Two New Animals: Newsosaur and Yahoosaur
October 22, 2008
Alan D. Mutter’s “Reflection of a Newsosaur” is a very good Web log post. You can find the Web log at http://newsosaur.blogspot.com and “Fat Newspaper Profits Are History” here. Mr. Mutter points out that newspapers are going to have to live with declining profits. He cites a number of papers that have debt that adds to broader sector woes such as declines in sales and circulation. He does a solid job of explaining the interplay of certain cost factors for publishers. His analysis does not apply just to newspapers. Any book, magazine, or journal publisher cranking out hard copies faces the same set of problems. The data in this article are worth saving because he has done a better job of identifying key figures and metrics than some of the high-priced consultants hired to help traditional publishers adapt to today’s business realities. For me, the keystone comment in Mr. Mutter’s analysis was:
Although the economy will recover in the fullness of time, there are very real doubts about whether newspapers still have the time, resources and ingenuity to migrate to a viable new financial model to assure their long-term survival.
After reading this article, I realized that traditional publishers, not the author of the Web log, are Newsosaur. What also occurred to me was that Yahoo is becoming a high profile Yahoosaur. As a 15 year old Internet company, Yahoo’s management faces problems that its business model and management pool cannot easily resolve.
Keep in mind that newsosauri are trapped in the dead tree problem; that is, a fungible product in an environment where young people don’t buy newspapers or read them the way their parents and grandparents did. Advertisers want to be in front of eyeballs attached to people who will buy products and services.
Yahoo may be the first identified Yahoosaur. The company’s financial results and the layoffs are not good news. The deal with Google may be in jeopardy. Yahoo’s home run technology plays like the push to open source and BOSS may not have the traction to dig the company out of its ecological niche. I think the Yahoosaur and the Newsosaur are related.
Mr. Mutter provides a useful description of the traditional publishing company woes. Perhaps he will turn his attention to the Yahoosaur.
Stephen Arnold, October 22, 2008
Nutter on the Future of Search
October 22, 2008
Blaise Nutter’s “Three Companies That Will Change How We Search” here offers an interesting view of three vendors who are competing with Google. The premise of the article is that there is room for search innovation. The five page write up profiles and analyzes Blinkx (video search spin out from some folks at Autonomy), Mahalo (journalist turned search entrepreneur Jason Calcanis), and Cuil (Anna Patterson and assorted wizards from Google, IBM, and elsewhere). As I understand the analysis, the hook is different for each company; for example:
- Blinkx. Indexes the content in the video, not just be metadata, for 26 million videos
- Mahalo. Community search engine with humans not software doing the picking of results
- Cuil. A big index with a magazine style layout.
The conclusion of the article is that innovation is possible and that each of these sites does a better job of addressing user privacy.
For me, the most interesting comment in the write up was this comment:
David and Goliath fought on a level battlefield, but Google doesn’t.
My view on each of these search systems is a bit different from Mr. Nutter’s. I do agree that Google presents a large challenge to search start ups. In fact, until a competitor can leap frog Google, I doubt that users will change their surfing behavior regardless of Google’s policy regarding privacy. Google monitors to make money. Money is needed to scale and provide “free” search.
This brings me to the difference between Mr. Nutter’s analysis and mine. First, for any of these services to challenge Google in a meaningful way, the companies are going to need cash, lots of cash. In today’s economic climate, I think that these firms can get some money, but the question is, “Will it be enough if Google introduces substantially similar features?” Second, each of these services, according to Mr. Nutter, offers features Google doesn’t provide. I don’t agree. Google is indexing content of videos and audios. In fact I wrote about a patent application that suggests Google is gearing up for more services in this area here. Google is essentially social, which is a big chunk of the notion of user clicks. The “ig” or individualized Google offers a magazine style layout if you configure the new “ig” interface to do it. It’s not Cuil, but it’s in the ballpark.
For me, the question is, “What services are implementing technology that has the potential to leap frog Google as Google jumped ahead of AltaVista.com, MSN.com, and Yahoo.com in 1998? In my opinion it’s none of these three services profiled by Mr. Nutter. “Let many flowers bloom”. But these have to be of hearty stock, have the proper climate, and plenty of nurturing. None of these three services is out of the greenhouse and into the real world, and I think their survival has to be proven, not assumed. Search innovations are often in the eye of the beholder, not in the code of the vendor.
Stephen Arnold, October 20, 2008
Dataspaces in Denmark: The 2008 Boye Conference
October 22, 2008
Earlier this year, the engaging Janus Boye asked me to give a talk and offer a tutorial at his content management and information access conference. The program is located here, and you will see a line up that tackles some of the most pressing issues facing organizations today. The conference is held in Arhus, Denmark. My first visit was a delight. I could walk to a restaurant and connect. Arhus may be one of the most wired and wireless savvy cities I’ve visited.
About a year ago, before Google decided I was Kentucky vermin, I discovered in the open source literature, a reference to a technology with which I was not familiar. In the last year, I have pulled this information thread. After much work, I believe I have discovered the basics of one of Google’s most interesting and least known technology initiatives.
Source: http://www.lohninger.com/helpcsuite/img/kohonen1.gif
Unlike some of the other innovations I have described in my 2005 The Google Legacy and my 2007 Google Version 2.0 reports. Those documents relied extensively on Google’s own patent documents. This most recent discovery reports information in Bell Labs’s patents, various presentations by Google researchers, and published journal articles with unusual names; for example, “Information Manifold”. The research also pointed to work at Stanford University and a professor who, I believe, has been involved to some degree with Google’s team leader. I also learned of a Google acquisition in 2006, which does not appear in the Wikipedia list of Google acquisitions. Although the deal was reported in several Web logs, no one dug into the company’s technology or its now-dark classified ad site.
Google Gets Input from Arkansas Church
October 22, 2008
Ah, the great and wise Google received some input from the New Hope Fellowship in the high-tech center, Springdale, Arkansas. Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky, takes a back seat to the folks in Springdale, Arkansas. Will Google listen? Hard to say. You can read the story of inputs in Juan Carlos Perez’s “Google Fixes Problem with Apps Start Page” here. The church was nuked with Google’s careless coding. Mr. Perez quotes the church’s media director, one John Jenkins as advising Google:
Our users were trained to access their mail through the Start page. Once that didn’t work, they could not access e-mail, which is critical to our work. We had to send paper memos around on how to access the mail without going through the Start page. Very frustrating. Google must improve communication with business customers if they wish to be competitive in the corporate IT space. The 2-sentence ‘we’re working on it’ blurbs posted in the [online discussion] groups are an unacceptable way to treat business clients.
Will Google accept advice from New Hope Fellowship? In my opinion, Google is Googley. I’m not. You may not be. The New Hope outfit is probably not Googley or the church person would have figured out how to get the mail despite the outage. What about Einstein’s “wise one”? Nah, he doesn’t work at Google. Just read the Google blurbs.
Stephen Arnold, October 20, 2008
Cloud Computing: What’s Required
October 20, 2008
Seeking Alpha ran a long analysis by Gregory Ness titled “Cloud Computing: What Are the Barriers to Entry and IT Diseconomies.” I thought the analysis was quite good. Not surprisingly, I had several thoughts occur to me, but I find it stimulating to read thoughtful work by an individual who approaches a subject in a helpful, informative way. You can find the full text here. The most useful portion of the write up for was the discussion of the infrastructure. The gap between Google and the also-rans in the Web search game boil down to plumbing. Mr. Ness understands its importance. I don’t agree with his assertion that we have entered “Infrastructure 2.0.” My view is that Google built on AltaVista.com’s experiences and applied itself to addressing fundamental issues such as file and record locks and unlocks, minimizing message overhead in massively parallel systems, and confronting the problems of traditional Codd database structures in its first year or two of existence. Since that time, Google has continued to make incremental improvements in its decade old system. Companies trying to catch Google are not going to get very far if those firms try to embrace Infrastructure 2.0 as more than a word envelope. Amazon–a company which seems to get more mileage from modest R&D and information technology investments than others–has made good progress, but I doubt that its engineering foundation is as robust as Google’s. But Google, like Amazon, can fall over as the recent Gmail outage proves. Nevertheless, plumbing is important. When I was wandering around Crete, I saw some ruins that we thousands of years old. Those ruins had terracotta water drains visible. Plumbing is old stuff. I don’t think archaeologists talk about “Plumbing 2.0.” Despite my dislike of the “2.0” reference, this is a good bit of work. A happy quack to Mr. Ness.
Stephen Arnold, October 20, 2008
Boom Is Lowered Gently on Yahoo
October 20, 2008
Kara Swisher lowers the boom on Yahoo gently in “What Yahoo’s Looming Costs Cuts Actually Mean (Not as Many Layoffs as You Think), which appeared on October 17, 2008. The hook for the write up is Yahoo’s firing people. I won’t cite a number because whatever that number is it won’t mean as many as I think. With regards to Yahoo, I don’t think much about layoffs. These are inevitable, and regardless of what the company will do in the next three or four months, Yahoo’s sitting on a cost time bomb. Nuking employees won’t do much. If you are a believer in Yahoo, you will enjoy the new announcements cogently summarized by ReadWriteWeb here.
Here’s what my research has turned up.
Yahoo has numerous search systems, search licenses, search initiatives, and search technologies. Today it is desirable to have a less heterogeneous technical sandbox. Not at Yahoo. Overture has a primitive search system, which I could no longer find on the redesigned Yahoo site. No problem because traffic for Yahoo advertising seems to be stable or gently undulating like long slow waves in the moonlight. There are two “flavors” of email and search delivered from the Stata Labs acquisition. No problem. Since the acquisition of Stata Labs, I can find email in the Yahoo system. There’s the Web search. Again no problem it is neither better or worse than Google’s Web search but Google has carried the day for now. There’s Flickr search. There’s other search systems kicking around. One reader reminded me that Yahoo’s real shopping search is Kelkoo. More information here. You could fiddle with the InQuira powered help search system until recently. I like using it to locate “cancel service”. Give Help a whirl here. For a laugh look at this attempt to “improve” Yahoo help.
If I am happy with these different search systems in general, why do I think collectively these very same systems are Yahoo’s cost time bomb. Three reasons:
- It costs money to maintain different systems. Staff, consultants, hardware. The more an organization has, the more it must spend for information technology.
- Heterogeneous systems means staff are not easily interchangeable. This means that Yahoo has to either hire more consultants or live with hacks that may operate like small roadside improvised explosive devices. Yahoo doesn’t know when a fix is going to create a problem elsewhere. These are unbudgeted fixes until one goes pop. CFOs don’t like this type of pop.
- Adding a new feature or function means that Yahoo either has to pick a horse to ride, thus keeping other systems in a position of imposed obsolescence or find a wizard who can produce a fix that works across heterogeneous systems. If this path is followed, see item 2 above.
Yahoo is busy creating new, new things. The hard fact for Yahoo is that much of the underpinnings are old, old things. You don’t fix these problems by firing people. You fix these problems by facing the reality of the infrastructure and making even more difficult decisions about technology, actions, and services. Firing people is expedient, and it will grease the skids for whatever Yahoo’s current pet consultant company recommends. But these steps, like Ms. Swisher’s analysis, lowers the boom gently on a ship that is struggling with flawed engineering. The ship, gently reader, she is not sea worthy.
Stephen Arnold, October 21, 2008
Yahoo Imposes Unilateral Profile Changes
October 19, 2008
I have a Yahoo email premium account. I have written before about killing Yahoo for fee services. Since I analyzed Yahoo’s email search system for a paying customer, I just left the account sitting in cyberspace. As part of the test, I created a custom news profile, slapped some sources on the page, and fiddled with the point and click color and layout functions. I check the site periodically to see what’s new. In the last year, the layout changed so an email link is sometimes hard to find. Eh, so what? Then there were new themes. None of which seemed particularly useful to my 64 year old eyes. Eh, so what? Then there was the sharp deterioration in the shopping search. Eh, so what? I did not pay much attention because Yahoo was morphing into a less and less relevant service for my needs.
Imagine my surprise when I found out that Slashdot posted another Yahoo change. You can read the original Slashdot snippet here, dated October 19, 2008. Yahoo explains what it did and why here. As far as I am concerned a free service can change any time it wants. For me, Yahoo’s fiddling around with open source, its Web log asking for help to improve its help, or this shift in profiles are irrelevant. This addled goose is not going to flap his wings or make a sound.
However, it seems that some users are annoyed with the blank profile delivered to them. I logged on and took a gander. Here’s what the new blank profile looks like:
Amazing. This blank layout is easier for me to read. I can even spot the tiny links to email at the top left hand corner of the display. I don’t care too much for the weird handling of USA Today content, but I skip that drivel regardless of color. The nice red of the stock market declines leaps out at me. Although not shown in the list of financial results is Yahoo’s share price at closing on October 17, 2008, at $12.90, down about $20 from Microsoft’s offer earlier this year. That delta of $20 speaks volumes about Yahoo.
The company is adrift. Grand stand plays like making everything open source won’t work. Even the helpful Yahooligan who reminded me that the real Yahoo shopping service is Kelkoo.com, not the big shopping search link on the splash page’s search box. You could have fooled me. I thought that when the main page’s search box’s shopping label was clicked, Yahoo would deliver the goods so the speak. Nope, that’s not the “real” service. I also pine for Mindset, a Yahoo experimental search service that was somewhat more helpful for me than the “real” search service. Mindset disappeared without warning in the last 12 months or so.
VideoSurf Looking for Wave of New Users
October 18, 2008
VideoSurf, a new online video search engine, is inviting people to try out its beta engine. No username or password is required.
The engine is built on “computer vision” – VideoSurf has designed it to search and “see” inside videos to index content rather than depending upon tags and descriptions that can produce spam. The goal is to return more relevant results on keyword searches.
VideoSurf’s competition is Google Video Search and blinkx. We wrote about blinkx back in May here.
VideoSurf boasts more than 10 billion videos indexed. Visit their site for more information.
As for this beta user? A test search on VS of “Simon Pegg Star Trek” listed the top result as the “Star Trek” teaser trailer, followed by an interview on “Friday Night with Jonathan Ross”, then several more trailers before other Pegg errata. Google’s top results returned only movie trailers, while blinkx listed a couple trailers followed by several interviews and media event clips.
Jessica Bratcher, October 18, 2008
Yahoo: Pragmatic Advice
October 16, 2008
Silicon Alley Insider does a good job of identifying Yahoo’s weaknesses and pointing out some obvious remedies. The consultants racing around Yahoo will have to lay out options for Yahoo, prioritize them, and dress the painful ones in a Project Runway gown. Yahoo has big problems, and you can get up to speed by reading “Yahoo Cracks $12 , Valuation Now Officially Ridiculous” by Henry Blodgett here. I wanted to add one point to Mr. Blodgett’s analysis. Yahoo’s heterogeneous approach to platforms and software adds another, more troublesome problem to the mix. Some fixes can’t be made because the time, cost, and complexity mean the job is just too big. Other fixes work for one service, but the features can’t be made available seamless to other services. For an example, just navigate to Yahoo and run a shopping query. Now navigate to Google’s shopping service and run the same query. I am running these test queries from the UK, so you may have to rekey the search phrase I used, “quad core motherboard”.
Which set of results makes more sense to you? Yahoo has some bright people, but the platform is looking more like a major liability Yahoo or its eventual owner must address.
Stephen Arnold, October 16, 2008
Yahoo Search: More Needed than an Ad Campaign
October 16, 2008
On October 14, 2008, Yahoo revealed new search features. You can read the story here. You can read ReadWriteWeb’s discussion here. The publicity suggests real change. I just see an ad campaign, including radio spots. With its share price below $14, Yahoo needs to deliver muscle, not window dressing. The economic downturn will exact a toll on Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo. Of the three, Yahoo will be least able to turn the dip into a scoop of ice cream.
That Microsoft buy out offer looks better than a new ad campaign for Yahoo search. I think it still looks good to some Yahoo shareholders. For Yahoo fans, this announcement may be a big deal. For this addled goose, it’s one more example of a company that went from leader to AOL clone in more ways than one.
Stephen Arnold, October 16, 2008
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
