Consultant Temp Omits Context for ATT and Google FCC Dust Up
September 28, 2009
I thought ATT was miffed because Google Voice can block calls ATT cannot. With Google’s method Google gets an edge over ATT. Big surprise, right? The Google can block calls to places like Harrod’s Creek. ATT can charge more for this type of connection. I know. ATT is my phone company.
Then, I read “AT&T Calling Google a Noisome Trumpeter to FCC”. Gerson Lehrman Group is a rental agency for consultants. The idea is a good one. Save the big fees imposed by McKinsey, Booz, and Boston Consulting Group and get solid advice. I think it works reasonably well in this belt tightening market. The analysis of the ATT and Google dust up over Google Voice does what most MBA-inspired analyses do: Describes what’s in the newspapers. One comment caught my attention:
AT&T points out the FCC’s fourth principle of the Internet Policy Statement to be about competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers. The FCC issue will be if customers with IP connections are favored in making calls with lower costs and more UC capabilities. The goal for the U.S. market has to be that competition improves communications connectivity regardless of the type of provider.
My view of the squabble is that ATT now realizes that Google is a next generation telecommunications company. In fact, Google’s engineers have pushed into technical fields that were converted to Wal*Marts and Costcos by the “old” Baby Bells. Like farmers angered with new uses for their land, the farmers want to go back to the halcyon days of the past.
Google has marginalized the past, particularly with regard to telecommunications in four ways. None of these is referenced in the consulting firm’s analysis:
- Google has built a global infrastructure that provides digital or bit-centric services unencumbered by the methods and systems that US telcos in particular provide their customers. The platform approach means that telco is one business thrust, not THE business thrust.
- The technology in play at Google is in some cases based upon a Bell Labs-style of investment; that is, bright people working on big problems. When a breakthrough emerges, Google makes an effort to allow various Google units to “do something” with the invention. I would direct the GLB MBA to how Google has learned from a patent application that has now migrated to Alcatel Lucent. ATT had access to the same invention, missed its significance, and now faces a significant challenge in data management. Just one example from the dozens I have gathered, gentle reader. ATT’s research arm, while impressive, is not like Google’s. I think Google has some refugees from the “old” Bell Labs too.
- ATT, like other US telcos, continue to resist what seems to be an obvious tactic—exploiting Google. In the US, companies like ATT prefer to block, chastise, and criticize aspects of Google that are little more than manifestations of its applications platform. Google Voice is an application, and it is not a particularly smart one as Google apps go, based on my research. Instead of asking the question “How can we exploit this Google service?”, the response from publishers, media companies, telcos, and some government agencies is to put Google in a box and keep it there. As I argued in 2004 in The Google Legacy, the river of change has broken through a dam. The river cannot be “put back.”
- Analyses that convert a long document into a summary are useful. I do this myself, but when that summary leaves out context, the points without proper definitions float like a firefly’s disembodied glow. What else is Google probing in the telco space? That’s an important question because ATT is dealing with a probe, not an assault. Is ATT missing a larger strategic challenge? Can an Apple ATT tie up win in a game that Apple and ATT not fully understand?
To wrap up, the addled goose gets very nervous when he meets agency rental sporting an MBA name tag. By the way, what does this mean: “The letter to the FCC is from AT&T’s Federal Regulatory and deduces from the hearsay about blocked rural calls that Google saves on the higher termination costs imposed by rural telcos.” Too much MBA sophistication for me.
The tag on the bottom of the article speaks volumes, “Request a Consultation.” This addled goose is quite happy, however, to see the article labeled as a marketing item just like this Web log.
Stephen Arnold, September 28, 2009
Microsoft Fast ESP with the Microsoft Bing Translator
September 27, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to a write up and a screenshot of the integrated translation utility in the new Fast ESP. The idea is to run a query and get results from documents in different languages. Click on an interesting document and get the translation. To my eye the layout of the screen looked a little Googley, but that’s because I look at the world through the two oohs in the Google logo. The write up is “Enterprise Search and Bing Services – Part 1: The Bing Translator” and you should read the story. Here’s the screenshot that caught my attention:
The article said:
In this example, not only is the user’s query translated and expanded to include other languages (French, German, and Chinese), but the user has the ability to translate the teasers or the entire document using the Bing Translator. The search results also include query highlighting for each of the multiple translations of the query. Finally, the user can use the slider bar (or the visual navigator) to favor documents written in certain languages. Any slider action causes the result set to update automatically. The relevance control behind this slider widget is actually a feature of FAST ESP, but it shows another way of surfacing cross-lingual search.
No information was provided about the computational burden the system adds to a Fast ESP system. Interesting, however. I prefer to see a translated version of the document’s title and snippet in the results list with an option to view the hit in its original language. The “old” Fast Search & Transfer operation had some linguistic professionals working Germany. I wonder if that group is now marginalized or if it has been shifted to other projects. Info about that linguistic group would be helpful. Use the comments section of this Web log to share if you are able.
Stephen Arnold, September 27, 2009
Goggle Points Out that Canada Is Lost Amidst the Maple Leaves
September 26, 2009
I liked the power play that turned the piggy Internet Explorer into sleek Chrome. Microsoft can deal with marginalization. But I was not too happy to read the story “Google Exec Says Canada Missing Web’s Potential.” Assume the story is accurate. I don’t perceive Canada as missing much in technology. I was on the Board of the Sports Information Research Center, which was Webby and one of the first government supported entities to generate a profit and then sell a chunk of its business to a big American publishing company. Tim Bray figured out how to do a nifty SGML database and find time to help with Web standards. I pay attention to Web developments from PEI to Vancouver. I even did a job for the Canadian government to use the Internet to get Métis children educational materials where distance and weather disrupt routine educational access. What interests me is why Google executives, who are obviously bright, find it necessary to make political statements that are interpreted by me as stupid. I recall the Googler Cyrus from Google’s LA office, who told me a diagram from a Google patent application was photoshopped by me. Stupid, stupid AND uninformed. May I suggest that Google focus its brilliance on issues that add some spice to my technical life like challenging Oracle in the data management sector or keeping mum when lists of Google acquisitions conveniently omit one of Google’s most important acquisitions in its history. I want to wrap up with this statement from the article cited above. The Googler is talking about online advertising, but I won’t cut this gleaming, wizard any slack:
“It’s not as competitive a business market, which basically suggests that there’s not as many businesses online because they’re not competing for more share amongst each other or there are not enough businesses competing in certain areas,” said Nikesh Arora, Google’s president of global sales operations and business development…”
Yikes. I can see Mr. Arora’s Googley grin as he displays data that shows Canadian businesses’ scores that qualify them for the short bus. In my opinion, this type of comment qualifies him to swim with me in the pond filled with mine drainage.
Stephen Arnold, September 26, 2009
Mobile News Aggregation
September 23, 2009
I wrote an essay about the impending implosion of CNN. The problem with traditional media boils down to cost control. Technology along won’t keep these water logged outfits afloat. With demographics working against those 45 years of age and above, the shift from desktop computers to portable devices creates opportunities for some and the specter of greater marginalization for others. I saw a glimpse of the future when I looked at Broadersheet’s iPhone application. You can read about the service in “Broadersheet Launching “Intelligent News Aggregator” iPhone App”. The app combines real time content with more “traditional” RSS content. The operative words for me are “intelligent”” and “iPhone”. More information is available on the Broadersheet Web site. Software that learns and delivers information germane to my interests on a mobile device is not completely new, of course. The Broadsheet approach adds “time” options and a function that lets me add comments to stories. This is not convergence; the application makes clear the more genetic approach of blending DNA from related software functions.
Stephen Arnold, September23, 2009
Microsoft Live: $560 Million Loss in 12 Months or $64,000 and Hour
September 23, 2009
TechFlash reported an interesting article called “Windows Live Lost $560 Million in FY2009”. With revenues of $520, the loss chewed through $64,000 an hour or $2,663 a minute 24×7 for 365 days. With Microsoft’s revenue in the $58 billion range, a $560 million is not such a big deal. In my opinion, profligate spending might work in the short term, but I wonder if the tactic will work over a longer haul on the information highway.
Stephen Arnold, September 23, 2009
Two Additions to Euro Search Vendor List
September 22, 2009
Readers have continued to shoot buckshot at my list of European search vendors. I appreciate the input and I am adding two vendors to the list.
The first is Exorbyte. The second is Silobreaker.
Exorbyte, founded in 2000, is a privately-held company. The firm is based in Switzerland, not far from Zurich. The firm says that its search technology is focused on “high-performance approximate search and data matching solutions for online ecommerce, directories and data quality applications.” The company offers Web extraction functions as part of its technology suite. The search function complements the firm’s navigation features to support database, directory, and catalog search. More information is available from the firm’s Web site.
Silobreaker, a company I have written about in my studies and in this Web log, continues to gain features and functions. The firm’s search system is speedy, but what sets the company apart is its ability to generate relationship maps, display data on topics in actionable reports, and widgets that make it easy to add specific Silobreaker functions to third –party applications or customized implementations of the Silobreaker system. The company told me:
Silobreaker is a search service for news and current affairs that aims to provide more relevant results to the user than what traditional search and aggregation engines have been offering so far. Instead of returning just lists of articles matching a search query, Silobreaker finds people, companies, organizations, topics, places and keywords; understands how they relate to each other in the news flow, and puts them in context through graphical results in its intuitive user interface.
More information is available from the Silobreaker Web site.
The vendor table addition rows are:
| Vendor | Function | Opinion |
| Exorbyte | Ecommerce and database search | The firm has a strong following for database and directory search. Blue chip clients. |
| Silobreaker | Search plus intelligence analysis | The company’s system processes content in real time and generates actionable reports on people, events, or concepts. |
Let me know of other vendors to include on this list.
Stephen Arnold, September 22, 2009
European Search Vendor Full List Update
September 22, 2009
Updated on October 1, 2009. Exorbyte is in Germany. SurfRay is worth a close look.
Instead of updating the table in the original WordPress article, I have updated the table and reproduced it below. Please, locate the most recent table by using the Blossom.com search function on the Beyond Search Web log. I will post this list on the ArnoldIT.com Web site once the list seems to stabilize. I am reevaluating several vendors at this time. Watch for an update on SurfRay. The company provided one of my colleagues with some fresh information.
| Vendor | Function | Opinion |
| Autonomy | Search and eDiscovery | One of the key players in content processing; good marketing |
| Bitext | Semantic components | Impressive technology |
| Brox | Open source semantic tools | Energetic, marketing centric open source play |
| Empolis GmbH | Information management and business intel | No cash tie with Attensity |
| Exalead | Next generation application platform | The leader in search and content processing technology |
| Exorbyte | Ecommerce and database search | The German firm has a strong following for database and directory search. Blue chip clients. |
| Expert System | Semantic toolkit | Works; can be tricky to get working the way the goslings want |
| Fast ESP | Enterprise search, business intelligence, and everything else | Legacy of a police investigation hangs over the core technology |
| InfoFinder | Full featured enterprise search system | my contact in Europe reports that this is a European technology. Listed customers are mostly in Norway. |
| Interse Scan Jour | SharePoint enterprise search alternative | Based in Copenhagen, the Interse system adds useful access functions to SharePoint; sold in Dec 2008 |
| Intellisearch | Enterprise search; closed US office | Basic search positioned as a one size fits all system |
| Lemur Consulting | Flax is a robust enterprise search system | I have written positively about this system. Continues to improve with each release of the open source engine. |
| Lexalytics | Sentiment analysis tools | A no cash merger with a US company and UK based Infonics; |
| Linguamatics | Content processing focused on pharma | Insists that it does not have a price list |
| Living-e AG | Information management | No cash tie with Attensity |
| Mindbreeze | Another SharePoint snap in for search | Trying hard; interface confusing to some goslings |
| Neofonie | Vertical search | Founded in the late 1990s, created Fireball.de |
| Ontoprise GmbH | Semantic search | The firm’s semantic Web infrastructure product, OntoBroker, is at Version 5.3 |
| Pertimm | Enterprise search | Now positioned as information management |
| PolySpot | Enterprise search with workflow | Now at Version 4.8, search, work flow, and faceted navigation |
| SAP Trex | Search tool in NetWeaver; works with R/3 content | Works; getting long in the tooth |
| Silobreaker | Search plus intelligence analysis | The company’s system processes content in real time and generates actionable reports on people, events, or concepts. |
| Sinequa | Enterprise search with workflow | Now at Version 7, the system includes linguistic tools |
| Sowsoft | High speed desktop search | Excellent, lightweight desktop search |
| SurfRay | Now focused on SharePoint | Worth a close look |
| Temis | Content processing and discovery | Original code and integrated components |
| Tesuji | Lucene enterprise search | Highly usable and speedy; recommended for open source installations |
Any company on this list can sponsor a profile which I will put on the ArnoldIT.com Web site with a link from the entry in this table. For details, check the About link at the top of any page of this Web log. This Web log is not journalism, it is for marketing and my observations. PR people. Be aware. I am not your mother’s Web logger.
Stephen Arnold, September 21, 2009
Google and Newspapers: Misclassifying Google Is Risky
September 22, 2009
I enjoy most of the GigaOM information. I found the write up “Google’s Plan to Become The Media Company” thought provoking but off the mark. My view is that classifying Google as a media company is one of those confident assertions that seem accurate but are only partially correct. In fact, the error is akin to classifying a tiger cub as a house pet. Sure, the young cub might learn some manners, but as Roy and Siegfried learned, the tiger often has a different idea about what it is; namely, a wild animal capable of ruining an act and a life. If you don’t remember, Roy and Siegfried, here is a useful reminder of the consequences of an erroneous classification. (Warning: not for the faint of heart.)
Google is an application platform, a point I made in my 2005 monograph, The Google Legacy. That research study is germane today. I amplified my analysis of Google’s technology in two subsequent studies, pointing out that Google’s technical open source information supported my assertion that Google was a disruptive force in such business sectors as enterprise software, financial services, and commercial publishing, among three or four other business sectors. The importance of this point was mocked openly by telecommunications executives when one of the consulting firms for which I work as an advisor trotted me around to review Google’s telephone inventions in 2006. I wonder how many of those executives are laughing now? Google is not just a disruptive force in the telco space, the company is in a position to give Apple a run for its money in the broader mobile device sector. This idea is probably not too amusing for Apple. In fact, Google teamed up with Sony to get some steroids in its distribution and content arm for the coming dust up.
Wild animal or pet? Source: http://www.wamajama.com/wamajama/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/siegfried_roy_tiger_1_r.jpg
Now back to the GigaOM write up.
Here’s the problem. I agree that Google will have even greater disruptive impacts on the media sector. But media is just one business sector that Google will jostle. The author believes that defining Google as a media company sums up that wild and crazy bunch of physicists, mathematicians, computer scientists, and smart folks. That’s a very big mistake. The reason is that a media company draws a ring around Google and says, “Here be the dragon.” Wrong. The circle identifies one of Google’s dragronettes. Seeing Google as a dragonette leads to the misperception of Google as a dragonette breeder. A person involved in online retail could take the media company definition to heart. That person might then overlook what the Google is doing with its financial back office system. Sure, Checkout is visible, but it’s a weak sister compared to eBay’s PayPal or the Amazon machine. Or, is it? Kevin Kelleher, like those telco executives, would not ask the question, “What is Google?” Heck, Google is a media company, maybe a next generation outfit like Hanna Barbera Studios or the Peoria Journal Star.
Get that classification wrong and you may — no, strike that – will be blindsided as Google uses its platform to probe, disrupt, and exploit a broader range of market sectors. In short, those who misclassify run the risk of seeing the tiger up close and personal as Roy and Siegfried did. The results may not be for the squeamish.
Stephen Arnold, September 22, 2009
Visual View of Search History
September 21, 2009
A happy quack to the team of readers who sent me a link to the Firefox add in, History Tree 1.1. Now these are sharp readers who know that my honks about visualization make clear that gratuitous interface elements ruffle my feathers. I loaded the History Tree and found that it provided a quick and easy way to locate specific Web pages I had visited.
The Firefox add in is available from the Firefox splash page for the software. You can get more information and a one click install button from Normansolomon.org. Useful, not gratuitous, and evidence that there is a better way to deal with history files. I also like it when two bright people tag team what I cover in this Web log. I bet both are pretty good at finding information and keeping addled geese like me in formation.
Stephen Arnold, September 21, 2009
Former Intel Operative Tackles Real Time Search
September 21, 2009
I had a long talk with Robert Steele, OSS.net, the other day. He is going to deliver a hard hitting talk at the upcoming ‘Change 2010 Responding to Real Time Information, Open Systems and the Obama IT Vision’ seminar in Washington, DC, on September 23, 2009. As I understood his point of view, he wants to make clear the value of the flows of open source information that are now available. The challenge is to pipe some of this content into government agencies so that decision making is more informed. I don’t want to let the cat out of the bag, but he wants to reference some important innovations from Europe that are not widely known in the US.
The venue for the program is the National Press Club. Other speakers on the program, sponsored by Somat Engineering (an 8A firm based in Detroit, Michigan) is the sponsor of the program. Somat’s Arpan Patel will talk about bridging the gap between government infrastructure and external information and services. He will showcase the Ripply software tool. The other speaker on the program is Jim Orris, one of the managing partners of Adhere Solutions. Adhere is a focal point for Google’s US government initiatives. Mr. Orris will talk about how the Google technology can be used as a mechanism to process real time content.
Representatives of the Executive Branch, Department of Defense, other government agencies, and consulting firms supporting government agencies will be in attendance. For more information, navigate to the registration page here. Members of the media may register by writing Pacific Dialogue.
Stephen Arnold, September 21, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
