MeFeedia: Video Your Way – Just Like a Burger
April 14, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to this news release wrapped in a Forbes.com package. The headline was “Multimedia Search Engine MeFeedia Brings Order to the Video Web” and you can read it here. The MeFeedia system provides these improvements:
- Layout
- Site performance. The story said, “The new site also loads three times as fast, due in part to its new tableless design and highly efficient multimedia search engine.”
- Navigation
The service provides access to video, TV shows, music, news, and movies.
My test queries returned some useful results. I did like the tag at the foot of each item in the results list that provided the source and other information about the video clip; for example, “Howcast – Most Recent Videos in Travel | howcast.com“.
The challenges any video search site faces are significant:
First, there’s the issue of deep pockets. It costs big piles of dollars and euros to pay for bandwidth and lawyers. Which consumes more money is up for grabs. I am not sure pre roll advertising will do the job for any video site.
Second, there’s the problem of marketing in the shadows of YouTube.com and the distant second place challenged Hulu.com. Even Google is opening a new video service with its pal Universal. More information about that deal is here.
The goslings and I want MeFeedia to succeed. Our query for geese returned this result, which is similar to the comments I get about my opinions expressed in this Web log by azure chipped consultants who are trying to earn a living as a “real” journalist.
Stephen Arnold, April 14, 2009
Google Health: Fatally Flawed
April 14, 2009
Jay Parkinson, MD, wrote “Google Health Will Belly Flop” here. The point of the write up is to identify some flaws in the Google Health beta service. You can read about Google Health here. Dr. Parkinson wrote:
Each and every piece of multi, multi-million dollar bloated piece of crap healthcare “electronic medical record” (sounds about as dated as electronic mail, doesn’t it?”), is simply a billing engine to communicate a medical diagnosis to insurance companies with the hopes of maximizing how much doctors are paid.
He added:
And now Google wants you to have access to this coded language that you, nor your doctors, speak. The assumption is that this will empower consumers and drive advertising revenue to Google based on these medical codes. And then you log in to Google Health and see a language that’s impossible to interpret and, most of the time, simply inaccurate. But these are your medical records found in one of the highest ranking hospitals in America.
I don’t know anything about medicine and I know even less about the exciting world of insurance billing and DRGs.
I agree that there are some interesting challenges in health information. I think there’s a field called medical informatics to tackle some of the issues.
What I learned in the Houston Wellness Association meeting earlier this month was:
- Vendors know that a pile of Obama dollars will become available to tackle some of the medical record issues, among others
- There are dozens of outfits in Houston alone angling to address the medical information mess
- It is very early days for the incumbents like Cerner and parvenus like Google and Microsoft and the entrepreneurs. Lots of demos and lots of confusion are what I perceived.
I urge you to read the doctor’s analysis. You may also want to consider that the marketing battles about medical information have yet to begin. The US in many ways reminds me of Brazil in the 1950s but without the good humor and the resources. Like other core pieces of infrastructure, the medical information system is struggling. I don’t want to count out the US government, its contractors, outfits like 3M or Siemans, and the others jockeying for position.
I know there will be a need for search because in my opinion it is tough to find documents in a small, unregulated organization like the local accounting firm. I see the belly flop as an opportunity. Yippee.
Stephen Arnold, April 14, 2009
Viewzi: Visual Results with Display Options
April 14, 2009
There’s a new way to see search results, as presented by search engine Viewzi at http://www.viewzi.com. Instead of getting long white pages of links ala Google, you can choose from a variety of graphic displays for your search results. I searched Karl Urban, an actor in the new Star Trek movie. In Viewzi, I chose the web screenshot display. The links returned as actual screenshots from imdb.com and Wikipedia as well as media and fan sites. I don’t have to actually click to that page to see what it looks like – I saw it right there.
Frankly, it’s cool to look at and not as hard on the eyes as the links list. Now, it took me more time to look through the links, but I sure enjoyed it as I went. There are other result sets (eighteen total), for example, there’s an Amazon books view. For my actor, it returned Karl Imhoff’s Handbook of Urban Drainage and Wastewater Disposal. Useful and relevant? Not at all. Pretty darn cool? Yes. It can also set up results grouped into music, video and photos as well as topics including news, weather, shopping, and gadgets.
If you’re in a hurry for quick links to exact information, Viewzi may not be for you (although it does have a links list view). But if you’re just browsing or doing research, you may want to give the site a shot.
Jessica Bratcher, April 14, 2009
Picollator: Graphical Query System
April 14, 2009
Now’s here’s a really neat idea: a search engine that finds pictures based upon a graphical query–not a text query. The Picollator universal search engine, http://www.recogmission.com/products/picollator, scans the Internet collecting digital images and matches visual objects within the images using pattern recognition technology. The system accepts both text queries and sample images simultaneously to find relevant resources in the Web. You can do a search right now at http://www.picollator.com/. I tried a celebrity actor and didn’t get anything with just the picture; I also had to a text element to the search. I can do that in Google Images. So I’m not so sure this program works all that well with just the digital image. Perhaps it would function better in a closed database. Definitely a worthwhile project though.
Jessica Bratcher, April 14, 2009
Twazzup: Twitter Search Alternative
April 14, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to Twazzup.com, the most recent Twitter search alternative. You can try the system here. Keep in mind that if you are new to Twitter, you won’t make much sense of Twitter results. I’m convinced that Twitter content needs some smart software to provide context for the posts that appear to have meaningful information. Twazzup does some value adding to the Twitter hits, and when compared to Twitter’s approach, Twazzup is heading in the right direction. Take a look at Louis Gray’s analysis here.
I ran my standard suite of queries and was a bit dismayed to see that my search for “beyond search” returned zero results. I put quotes around the phrase and the relevancy jumped. The other queries were useful, but I have been fiddling with Twitter content for a while, and I don’t think I am a good “out of the box” judge.
What I liked about Twazzup.com was:
- The system was snappy. I perceived zero latency even when I was using my lousy Verizon “high speed” wireless service
- I liked the listing of popular Tweets. I am not sure that I am ready to abandon Tweetmeme.com or the other services I use to see what’s hot and what’s not, but I liked their inclusion
- The gray hot spots that open up relevant information could be useful, but in general I don’t use those service. I focus more on results lists. So “facets” don’t “facet-nate” me. Other folks love them which is okay with me.
On the downside, I find the presentation a bit busy, but compared with some of the Chinese interfaces I’ve examined recently, Twazzup.com is downright sedate. The multiplicity of buttons may be better suited to the young at heart. I am an old and addled goose, not a spring chicken.
Here’s the result screen for one of my test queries:
Give it a look.
Stephen Arnold, April 14, 2009
Microsoft Search Strategy Explained — Sort of
April 14, 2009
Ina Fried, CNet, does a very good job of adding some coherence to Microsoft’s Web search strategy. You can read her article “Microsoft’s Search Must Begin in Redmond” here. She has worked hard to take a number of somewhat unrelated Microsoft actions and organizing them so I could see a strategy emerging. The hook for the story struck me as an interview she had with Microsoft’s latest “search trail boss”, a chap named Yusuf Mehdi. I have never met the fellow and his photo looked quite a bit like the Googlers’ photos I have seen–smiling, confident, and ready to try out for America’s Next Top Model.
Ms. Fried pulls out some useful factoids; including:
- There is internal support at Microsoft for paying people to use its Web search system
- Microsoft’s year on year market share in search grew less than one percent
- Microsoft will integrate Powerset, Farecast, and Medstory into its search services
- A rebranding effort may take place. (I see Kumo in my usage logs for this newsletter
- Microsoft may spend $100 million on an ad campaign for search.
I came away from this well written story with one thought: “I don’t think Microsoft has a clue about specific tactics that will narrow the gap between its Web search system’s market share (10 percent) and Google’s (about 65 percent). These are still random acts that have done zero to close the gap. Remember, Microsoft has been working at closing the gap with Google for about seven years.
Let’s assume Microsoft does a search deal with Yahoo. Combined the two companies will have a 25 percent share compared to Google 65 percent share. Google has an existing infrastructure, a performance advantage, an index advantage, a cost advantage, and a brand advantage. Sure, Google can muff the bunny. Microsoft might have more luck sitting back and waiting for Google to make a mistake and then attack a specific weakness. Shotgun shells filled with tapioca balls won’t don’t the job. Sipping a bubble tea and waiting might be cheaper and probably won’t cost as much.
Stephen Arnold, April 14, 2009
Beyond Search: Saying Again – Marketing Blog
April 14, 2009
One of my three or four readers sent me a link to a Tweet that reveals–gasp–the shocking truth that this Web log is a marketing vehicle. Oh, my what an insightful comment. I explain what the purpose of Beyond Search is in my editorial policy which you may read here if you wish.I haven’t changed it much since I started this blog in January 2008. I started the Web log to recycle information. I learned quickly that I am not a news goose and I don’t want to be one. If a company wants to hire me to describe their products and services, I will talk. I also promote aggressively my reports and studies. The reason is that this Web log now reaches more than 35,000 readers per month, so it has become a better marketing vehicle that some of my four publishers possess. I don’t include the for fee content in this Web log. I rather shamelessly point you to Information World Review, KMWorld, and the Smart Business Network where my published columns appear. I even cover search engine optimization. If you read this Web log you know that I am critical of those who are self appointed SEO experts. I am no expert, but I can describe functions that the GOOG explains are important to appearing at a reasonable point in a results list.
Summing up:
- I am not a journalist. I sell my opinion, and I pay people to write articles about companies and products. Some of these outfits pay for my writers’ time. Others dazzle us with their scintillating personalities. Don’t confuse what appears in Beyond Search with “journalism”, which seems to be in a bit of a pickle in my opinion. Whining, going out of business, and losing jobs I think applies in some cases.
- I write about my interests in an often futile attempt to generate inquiries about my patent analysis, expert witness, and management consulting business. The Web log “sort of” works, but it is a marketing vehicle. Let me repeat: marketing vehicle. Do you think? Doh?
- I write about my son’s business even though he is closely aligned with the GOOG, an outfit that wishes my goose were cooked. I take umbrage if someone criticizes my son, so if you get frisky with my progeny, expect to see some sparks from the senior Arnold in the clan.
- I am not interested in whether some of the companies and products survive, are wonderful, or are just me too products in a lousy financial climate.
- I tell PR people that I am not a journalist. I don’t respect their “leaks”. I don’t want to be briefed unless someone pays for my time. One jejune lass almost cried when I told her I wanted money to sit through a Webinar. Sensitive plant, she is.
I think that there are some folks who confuse Web logs (free) with confidential, for fee work. I opine that there are quite a few consulting firms trying to sell advice without having solid technical foundations and trying to create the impression that their Web logs are the equivalent of the Harvard Business Review or the output of second and third tier consulting firms.
Let me set the record straight. There are a handful of blue chip consulting firms and advisory services in the world. I worked for many years at Halliburton Nuclear (get it right or literally die), Booz Allen & Hamilton (before the disastrous break up), and a number of high profile outfits from intelligence agencies to the government of England. I been involved in successes and failures. I have learned from the best (Dr. William P. Sommers) and from the worst (a gambler in LA).
Working at blue chip firms where information is the key to success and writing a Web log are at different ends of the content spectrum. I don’t get confused. Some folks can’t figure out that Beyond Search is a marketing vehicle. Others can’t get the drift that when I argue against SEO, I am generating buzz.
I hope that’s clear. I am 65 years old and getting pretty tired of callow youth who find this Web log somehow offensive to their gentle spirits. Suck it up. Life gets worse and it will for the foreseeable future. When the chips are down, clients don’t want those who learn on the job. Clients want results. An MBA or a bit of work at a third tier firm won’t do the job in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold. April 14, 2009
Google: A Static Filled Channel
April 13, 2009
Mine That Data has an interesting take on Google. Click here to read “Role of a Channel: Google.” The article left me with the impression that Google has not been an ideal channel for some of its partners, users, and customers. You will want to read the original analysis by Kevin Hillstrom and make up your own mind. Mr. Hillstrom raised some interesting questions. When I tried to answer them, I noted that Google seems to have some areas in which to improve. For example, Mr. Hillstrom asked, “Does the channel aid in customer service?” I must admit Google won’t talk with me. He also asked, “Does the channel feed other channels?” I answered, “No.” Mr. Hillstrom said:
And we consistently find that Google customers have lower lifetime value estimates than customers from other channels. Too often, Google is in isolation mode, yielding low value customers.
I found that I began to perceive Google differently after reading this thought provoking article.
Stephen Arnold, April 13, 2009
Search Results a Cesspool
April 13, 2009
The addled goose is at the end of the trail so I don’t pay much attention to link farms, traffic scams, and online advertising. I was shocked when I read Frank Watson’s “Extortion SEO Sanctioned by Google” here. If true, I have been misunderstanding how the Google operated. Mr. Watson wrote:
There’s a much more successful way to play Google these days — just build a site that can rank for companies or individuals and write crap about them. Once the posts start appearing in the search results, these entities will get in touch with you to remove them and you can charge them for it.
Mr. Watson then asserted:
The king of these programs is Ripoff Report — the darling of Google. Matt Cutts has defended them and their right to publish defaming information — and he has two reports in there himself. Inclusion of information like this makes me agree that the search engine results are “cesspools” — though Yahoo, Microsoft, and the other engines seem to be wise to Ed Magedson, the site’s founder.
Take a look at a site called Ripoff Report. You will have to make your own decision about Mr. Watson’s allegations. Post your views.
Stephen Arnold, April 13, 2009
Google and News Irrigation
April 13, 2009
The Washington Post’s Erick Schonfeld asked a question to which I knew the answer. The question here was: “Does Google Really Control the News?” Mr. Schonfeld answers the question by walking down the road, sometimes veering left and sometimes right. He wrote:
The bigger question is whether Google as a search engine is controlling access to news sites. That really seems to be Carr’s main concern, although it is not clear because he uses a Google News search as his main example. Nevertheless, Google’s main search engine is certainly a major source of traffic to information sites of all stripes. At TechCrunch, for instance, it is the single largest source of traffic, accounting for about a third of the total. I have no idea whether this is representative of other news sites, but it wouldn’t surprise me. Google search is a very important middleman indeed.
Mr. Schonfeld’s hook for this story is the Nick Carr posting about Google as middleman here. I want to steer clear of this discussion. My views appear in my forthcoming study Google: The Digital Gutenberg. I do want to ask several questions:
- What if Google embodies creating, intermediating, distributing, and monetizing functions in one system?
- With users clicking on services, are not the users making a decision, which may, of course, be limited by the function of the natural monopoly?
- If one outfit is in charge, is this going to leave much doubt about who steers the automobile?
Stephen Arnold, April 12, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
