Web Search Seems Interesting Again
October 15, 2010
From the goose pond, Web search has not been too interesting in the last few years. Others see an open market. I see a closed market. Others see many Web search options. I see limited options. The reason? Most people take one of a small number of options as naturally and unconsciously as a breath of air:
- Use a default search engine, which means either Bing or Google, enter a keyword or two, and pick one of the hits
- Navigate to Google, type a letter or two and click on a link
- Click something on almost any page that looks interesting.
Sounds simple right? I think it is simple and the usage data suggests that anything involving Google is good enough for two thirds of those who “search”. The other vendors are pretty much irrelevant in the US. In other countries a similar skewed usage pattern is evident. Some countries’ users rely on local systems, but for the purposes of this blog post, let’s focus on the US market.
In that market, there are, in my opinion, two players–Microsoft Bing and Google.
“Bing = Bing + Facebook” caused me to think that Web search is once again interesting. Here’s the point that hooked me:
Effective immediately, when you search on Bing you can see results based on what your friends and other people are recommending and talking about. So your search results will be different from mine because we know different people.
Eeek. Microsoft and Facebook appear to have — if the information in the write up is spot on — a search feature that Google does not. Google has stellar earnings, but Microsoft has a pipe into Facebook. What makes this more interesting is that Facebook has been hiring Googlers. The combination of chemicals could produce an interesting compound.
When I was in high school chemistry, I found that departing from the lab workbook produced some fascinating results. One example was a mixture of calcium carbide and concentrated hydrochloric acid. A click from the Bunsen burner ingniter thing was particularly memorable.
Search is interesting because the combination of Googlers migrating to Facebook, Microsoft’s Facebook data, and the poorly understood behavior of the Facebook addicts could produce a bang. Of course, the compound may be unpleasant. Google, on the other hand, is missing one of the ingredients: Facebook data. The void can be filled but at this moment, Bing is in a space and may expand.
The uncertainty adds interest to what is for most people a routine and method that gets little thought.
Stephen E Arnold, October 15, 2010
Freebie
x
Microsoft SharePoint Videos
October 13, 2010
A reader sent me a link and it pointed to a framed page on StumbleUpon.com. For the life of me, I can’t figure out who wrote what, when, and why. Here’s the StumbleUpon link.
When I shaved the url, I got a 404, so you are on your own. What interested my reader a lot and me not so much were two new videos in an article called “Microsoft’s Internet business Vision: SharePoint for Internet Sites & Fast Search.”
The two videos which I watched as I was writing this post are:
- Microsoft’s Internet Business Platform Vision Part 1. This is a seven minute video featuring a person in the Technology Solutions DPMG unit. I don’t know what the acronym means. The video is a voice over PowerPoint. The first video explained market trends.
- Microsoft’s Internet Business Platform Vision Part 2. The second video includes a nifty graphic about Redmond’s business vision. The diagram shows an “integrated platform”. Yes, another integrated platform which one hopes connects to the other platforms in an enterprise and in cloud space.
What’s this have to do with search? Well, one has to be able to find things in this integrated space. The Fast search detail was, in my opinion, thin. But there is a nifty diagram showing how Fast Search Server can deliver reach, retention, and revenue.
If you are into Microsoft, you will enjoy the voice over PowerPoint presentations. I anticipate that certified partners selling a snap in replacement for Fast Search Server may find the videos helpful with regard to their product marketing and positioning.
Stephen E Arnold, October 13, 2010
Clearwell Goes All in One
October 13, 2010
“Clearwell Unveils All-in-One eDiscovery Platform” alerted me that another vendor has shifted from a solution to a platform. Clearwell flashed on my radar with its Rocket Docket system. The company won some kudos because a law firm or corporate legal office could ring Clearwell on the phone, and the company would deliver a ready-to-run box. The system could be plugged in and pointed at the content to be processed. The company has added nifty features that lawyers find quite useful. One lawyer told me a couple of years ago, “I can save my discovery trail and rerun it or show it to a colleague.”
According to the write up in Computer Business Review:
The platform can pull data from over 50 sources, including cloud-based applications, and offers a single dashboard for report generation. Other features of the new platform include an interactive data map, which enables users to navigate through data sources with what Clearwell calls an iTunes-like filter; collection templates, which save commonly-used collection settings, including specific directories, filters and preservation stores; and collection analytics, which provide a portfolio of analytical charts and tables that display the types of data collected.
For more information about this platform, navigate to www.clearwellsystems.com.
My views, before I forget them, include:
- How many platforms does an organization need? In some situations, cloud solutions make more sense. My recollection is that Brainware offered a spin on hosted a few years ago. One could call Brainware and the firm would pick up hard copy and digital data obtained via discovery, process it, and then provide secure access to an authorized user.
- Has the law firm market shifted? My sources tell me that buyers of these eDiscovery systems are corporate legal departments. The hook for these sales is that a CEO wants to know right away if there is an “issue” in the discovered materials.
- Has the number of vendors chasing the legal market forced down prices for basic services? The “platform” sounds like a higher value sale, particularly when connectors are provided to make it easy to ingest popular file types. The platform play, if successful, could draw the attention of a larger, more established platform provider. What happens when platforms collide? Unlikely because lawyers are not diffused widely in most organizations. Maybe the play will lead to a buy out.
Just some questions to which I don’t have answers.
Stephen E Arnold, October 13, 2010
Freebie
Wolfram Alpha and Search
October 12, 2010
I read “Wolfram Alpha and the Future of Search.” When I first looked at Wolfram Alpha, I did not consider the system a search engine. Google has a similar function. The idea is that an appropriate query will generate an answer. In my first queries with Wolfram Alpha, the math questions worked well. The more generalized query elicited some head scratching from the Wolfram Alpha system.
The write up summarizes some remarks made by Stephen Wolfram, a well know wizard and software genius, whose Mathematica finds use in many PhD study areas, research labs in Silicon Valley, and puzzle solvers who find Mathematica just what the doctor ordered to avoid a silly addition error.
The write up contained two points which I found interesting.
First, Dr. Wolfram allegedly said something along the lines:
Traditional search engines help us find documents in that mountain of words. But they do very little to distill those words into knowledge, or to answer our questions. The challenge in the coming years, Wolfram said, was to make more of these files and documents computable. That would enable systems like Wolfram/Alpha to digest them, and to use them to produce answers and analysis.
Dr. Wolfram is right in the flow of the data fusion trend. The question I would raise is, “What happens when those generating the outputs fiddle the game?” I don’t think “trust”, “reputation,” or “honor” will satisfy my need for some substantive reassurance. The nifty interfaces and the point-and-click access to “the answer” may be a mixed blessing.
Second, Dr. Wolfram alleged said something along these lines:
But the way Wolfram sees it, more of us will produce information in a style (or on templates) that will make it computable, and machines like his will eventually be able to answer all sorts of questions. In a sense, an early stage of this pre-processing is already happening: An entire industry is formatting Web pages to make them more searchable.
Bingo. Data fusion. The question I would raise is, “What happens when one of the nifty acquisition and transformation systems cannot process certain content?” In my experience, the scale of operation at even Twitter content centric start ups is a significant amount of data. Presenting information as complete that may quite incomplete seems to be a sticky wicket to me.
Is this bulk content processing and machine answering the future? Google, Recorded Future, and DataSift are rushing toward that end zone. Trends are fascinating, and in this case, data fusion tells us more about the market’s need for an easy-as-pie way to get actionable information than about the validity of the methods and the appropriateness of the outputs.
Stephen E Arnold, October 12, 2010
Orkut: The Need for Speed
October 12, 2010
We think there may be a number of different points of friction for Orkut, Google’s social networking service. Orkut became available since 2004. Orkut “lived” in the US, but we have heard that it now resides on servers in Brazil, not that the location of a Google server makes much difference to a user. Other folks may have a different opinion about where a particular service should reside.
The TechCrunch article “Marissa Mayer: Orkut’s U.S. Failure Was Due To Slow Performance After Fast Growth”, shows a different side of Google. Many people have never heard of Google’s social network Orkut which was introduced before Facebook. The network attracted a lot of attention in just the first few days. However, Google was not prepared and Mayer admitted “This caused the network to slow down to a crawl.” US Internet users stopped using the program and it became obsolete. Google eventually worked out the network problems but they missed a golden opportunity and their US audience was gone. With the introduction of FaceBook, Google may have lost its chance at a social network audience. Orkut continues to be popular in Brazil but when it comes to the US it seems that ship has already sailed.
The question is, “Can Google catch up with Facebook?” If the answer is, “Yes,” then the question becomes, “Can Google leap frog Facebook?” Our view is that speed is more than the rendering time of a Web page and its images. Speed also shades into closing the gap with a competitor and quickly blasting away that competitor’s market position.
Google is good at certain types of quickness, but in terms of the Facebook problem, Google is less than fleet footed in the Facebook-type market. With Facebook now the subject of wildly popular movie, the film makes clear that any notoriety is good in Hollywood. The ClickZ article about video usage delivers another interesting fact. Please, keep in mind that these 20-something oriented surveys may have some wild and crazy aspects to them.
Here’s what ClickZ said:
Facebook is now the second largest online video property in the U.S. when ranked by unique viewers, according to data from comScore. The measurement firm’s Video Metrix service reports Facebook grew its audience substantially in August, with over 58.5 million users watching video content on the site over the course of the month, compared with around 46.6 million doing so in July. Meanwhile, viewers of video content on Yahoo sites dwindled, allowing Facebook to overtake it and claim the second spot behind Google.
If true, the need for speed in the social networking sector is increasing in our opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, October 12, 2010
Freebie
The Google Car: The Goose View Mirror
October 11, 2010
Short honk: Geese don’t drive unless killed, processed, and converted to pillows. At that stage, the geese are transported, and that’s the idea behind the Google “look, ma, no hands” Math Club car. The received wisdom appears in “Google working on Self-Driving Cars.” Some bafflement swirls about this Google initiative. Here’s the goose’s view:
- When Google drives, Google has geospatial data. Yep, it’s still search.
- When Google drives, it has a captive audience who may be surfing or otherwise consuming digital goodies in a Google-equipped vehicle
- When Google drives, Google can serve ads just like the ones Sun execs wanted so a burger joint was readily accessible without unnecessary exits and delays.
In short, the Google car makes a lot of sense and cents.
Stephen E Arnold, October 11, 2010
AOL Makes Its Research Study Available
October 11, 2010
My doubt about the validity of sponsored research remains unchanged. If you are a data maven, eager to gobble, information about online, you will want to navigate to “AOL Commissions Two Research Studies to Help Determine Driving Forces Behind Online Content Consumption” and read the story. Skip the fruitless trip to the download link. Just propaganda about AOL. Reuters presented some highlights. I found one passage remarkable:
The most acceptable forms of online advertising to the consumer are those that are directly relevant, integrated and informative as well as have visually appealing imagery.
Quite a surprise. Too bad there is no detail about the development of the questions, sample selection, and other down-and-deep details. Google displayed a wild ad on one of my blogs today. There were components in the ad, but these were not independently active.
Maybe some day. Exciting. Ads.
Stephen E Arnold, October 11, 2010
Freebie unlike the ads
Nstein in the News
October 11, 2010
I had a couple of comments about my not mentioning Nstein, now a unit of OpenText. Nstein has been an interesting company or unit of a bigger enterprise. Last year, one of Nstein’s executives set up a meeting with me and then did not show up. I pinged the fellow and learned that his plans had changed. Since then, my plans for covering Nstein changed as well. Seemed only fair.
To assuage the aggrieved reader, I took a quick look at the content sucked into my Overflight system about Nstein. One of the more interesting items appeared in a publication for which I write a for-fee column. I don’t cover search in that publication, but Archana Venkatraman wrote “Semantic Content Analytics Can Resolve Digital Information Problems.” I was surprised because a picture of me and links to my recent write ups about SAP appeared in the border for the Web version of Mr. Venkatraman’s article. I was flattered, but I was confused about the premise of the article; to wit, analytics resolving digital information problems. I think of analytics as causing problems, particularly with regard to the methods used to generate output. Data type and source, privacy, and latency – these topics cross the goose’s mind when he thinks about content analytics.
With regard to Nstein, the passage that caught my attention was information which is attributed, I assume, to an OpenText Nstein executive, Lubor Ptacek, vice president, product marketing:
Semantic Navigation first collects content through a crawling process. Then the content is automatically analyzed and tagged with relevant and insightful entities, topics, summaries and sentiments – the key to providing an engaging online experience. Next, content is served to users through intuitive navigation widgets that encourage audiences to discover the depth of available information or share it on social networks, such as Facebook and Twitter. From there, it supports placement of product and service offerings or advertising to convert page views into sales.Ptacek gives the example of a medical information professional is searching for the name of a disease, content analytics technology can provide him additional information such as the side effects of the illness the drugs used in the past and so on. “And this logic can be applied to other industries as well.” The solution comes after Open Text acquired Nstein Technologies, a content analytics company, six months ago. It acquired Nstein at a time when analysts were suggesting that such e-discovery solutions could provide sophisticated search and content navigation options that info pros are seeking.
I am hearing similar explanations of functionality from a number of companies. These include “sentiment specialists” like Attensity and Lexalytics and from certain mashup vendors such as Digital Reasoning and Kapow Technologies. I have heard the leaders in enterprise search like Autonomy and Exalead reference similar functions. I could toss in IBM, Google, and Microsoft, but I think you get the idea. Quite a few search vendors are morphing into solutions.
If you want more information about OpenText / Nstein, navigate to www.opentext.com. I would also suggest a look at the other vendors making similar assertions. I may have to start covering this new segment of search. Perhaps it warrants a separate Web log?
Stephen E Arnold, October 11, 2010
Freebie
Google Oracle and a Cup of Java
October 10, 2010
I don’t understand how the legal methods work in the US. Oracle files suit. I read in Digital Daily that Google has responded with its own request. “Google Asks Court to Toss Oracle’s Android Lawsuit” informed me that
the search sovereign filed an answer to Oracle’s suit, denying all seven of its patent-infringement charges, and asking that the company’s copyright-infringement claim be dismissed because Google (GOOG) feels it is “legally deficient.”
My take on this particular matter is that Google is a big, fat, easy, rich target. The fact that a company that was a Google- Search-Appliance tolerant outfit has lost patience with Android. The vehicle for the annoyance is Java, a programming language that I had assumed was available for anyone to use. I remember of old “write once, run anywhere” pitch from my long ago tie up with Kendara. That team used Java to create a personalized experience and the technology ended up in the hot hands of the AT&T @Home folks.
Now one needs a lot of time and a lawyer sitting near by to figure out what the next move will be. Oracle and Google: A pretty interesting spat. It was until Microsoft aimed its legal eagles at Motorola in order to take a whack at the GOOG.
My question: After 12 years, isn’t it a bit late to try and corral Googzilla. I remember those briefings I was doing in 2004 and 2005. Telcos and the world’s biggest software company just snorted. Now it is not snorting it is hyperventilating.
The collateral implications of the Oracle Google matter may spill over into the Wild West of open source software. Whenever smart attorneys take over from technologists, the unpredictable becomes the new normal.
Maybe it is a bit too late. I just read Android is the most popular operating system in US among recent smartphone buyers. What happened to Apple? Research in Motion? The Kin?
Did Yogi Berra really say, “It gets late early out there.”
Stephen E Arnold, October 10, 2010
Freebie sort of like Android and its sweet names
A Google Triple
October 9, 2010
It has been a long day. More than 300 people coding and chatting. The goslings and I flapped around the Lucene Revolution and survived the debate among some industry big dogs.
After the crowd thinned, I flipped through my newsreader and spotted three items in quick succession. Are these true? Who knows? I did find the three items taken as a bap, bap, bap quite suggestive.
First, the Google according to one of the super confident Web traffic outfits accounts for 72 percent of searches in September 2010. The story ran in Search Engine Watch. Is that a monopoly? I sure don’t know, but that’s a hefty chunk of the market.
Second, with that many users, I assumed that happiness was a warm puppy or at least a warm Googzilla. Not according to the Better Business Bureau. “Google Gets a C-Minus for Customer Service” reports that Google, despite its A+ in math has received a dull normal in helping those customers. As a C minus goose, dull normal is not too bad or is it two bad? For the Hahvad bound, gloom falls or is it fails?
Third, “Former FTC Staffer Files a Complaint against Google” contains some allegations. The story asserts:
the search engine and advertising outfit shares data with third parties. Soghoian doesn’t mince words, asking the FTC to “compel Google to take proactive steps to protect the privacy of individual users’ search terms”. His complaint also includes the aforementioned allegations of personal information being shared with third parties.
One wonders why the US government agency fiddled while Rome smoked?
Now, assume these statements from three sources are semi-accurate. The customer thing seems to be like one of those social type things, not a math type thing. Bap, bap, bap.
Stephen E Arnold, Octobenwsr 9, 2010
Freebie or is it furby? It’s a C minus thing.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
