Quote to Note: The Foundation of Yahoo, Rotten
March 3, 2010
Navigate to “The Steady, Efficient Decline Of Yahoo.” The article has some useful analysis of Yahoo’s woes. These include silos and unexciting products. The key statement is:
Yahoo’s foundation is rotten.
When foundations are weak, the structure comes apart. Right?
Stephen E Arnold, March 2, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I will report non payment to the manager of the Blair House, which has foundations like Toyota plants.
Yahoo Redefines Search as an Interface
February 28, 2010
Yoiks! The UK media giant Telegraph ran the story “Yahoo and the Future of Search” with a remarkable subtitle: “Yahoo’s search deal with Microsoft could usher in a new purple patch for the former web giant.”
Look at this paragraph in the interview with the former Googler Yoelle Maarek, now senior director of Yahoo Research.”
The [Microsoft] deal, she explains, should be seen as liberating Yahoo! to focus on front-end search innovations, rather than spending time and money on ensuring the back-end technology is working well. If anything, says Maarek, the Microsoft deal has freed the company up to start fighting the search war in the most important area – the bit the consumer can see. Yahoo’s search teams are planning to launch several new initiatives in this area over the coming months, to try and steal share from search Goliath Google, and also, somewhat confusingly, from Bing, the search platform of Microsoft, its new partner.
Now I am an addled goose often besieged by azure chip consultants and swamped with poobahisms. But this passage startled me.
First, as a former Googler, I expected something logical. Search as interface is okay, but it is part of the story. In fact, that story is Microsoft’s pitch for the UX or user experience. The idea is that users can have eye candy, facets, and suggestions so no query is needed. Fine, but to define search as an interface is like defining GM as a Corvette wheel assembly. Important but not the “real” GM.
Second, I quite like the notion of relying on Microsoft’s plumbing so Yahoo can do the UX thing. The hitch in the git along is that the plumbing is not quite up to Google standards. Ms. Maarek may not know how different but I am of the opinion that she will find out pretty darned quick.
Third, Yahoo has to make stuff work. I will not mention Panama. I will not point out the problems with email search. I will not point out the interesting behavior of Yahoo’s help system. Nope. I will just suggest you navigate to Yahoo.com and run a query for a Canon 200 camcorder. Check out the results. Make your own decision about where Yahoo is relative to Amazon and Bing. Even Google’s quirky Products service is more useful in my opinion.
What I find remarkable is that a marketing pitch is presented as laser like insight:
Over the coming months, Maarek says Yahoo! is focusing on three core search areas. Firstly the company is investing in lots of research and “data crunching” to understand how its search engine can better anticipate a person’s “intent” when they enter a search term – for instance, how it can discern whether a person is looking for business news, the record label or the fruit if they enter the search term ‘apple’. Secondly there are new tools being built upon and promoted to make searching via Yahoo! easier and help the company “establish a dialogue” with its users, according to Maarek. ‘Search Pad’ is one of these initiatives. It is a note-taking application which automatically assists a user in saving the addresses of the websites they are visiting on a virtual pad. It helps users collect, edit, organize, save, print and email their notes for immediate or future use. However, unless a user is logged into a Yahoo! account, it will not save or send a user the URLs after the browser window is shut down. Thirdly, Yahoo! is trying to build upon is ‘web of things’ concept – the idea that the web should be seen as an entity built up of ‘objects’ rather than documents. This should be reflected in the way search results are presented. For instance, if a user searched for Lady Gaga, then instead of receiving a list of blue links, the search results will be presented like a mini newspaper – with a variety of types of result including, images, ticket offers, videos (presented as videos and not just links) and news articles.
Does this sound like marketing speak to you? It does to me.
My view:
- Yahoo is yesterday in my opinion and rolling up other companies’ technology is a tricky financial wicket in my experience
- The technical infrastructure has not been rationalized so cost control for Yahoo will remain a problem. You can only sell off so much and fire so many people before deterioration accelerates even if revenue ticks up a notch.
- AOL is moving in a new direction, not talking about a new direction. I think the odds against AOL are significant but, hey, AOL is giving the content farm game a whirl
- Time is running out for Yahoo. Top line revenue growth is needed now.
What happens if the Microsoft Yahoo tie up does not yield big bucks and significantly greater market share? Microsoft moves on and Yahoo twists in the wind.
Stephen E Arnold, February 28, 2010
Xerox Legal Eagles Swarm at Google and Yahoo
February 24, 2010
Quite a surprise. I have not given Xerox much thought. True, about 11 years ago we had a job to hook one of the DocuTech scanners to the main DocuTech copy machine. Not too tough, but work is work. Since that time, I don’t pay much attention to Xerox. I know about Xerox Parc’s history of innovation, of course. I do recall learning that the company has rolled out an information system for law firms, but I don’t think of Xerox as a document management or eDiscovery company. Xerox to me is a maker of photocopy machines which makes clear why the headline “Xerox Files Patent Suit against Google, Yahoo” caught my attention. I thought, “What?”
The main idea is that Xerox has US6778979, “System for Automatically Generating Queries”. I think I met Greg Grefenstette at one time. The invention, according to the patent document’s abstract states:
A system generates a query using an entity extractor, a categorizer, a query generator, and a short run aspect vector. The entity extractor identifies a set of entities in selected document content for searching information related thereto using an information retrieval system. The categorizer defines an organized classification of document content with each class in the organization of content having associated therewith a classification label that corresponds to a category of information in the information retrieval system. The categorizer assigns the selected document content a classification label from the organized classification of content. A query generator formulates a query that restricts a search at the information retrieval system to the category of information in the information retrieval system identified by the assigned classification label. The short length aspect vector generator generates terms for further refining the query using context information surrounding the set of entities in the selected document content.
Xerox also asserts that the Google infringed on US6236994, “Method and Apparatus for the Integration of Information and Knowledge.” This invention, according to that patent document’s abstract states:
The present invention is a method and apparatus for first integrating the operation of various independent software applications directed to the management of information within an enterprise. The system architecture is, however, an expandable architecture, with built-in knowledge integration features that facilitate the monitoring of information flow into, out of, and between the integrated information management applications so as to assimilate knowledge information and facilitate the control of such information. Also included are additional tools which, using the knowledge information enable the more efficient use of the knowledge within an enterprise, including the ability to develop a context for and visualization of such knowledge.
The TechWeb article reported:
Xerox is seeking treble damages because it claims the defending companies are aware of its patents and that their infringement is willful.
I know zero about the legal world. I do know big bucks when I read about this type of claim. What’s interesting is that Xerox seems happy to talk about the legal matter. According to the write up:
“We have been in dialog with Google and Yahoo for some time about licensing these patents, without reaching a resolution,” a Xerox spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. “We believe we have no option but to file suit to properly protect our intellectual property.”
The economy may be struggling, but the lawyers involved in this may have a Veyron in the drive way by next spring.
Stephen E Arnold, February 24, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Unlike attorneys, I guess, I work without compensation. I have to report non payment to the USPTO. I hope that group’s online system someday includes more patent documents easily accessible via a search system that does not violate another party’s patent.
Microsoft and Yahoo, The Challenges
February 21, 2010
eWeek, once one of the big dogs in the Ziff Communications kennel, ran the story “Microsoft, Yahoo Face Integration Challenges, Analysts Say” on February 20, 2010. No kidding? I set this short write up aside because I was not sure how to comment on the analysis by the analysts. I decided to point out the challenges expressed in the article even those these were scattered and not grouped to make explicit that Microsoft and Yahoo have some challenges ahead. Here goes:
- Nine months to achieve integration, full shift by 2012
- Microsoft’s ad system is ready to tackle the Google in hand-to-hand combat
- Combined market share about 30 percent. Google’s market share is 65 percent of US market, maybe more so that’s like a handicap in golf, right?
- Yahoo’s hot search features will add lift to Bing. What about Bing’s UX?
My thought? We will know at the end of 2012 if not sooner. If this flops, what is Plan B? Lots of assumptions, lots of challenges. No Plan B. Even Alexander the Great had a Plan B until he fell ill and died.
Stephen E Arnold, February 22, 2010
Nope, no one paid me to write about Alexander the Great. Ah, a disease. I must report getting no dough for this short item to the NIH?
PCWorld Reports DOJ Search Thinking
February 20, 2010
“Yahoo Microsoft Deal Makes Bing Better, DOJ Says” caught my attention. In my opinion, a key passage was:
The [Department of Justice’s] reasoning is simple: By handling the back end of all Yahoo searches, Microsoft will gain access to almost three times the search queries it’s getting with Bing alone. The extra data will speed up Bing’s automated learning, helping the search engine return more relevant results, especially with rare queries, the DOJ says. In other words, Bing will have a better chance of finding what you’re looking for the first time around.
I suppose.
My view is that an outfit that has a significant market share lead can pretty much do what it wants. Competitors can surf the market economy. My question is, “Does the DOJ know more about search methods than some of the attorneys whose search expertise with which I am familiar?”
Stephen E Arnold, February 20, 2010
I was not paid to write this opinion. I am reporting my not getting paid to write this item to the DOJ.
Microsoft Gets Almost Married
February 19, 2010
My feedreader has been overflowing with the news that Microsoft and Yahoo can unite in their quest to chop down Google’s Web search market share. I think that the idea is an enervating one to the execs in strategy meetings. The optimism is probably contagious. Take a gander at the ZDNet write up called “Microsoft-Yahoo approved: Now the Heavy Lifting Starts.” For me, the key passage was:
Folks, this is a big project. The companies hope to have the integration complete in the U.S. by the end of the year. Meanwhile, advertisers and publishers are expected to be migrated over before the 2010 fourth quarter holiday push. That deadline could slip to 2011. All customers globally will be transitioned to Microsoft’s platform by early 2012.
Wow. I must admit I have not paid any attention to the grand plans of the Microsoft Yahoo duo. What crossed my mind when I read this ZDNet article was:
- What’s the Google doing during this time? Certainly taking pot shots at its foot but probably lumbering forward even when encumbered with lots of legal briefs.
- Will the tie up of two companies which have not been able to make much headway in online advertising be able to get their Evinrude fired up and the bass boat into the lake? Panama took years and never really worked as well as Google’s system. Microsoft’s fixing Vista sucked up a couple of years. Both of these were priority projects and neither made my pinfeathers tingle.
- Users have quite a few tasty options. These include Facebook and Twitter. The Google has not been able to deal effectively with these two, and I don’t think of either Microsoft or Yahoo as set up to deal with users who may not have a combined service as a number one destination or even a number three or four destination.
In short, Microsoft and Yahoo may need to do some pretty nifty work and quickly. Without quick, decisive, compelling action, the Yahoo crowd will get mired in Microsoft. Microsoft will be Microsoft. Google may be more vulnerable to Facebook, the Chinese special section, and lawyers. I am eager to see the search solution that Microsoft and Yahoo roll out to close the gap with Google.
Stephen E Arnold, February 19, 2010
No one paid me to write this. Since I mention social activities, I suppose I will report this to the GAO’s intramural team picnic chairperson.
Yahoo to Out Google Google
February 19, 2010
I remember when the kids were young. I had to endure some films with titles like Friday the 13th, Part 2, Friday the 13th, The Final Chapter, Friday the 13th, Part VII, and (my favorite) Jason Goes to Hell, the Final Friday. Well, it wasn’t the final Friday, there was Jason X. When I read about a new search wizard at Yahoo and how Yahoo will become a powerhouse in search, it’s Jason time.
I read “Yahoo! Looks beyond Google’s Data Cruncher” and shivered. It’s back! The article reports without the zing I associate with the Register that Google has a laser dot on its scaly forehead. Googzilla’s data methods are toast. According to the write up:
But for Ron Brachman – the former Bell Labs and DARPA man who now serves as vice president of Yahoo! labs and research – a future interwebs may need something very different. MapReduce splinters compute tasks into tiny pieces that are processed independently of each other, and this sort of parallelism by complete separation, he argues, may be ill-suited to a more nuanced breed of web application. One example is a web that leans heavily on natural language processing. “When we get closer to doing broad-scale language processing that’s more, if you will, semantic, we might need to move away from a MapReduce architecture to something that may be equally parallel but with a very different computational architecture,” Brachman tells The Reg.
On paper, sure. In reality, not so sure. Yahoo is going to enter some sort of speed dating event with Microsoft. Yahoo is losing credibility with me because I have heard promises before. After my BearStearns report about Ramanathan Guha’s semantic inventions, a Yahoo poobah insisted that Yahoo had semantic technology that was going to put Google in a dark room with no candles.
What happened was staff cutting, reorganizing, lower revenues, and the same old search. Shopping search, which was unusable, and remains less useful to me than Bing.com’s approach.
My view. Roll out a service that delivers on point results. The PR buzz causes me to put in ear plugs. Have you ever seen a goose with ear plugs. Very weird. Almost as weird as viewing Google’s data management infrastructure, system, and methods as frozen in time. When you read it in a patent, it is too late in my opinion. Google has moved on when the patent applications are filed.
Stephen E Arnold, February 19, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I will report getting no money to the White House which seems to know everything there is to know about the Google. Well, almost everything.
Quote to Note: Yahoo Search Speak
February 15, 2010
Yahoo is an enigma. One day it is embracing Bing, the next it is back in the search game. I find Yahoo a distant fifth when I run my queries. In fact, I have popped the little-known metasearch system Devilfinder.com ahead of Yahoo. I wanted to document a quote to note from Shashi Seth, senior vice president of search products, Yahoo. The quote is from a press conference held in February 2010 with a summary posted on February 12, 2010 in the write up “Highlights from Yahoo Search Speak”. The quote:
“Yahoo! has been in search, is in search, and will continue to be in search in the future,” Shashi said at SearchSpeak. “That is the stake we have put in the ground and we will continue to drive great features.”
Mr. Seth joined Yahoo from AOL, an outfit attracting Googlers. At AOL he was the officer in charge of Global Ad Products, which from the goose’s vantage point, is not search. Ads are one facet of search. HIs LinkedIn profile points out that he was the chief revenue officer at Cooliris and was the head of monetizaton at YouTube.com and was the product lead for Google search from May 2005 to January 2007. Prior to joining Google, he was in charge of product strategy at eBay.
Selling ads is not search to me. Selling ads is part of sales. I will stick with search in the archaic sense; that is, finding information that answers my questions which only sometimes involves purchasing a product or service. Too bad there was a power failure so that the entire Search Speak event was not captured on video. Ah, Yahooooooo!
Stephen E Arnold, February 15, 2010
No one paid me to snag this quote. Since a quote is semi-scholarly, I will report this lack of compensation to the fine folks at the Library of Congress.
Yahoo Slide Ahead?
February 14, 2010
I have not paid much attention to Yahoo. I check every couple of months to see if the search system is getting better or Binged. So far. Status quo as far as I can tell. I have a sense that Yahoo is following the path worn in the digital forest by AOL. With an influx of Googlers, AOL may have a chance. Yahoo in my opinion thinks that it is a Google-level outfit. Maybe? Maybe not. When I read “Icahn Unloads Most of Yahoo Stake”, I realized that a savvy investor may feel that Yahoo is not going anywhere quickly. The MarketWatch story contained one comment I found interesting:
Icahn reported holding nearly 12 million shares of Yahoo as of the end of December [2009], according to the filing. The high-profile activist investor had owned more than 75 million shares of Yahoo at one point, and reported holding 62.9 million shares as recently as September.
Looks like Mr. Ichan is rethinking his investment in Yahoo. What does his smart money tell us? I don’t get happiness vibes, but I could be misreading a sale of shares when the market is conflicted.
Stephen E Arnold, February 14, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I will report this state of financial non input to the Bureau of Public Debt.
Google and Bing: The November Horse Race Results
December 21, 2009
Through the complex route of Yahoo, I read Barry Levine’s “Google Is Galloping Way Ahead as Bing Moves Up.” I live in Kentucky, so the horse analogy is interesting. The search market is not a horse race. The search market is an interesting manifestation of information usage.
Guess what you can buy for dinner here. Which search engine logo will be mounted on the wall?
Without substantive change in human behavior, there is little likelihood that Google will lose its lead any time soon. The analogies to horses abound in the Newsfactor story. I like metaphors. I enjoyed “They Shoot Horses Don’t They”, and I like to window shop at the boucheries chevalines.
For me the key point in the write up was:
The competition, said Information Technology Intelligence Corp.’s Laura DiDio, is like “everyone being way behind Secretariat in the 1973 Belmont Stakes,” where the legendary racehorse “looked like he was racing against himself.” In the race for second place, DiDio added, the “momentum goes to Bing.” She noted that Microsoft’s entry into search has gained two percent since May, Yahoo’s has dropped from 20.5 percent, and Google appears to be stabilizing in its way-out-front position. Measured as query volume, Bing had the largest growth of the top search engines in November, with a six percent increase in volume. Yahoo’s dropped two percent, and Google’s edged up one percent. comScore’s stats include partner and cross-channel searches, but not searches for mapping, local directory, or user-generated video sites. The actual number of searches was about 9.5 billion for Google, 2.5 billion for Yahoo, 1.5 billion for Bing, 548 million for Ask, and 401 million for AOL.
The question for me is which of these nags will end up on the grill?
Stephen E. Arnold, December 19, 2009
I wish to disclose a free write up to the USDA, an entity focused on making sure I eat beef, chicken, and the other white meat, not losers of horse races.
