.com and carted the service back to Redmond.
Stephen Arnold, October 29, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
