Real Journalists May Have Lost Touch with IT Reality
March 9, 2010
Keep in mind that the addled goose’s Web log, which you are now reading, is a marketing vehicle. It contains on good days old news. On bad days, the addled goose recycles his own talks which he delivers for tacos and Pepsis. I am not a journalist and I don’t pretend to be one. I am not even a public relations person. As I approach 66, I entertain myself capturing information that I otherwise would forget and documenting my thoughts, which are subject to change. When was the last time, a 65 year old could remember where he or she put the keys to the automobile? See what I mean.
When I read the Cnet write up about a post I saw last week, I thought, “CBS’s real journalists are now thinking about themselves in a meta-way.” Navigate to “Has Business Press Lost Touch with the Tech Industry?” CBS is a real company and it does real news. Cnet is a real news outfit, if I understand set theory. The point is that an azure chip outfit called ITDatabase figured out that the real journalists are writing about topics that are popular. I think this is using humans the way Google uses popularity algorithms. I am sure the “real” journalists would disagree. That’s okay.
For me, the most interesting passage in the write up in Cnet was:
Enterprise IT is woefully underrepresented, despite being the cash-cow in the industry. “In the overall editorial agenda,” the report says, “enterprise IT is treated like consumer tech’s snaggletoothed twin. It barely even makes the family photo.”
Let’s think about this statement.
First, publicly traded companies are covered with a bit of fancy geometry by the investment analysts tracking these companies. The information is usually able to deliver a couple of nuggets. The reason is that most of the analysts talk to people * other than public relations * and * business development officers *. Most of the real journalists recycle familiar contacts, preferring to quote names the writer assumes the readers will recognize. So when the word “search” appears in a story the same handful of “experts’ get quoted. The result is that the stories really don’t change too much from article to article. Google is an advertising company. Bing is gaining share. Autonomy is the leader in enterprise search. The statements in the article are true because they are in the article. Tautology meets routine.
Second, figuring out what is going on in a technology field is tough for three reasons. [a] The jargon is impenetrable. A “real” journalist may not have the time to figure out what the words mean. Example: faceted search or taxonomy. [b] The sources are often running the game plan. Take a look at the comments by tech leaders. There are buzzwords and a jab or two at a windmill. Not much substance because the focus is the sound bite. [c] A tech company sells products that a really complex. The wizards at the company cannot be trusted to answer a question because the wizard might point out that a specific feature is different from the function described by the marketing person. Guess who gets in trouble? The tech person so there folks are shuttled away from the lights and the cameras.
Third, I heard that publishing companies are getting rid of staff. The numbers quoted at a conference last week struck me as pretty high. The person pointed out that newspapers were shedding jobs at the rate of 1,000 per month. Wow. What will be left? What’s left, if this number is accurate, are people who have to write from news releases, contacts who are warm and familiar, and topics that are listed on Tweetmeme.
When the money goes away, algorithms will do this work and, of course, folks with time on their hands like this addled goose. Just my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, March 9, 2010
No one paid me to write about how I write this blog. Wait. If I buy myself lunch this afternoon, I will be getting paid. I will report the write-for-food angle to the FCC.
Google Flashes Star Trek Gizmo
February 8, 2010
Short honk: In 2006 one of my partners and I made a series of presentations to Big Telecommunications Companies. After about 15 minutes of introductory comments, I perceived the reaction as my bringing a couple of dead squirrels into the conference room, chopping them up, and building a fire with the telco executives’ billfolds. Chilly and hostile are positive ways to describe the reaction to my description of Google’s telecommunications related technologies. Fortunately I got paid, sort of like a losing gladiator getting buried in 24 BCE in a mass grave.
You can see telco woe when you read and think about the story in the Herald Sun, “Google Leaps Barrier with Translator Phone.” The story apparently surfaced in the paywall secure London Times but the info leaked into the world in which I live via Australia. The key point in the write up was the sentence:
If it [a Google phone with automatic translation] worked, it could eventually transform communication among speakers of the world’s 6,000-plus languages.
Well, if it worked, it means that the Googlers’ voice search, machine translation, and low latency distributed computing infrastructure will find quite a few new customers in my opinion. Think beyond talking, which is obviously really important. I wonder if entertainment executives can see what the telco executives insisted was impossible tin 2006.
One president of a big cellular company in the chilly Midwest said in a very hostile tone as I recall, “Google can’t do telecommunications. It’s an ad company. We’re a telecommunications company. There’s a difference.”
Oh, is there? Bits are bits in my experience. I used to watch Star Trek and so did some Googlers assert I.
Stephen E Arnold, February 8, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I will report non payment to the FCC, a really great entity.
Vyre: Software, Services, Search, and More
March 6, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to Vyre, whose catchphrase is “dissolving complexity.” The last time I looked at the company, I had pigeon holed it as a consulting and content management firm. The news release my reader sent me pointed out that the company has a mid market enterprise search solution that is now at version 4.x. I am getting old, or at least too sluggish to keep pace with content management companies that offer search solutions. My recollection is that Crown Point moved in this direction. I have a rather grim view of CMS because software cannot help organizations create high quality content or at least what I think is high quality content.
The Wikipedia description of Vyre matches up with the information in my archive:
VYRE, now based in the UK, is a software development company. The firm uses the catchphrase “Enterprise 2.0″ to describe its enterprise solutions for business.The firm’s core product is Unify. The Web based services allows users to build applications and content management. The company has technology that manages digital assets. The firm’s clients in 2006 included Diageo, Sony, Virgin, and Lowe and Partners. The company has reinvented itself several times since the late 1990s doing business as NCD (Northern Communication and Design), Salt, and then Vyre.
You can read Wikipedia summary here. You can read a 2006 Butler Group analysis here. My old link worked this evening (March 5, 2009), but click quickly. In my files I had a link to a Vyre presentation but it was not about search. Dated 2008, you may find the information useful. The Vyre presentations are here. The link worked for me on March 5, 2009. The only name I have in my archive is Dragan Jotic. Other names of people linked to the company are here. Basic information about the company’s Web site is here. Traffic, if these data are correct, seem to be trending down. I don’t have current interface examples. The wiki for the CMS service is here. (Note: the company does not use its own CMS for the wiki. The wiki system is from MedioWiki. No problem for me, but I was curious about this decision because the company offers its own CMS system. You can get a taste of the system here.
Administrative Vyre screen.
After a bit of poking around, it appears that Vyre has turned up the heat on its public relations activities. The Seybold Report here presented a news story / news release about the search system here. I scanned the release and noted this passage as interesting for my work:
…version 4.4 introduces powerful new capabilities for performing facetted and federated searching across the enterprise. Facetted search provides immediate feedback on the breakdown of search results and allows users to quickly and accurately drill down within search results. Federated search enables users to eradicate content silos by allowing users to search multiple content repositories.
Vyre includes a taxonomy management function with its search system, if I read the Seybold article correctly. I gravitate to the taxonomy solution available from Access Innovations, a company run by my friend and colleagues Marje Hlava and Jay Ven Eman. Their system generates ANSI standard thesauri and word lists, which is the sort of stuff that revs my engine.
Endeca has been the pioneer in the enterprise sector for “guided navigation” which is a synonym in my mind for faceted search. Federated search gets into the functions that I associated with Bright Planet, Deep Web Technologies, and Vivisimo, among others. I know that shoving large volumes of data through systems that both facetize content and federated it are computationally intensive. Consequently, some organizations are not able to put the plumbing in place to make these computationally intensive systems hum like my grandmother’s sewing machine.
If you are in the market for a CMS and asset management company’s enterprise search solution, give the company’s product a test drive. You can buy a report from UK Data about this company here. I don’t have solid pricing data. My notes to myself record the phrase, “Sensible pricing.” I noted that the typical cost for the system begins at about $25,000. Check with the company for current license fees.
Stephen Arnold, March 6, 2009
Nexplore: Another Google Challenger
January 14, 2009
Nexplore Search here is a Web search system with some interesting functions. A reader alerted me to the firm’s sharp increase in Web traffic. I had looked at the system last year, and I wanted to revisit the Web search company’s service.
The company said:
It starts with Nexplore Search Redefined a visually engaging user friendly, interactive multi-media interface makes navigation effortless and drill down obsolete.
The company indexes 50 billion Web pages. According to the company here, its system:
redefines the search experience. A visually engaging, user-friendly, multi-media interface makes navigation effortless and drill down obsolete. Computer intelligence combined with human community fosters greater relevancy — in both search results and ad displays. Intuitive refinement tools and advanced personalization features make search faster, easier and more enjoyable for everyone — from Web newbies to average users to accomplished surfers.
My test queries returned useful results. For example, for “enterprise search” returned links to Vivisimo, Coveo, and Endeca as “sponsored results”, which is okay. The first hit–somewhat surprisingly was to Microsoft.com enterprise search page here, not to the Fast Search page here. The Fast Search page seems a bit spare these days, so Nexplore seems to have indexed the Microsoft page as the number one enterprise search hit. I find this surprising, but I don’t have a good enough feel for what Nexplore is doing to determine relevancy.
Nexplore results for the query “enterprise search”.
The interface provides hot links to suggested or related queries, a feature Nexplore calls “Pop Search”. The system includes a link to a “Wiki Search”, which is okay, but the number two result in the hit list is a Wikipedia link. The sponsored results contained a surprise. There was a direct link to Ontolica, a unit of Surf Ray. Surf Ray has been the subject of considerable speculation. In fact, if you run a query for “Surf Ray” from this page on the Beyond Search Web log, you can follow the conversation about the company’s various managerial and financial ills. Obviously someone paid to put the Ontolica ad on the Nexplore results page, so this cannot be an error. So0me of the firms in the Sponsor Results were equally interesting; for example, I don’t think too much about Abbrevity, Accenture, or EMC as big players in the enterprise search sector. But someone is paying to reach eyeballs for the query “enterprise search”. Two results struck me as peculiar in the main results list. First, the inclusion of the Enterprise Search Summit 2009. I heard the show attracted 60 paying customers, so the owner of the show must be working overtime to pump up the search engine optimization to get the program to appear among vendors of search systems. The second anomaly is the exclusion of Google and its Google Search Appliance. Odd. Google has more than 16,000 licensees of its enterprise search appliance, which puts it on an equal footing or slightly ahead of Autonomy, another company not in the results list.
One useful touch is that the results for a news search are run against the query in the query box. No annoying retyping required. The video link did not return a direct link to any videos on the Google Channel. Majority of the videos came from Blinkx, a company touting itself as the largest index of video content. The exclusion of Google may be due to Google, not Nexplore, however.
The image search in response to the query “enterprise search” was not useful. The illustrations did not include the images that I know are available on the Web sites of the leading vendors. For example, the Google search appliance pages include screen shots. Similar images may be found on the Web sites of Autonomy, Coveo, and Endeca, to name just three companies who make visual content available for potential buyers. The inclusion of the defunct Enterprise Search Report was an anomaly. More recent reports such as the Gilbane Beyond Search study and the Galatea Successful Enterprise Search Management were not included on the first page of the results. The image search for this test query was not useful to me. The blog search was not useful either. The majority of the links were not directly about enterprise search. Presumably, the Nexplore indexing system does not handle synonyms for “enterprise search” at this stage of the content processing subsystem’s development. I will monitor this function going forward. A similar statement may be made about enterprise search podcasts. The inclusion of enterprise networking in the results set requires me to listen to a podcast to determine if the information would be of interest to me. My hunch is that “enterprise search” as a podcast subject is too narrow to be of much indexing traction.
The company offers several search related services:
- MyCircle–an application agnostic social computing platform
- AdCircle–Ad creation and management tool
- HitLabel–contents, prizes, and tools for aspiring music stars
The company’s president and founder is Edward Mandel and Dion Hinchcliffe the chief technical officer. Mr. Mandel was in 2004 a distinguished as a finalist for the Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award. Prior to Positive Software Systems, Mandel ran a successful technology consulting firm, IIT Consulting. Mr. Hinchcliffe served as president and chief technology officer of Alexandria, Virginia-based Hinchcliffe & Company, a premier Enterprise Web 2.0 consulting and advisory Firm.
has added a former Microsoft vice president (Rowland Hanson) to the firm’s advisory board.
Nexplore has stated that the company is attracting more than five million unique monthly visitors and that the search system ranks in the top 5,000 internationally ranked Web sites, based on Alexa data. You can read the news story here. The company is publicly traded under the symbol NXPC. Ask your broker to pull the data from the “Pink Sheet” listings. You can read the company’s 2008 financial news release here. I scanned the information on the three page document. Several points jumped out at me:
- The company describes itself as “a development stage company”. I interpreted this phrase that the firm will be seeking additional funding.
- The company’s net loses through June 2008 were about $17 million. Most of this money is probably due to the investment in the system and software
- Through June 30, 2008, the company generated almost $700,000 in revenues. The next financial statement will make it easier to determine how the present economic environment is affecting this company
The $64 question is, “Is Nexplore the next Google?” If you want to bet on Nexplore, contact the company here. I will add this search system to my watch list.
Stephen Arnold, January 13, 2009
Mindbreeze Enterprise Search
October 3, 2008
Mindbreeze, headquartered in Linz, Austria, has caught the fancy of several of my European readers. The name was familiar to me, but I knew nothing about the company. KMWorld, the outfit who pays me to write a monthly column about the Google identified Mindbreeze Enterprise Search as “trend setting product of 2008.” I thought I was able to keep up to date on trend setting search systems, but Mindbreeze was a new player to me. You can read the news release about this recognition here. The news release–perhaps in the adrenaline rush of receiving the KMWorld award said, “US magazine KMWorld acclaims the ‘hottest’ products of the year.” Mindbreeze’s parent company–Fabasoft–seems to be working to reverse a decline in revenues.
With US search engines singing happy tunes to me, I have heard that several of the vendors are really struggling to “make their numbers.” Mindbreeze, it seems, is chugging along quite happily. Earlier this year, Intellisearch reallocated its resources. When I pinged the Intellisearch offices in San Francisco, I was redirected to the company’s offices in Europe. The flagships in search and content processing remain Autonomy (more of a diversified services vendor) and Exalead (a real challenger to the GOOG in engineering) dominate the European scene. I know there are many specialized vendors–for instance, Polderland in the Netherlands–and the revivified Oslo operation for Microsoft Fast Search & Transfer. I heard on my last trip to Europe of a number of new search and content processing vendors, and I will try to cover these as I get more information.
MES (Mindbreeze Enterprise Search)
Mindbreeze has an office in Beverly, Massachusetts. The US contact is David Cloyd, according to the document I reviewed. The managing director of the main company is Daniel Fallmann, who works from the Linz office. The marketing angle is what the company’s brochure calls CEVA or Content Enable Vertical Application. Here’s a diagram of how this works. The various components refer to software available from other Fabasoft companies.
The components show are a work flow component (Folio), a compliance archive (iArchive), a case management system (DUCX), and an operations manager. In this context, Mindbreeze seems to be heading in the same direction as MarkLogic, but I need to do more digging.
And what about Mindbreeze? (For more details you can download the Mindbreeze product brochure here.)
The company’s Web site provides no information about “latest news” as of October 3, 2008, at 8 30 am Eastern time. I expect that the news about the KMWorld award will be posted at some time in the future. The news archive reported on March 30, 2006 (the most recent entry) that a service pack was available for Mindbreeze Enterprise Search 1.6 was available. My firth thought was, “No news in two years. Hmmmm.”
I did locate FAQs for Versions 1.6, 2.x, and 3.x. The most interesting items I noted were:
First Search Mini-Profile: Stratify
September 9, 2008
Beyond Search has started its search and content processing mini-profile series.
The first profile is about Stratify, and you can read it here.
The goal is to publish each week a brief snapshot of selected search and content processing vendors. The format of each profile will be a short essay that covers the background of the system, its principal features, strengths, weaknesses, and an observation. The idea inspiring each profile is to create a basic summary. Each vendor is invited to post additional information, links, and updates. On a schedule yet to be determined, each mini-profile will be updated and the comments providing new information deleted. The system allows a reasonable trade off between editorial control and vendor supplements. We will try to adhere to the weekly schedule. Our “Search Wizards Speak” series has been well received, and we will add interviews, but the interest in profiles has been good. Remember. You don’t need to write me “off the record” or even worse call me to provide insights, updates, and emendations. Please, use the comments section for each profile. I have other work to do. I enjoy meeting new people via email and the phone, the volume of messages to me is rising rapidly. Enjoy the Stratify post. You will find the profiles under the “Profile” tab on the splash page for the Web log. I will post a short news item when a new profile becomes available. Each profile will be indexed with the key word “profile”.
Stephen Arnold, September
Stratify: Discovery System 3.x
September 9, 2008
by Nicholas E. Stover for Beyond Search
Basics
Stratify—formerly Purple Yogi—provides eDiscovery services intended to help attorneys minimize the resources needed to analyze and manage documents. The company is owned by Iron Mountain, a diversified records management company. More specifically, technology provided by Stratify aids in the search, retrieval, and management of information required for a legal matter. Founded in 1999, the company has offices in Mountain View, California, Boston, Massachusetts, and Bangalore, India. Stratify can found on the Web at www.stratify.com.
Product
Stratify Discovery System 3.x employs statistical and other methods to identify named people, places, and proper nouns from any collection of documents, including content from network file servers, content management systems, Web sites, and data fields. The indexed information and metadata are categorized into the system’s taxonomy, which can be modified by a licensee. Stratify provides a key word search and retrieval system to allow attorneys and paralegals to locate information processed by the system.
Stratify includes several interesting features; for example, the ability processing documents in multiple languages; inclusion of text mining functions; automatically creating dynamic taxonomies; providing discovery interfaces for reporting and analysis; and function to identify relationships between and among people, locations, organizations and topics.
Customers
The firm’s customers include law firms, corporate legal departments, and US intelligence agencies. Thomson Reuters uses the system. Stratify helps reduce the need for human indexers. Other customers include NASA, the Department of Education, and Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs.
Strengths
The major advantage of Stratify is that the company’s system has been optimized for eDiscovery and manipulation of information generated in legal matters. The company was an early entrant in the text mining sector. The firm’s product now includes visualization tools. The utility of these ways of viewing query results will vary from licensee to licensee. Now included are “heat maps” (to show the user hot spots, neighbor maps (showing topics or entities that have a direct, non-mediated relationship to each other), and network graphs (sometimes called social graphs) to help identify direct and indirect relationships between entities.
Weaknesses
Stratify systems begin in the $100,000 range. This license fee does not include customization or additional engineering services required by the licensee. Over the years, the system benefits from the involvement of a subject matter expert. An organization with little or no experience with enterprise search is not likely to understand or benefit from the software.
Price
Current pricing for the Stratify 3.x system begins at about $100,000. A custom price quote is required.
Summary
The Stratify software search-and-retrieval system lacks some of the case management functions that certain competitors are now bundling with their eDiscovery systems. Performance can be an issue if the system is not properly resourced.
Web site: www.stratify.com
nGenera Bakes in Autonomy Search
August 26, 2008
Just when Microsoft makes search “free”, along comes Autonomy and proves that licensing deals are alive and well. According to CRM Buyer, nGenera inked an original equipment manufacturing deal with Autonomy. What’s interesting is that it’s not “search”. The deal is for Web 2.0 technology for search. The application is not finding. The application is knowledge management. I have to be up front and admit that I don’t know what knowledge is. Absent that understanding, I’m baffled at how to manage what I don’t grasp. Nevertheless, the deal is done.
Let’s sort out who is who in this deal. Talisma, according to CRM Buyer, “OEM’ed the Autonomy search engine.” An Autonomy reseller told me that Autonomy’s search engine no longer needs training, and it now shares many features with “appliance like” search systems from Google and Thunderstone, among others. You can get more information about Talisma here. The Talisma catchphrase is “Software that enables an exceptional online customer experience.”
nGenera bought Talisma in May 2008. nGenera’s Steve Papermaster is reported as having said at the time of the deal:
The future of innovation is customer co-creation: talking directly to customers, listening to them, learning from them. We’re taking content and processes from customer interaction software and mashing that with Web 2.0 collaboration tools to help companies discover brilliant new product ideas inspired by their own customers. Source: Paul Greenberg.
nGenera now has its own customer support product line to complement its other management consulting type software offerings. nGenera is a cloud computing – Web 2.0 services firm. The company has a remarkable “manifesto” here that sets forth its vision for organizational operations. One idea in the manifest is that organizations must move from knowledge management” to what the company calls “content collaboration and collective intelligence”. Since I don’t know what “knowledge management” means, I am in the dark about information operations that reach beyond. The manifesto also advocates moving from “traditional information technology” to “a next generation enterprise platform.” Again my experience is not much help to me in figuring out what nGenera’s services will deliver. The company has its fingers in many different pies. Each pie is stuffed with Web 2.0 goodness and goodies like “leveraging institutional memory,” “mass collaboration”, “business analytics”, and “transformational change”. These notions are too sophisticated for this addled goose.
The Talisma Knowledgebase which may now incorporate Autonomy technology.
The purchase of Talisma adds what nGenera describes here as:
The leading Customer Interaction Management (CIM) software solution provider enabling organizations globally to deliver an exceptional online customer experience while dramatically increasing their efficiency and effectiveness. Talisma’s customers include Aetna, AOL, Canon, Citibank, Comcast, Dell, Ford, University of Notre Dame, Microsoft, Pitney Bowes, Siemens, Sony, and Sprint. Talisma is headquartered in Bellevue, Washington, and has offices located across Asia-Pacific, Europe, and North America.
To sum up, nGenera bought Talisma in May 2008. Talisma inked a deal for Autonomy’s search and content processing technology. Autonomy, therefore, “snaps in” to the broader range of nGenera’s Web 2.0 services. Autonomy joins Atlassian Confluence as a technology provider to nGenera. I must admit these names leave my head spinning.
SurfRay AB Update
July 6, 2008
In the first two editions of Enterprise Search Report, I profiled Mondosoft, a Microsoft-centric search system. I gave it a favorable review. Like most Microsoft-centric products, unless properly resourced, performance can become an issue. By the time I started work on the third edition of ESR in 2006, I had heard rumors of some changes underway at the firm. By late 2007, Mondosoft became part of SurfRay, a Danish search conglomerate. I found the search system implemented for the Vatican quite interesting. Hit boosting and multi-lingual support added zest to what could have been a sinfully bad (no pun intended) search experience. You can try it here.
In 2004, Mondosoft caught my attention because it was one of the first search vendors to offer analytics for licensees. Mondosoft, when deployed in a SharePoint environment, brought much needed usage data into the SharePoint picture. Instead of flying blind, Mondosoft gave the system administrator useful information about user actions. With Mondosoft’s analytics, SharePoint sites could be tuned to improve the user’s experience. Microsoft talked about SharePoint user experience; Mondosoft delivered technology that addressed user experience.
Mondosoft then acquired Ontolica, a company that made better use of SharePoint metadata and generated other useful tags. With Ontolica 3.2 installed and properly resourced, a SharePoint administrator could provide a useful set of hot links related to the user’s query. Microsoft delivered a blunt instrument; Ontolica provided a precision tool.
SurfRay’s product line includes an advanced, multi-lingual search engine suite with three components [a] MondoSearch, [b] BehaviorTracking, and [c] InformationManager, SurfRay’s Speed Index search and retrieval system, and Ontolica Search for SharePoint, providing business intelligence on information creation, search, retrieval and use. SurfRay also owns technology that can speed up searches of traditional relational database tables. In addition, SurfRay provides consulting services to its licensees. Plus, the company offers SurfRay XP search for Xerox’s multifunction document systems.
SurfRay/Mondosoft customers include Bosch, Burger King Corporation, Coleman. Hilton Hotels, Honeywell Process Solutions, Microsoft, Overnight Transportation, People’s Bank, Shell Oil, Siemens, SimCorp, The Swiss Army, TDC, The Vatican Holy See and United Technologies. SurfRay’s CEO and founder is Martin Veise. The president of the company is Steffen Saxil.
SurfRay has offices in New York, Stockholm, Bangkok and Copenhagen. You can learn more about the company here.
Stephen Arnold, July 6, 2008
Ontos: a Text Processing Company, Not a Weapon
June 5, 2008
In a conference call yesterday (June 4, 2008), someone mentioned “Ontos”. Another person asked, “What’s an Ontos?” I answered, “An anti-tank vehicle” What I remembered about the Ontos is that it was a tank loaded down with so many weapons I a turtle was speedier. Big laugh. Ontos is a company engaged in text and content processing with a product called ObjectSpark. To fill in the void in my knowledge, I navigated to the GOOG, plugged in “Ontos” and found a link to a 2001 article in Intelligent Enterprise, a very good Web site now that the print magazine has been put out to pasture. You can read the description here.
The company’s English language Web site is at www.ontos.com. The product line up no longer relies on the ObjectSpark name. You can license:
- OntosMiner, which “analyzes natural language text. It recognizes objects and their relations and adds them as annotations to the related text parts. The technology is based on semantic rules, i.e. NLP (Natural Language Processing). It uses ontologies to define the area of interest.”
- LightOntos for Workgroups, which “helps to organize and search information and documents. It allows the user to process and annotate PDF, Word, RTF, Text or HTML files using OntosMiner.”
- Ontos SOA, which “realizes the whole cycle of semantic-syntactical processing, management and analysis of unstructured information located in the Internet and large corporative data banks.”
- TAIS Ontos, which is “created as an Application Package using ORACLE technologies and Java. The system uses a semantic designed for building and maintaining object oriented databases. Additional components are effective engines for the search of explicit and hidden relations between objects. A visualization environment (interface) supports the analysts when analyzing a domain of interest. The product is adapted for the segment of law enforcing structures and attributed to the class of anti-criminal analytical systems”
The display of tagged text uses color to identify specific elements. When I saw this display, it reminded me to the output from Inxight Software’s text processing system.
The company’s Russian partner–ZAO AviComp Services–participated in the recent German technical extravaganza, CEBIT 2008.
You will find a handful of white papers on the Ontos Web site. I found “Ontos Solutions for the Semantic Web” quite interesting and informative. You can download it here.
I wasn’t able to locate any pricing or licensing information. If you have some of these data points, please, use the comment form below this essay to share the information with other readers. My email to the company went unanswered.
Based on my clicking through the Web site, you might want to take a look at this system. The white papers and technical descriptions use the buzz words that other vendors bandy about. The one drawback to a system that lacks a high profile in the US is this question, “Does the system meet US security guidelines?” My hunch is that the system is industrial strength; otherwise, the Brussels customer would not have signed a deal to use the Ontos technology.
Stephen Arnold, June 5, 2008
