Getting Ready for the SEO Grilling
November 24, 2008
For the last 20 years, I have been attending and participating in the International Online Show. The show is now in the capable hands of Incisive, a UK based company. Each year, there are one or two sessions that catch my attention. The show next week in London promises to be interesting for me. I am giving a talk about the future of search and participating in a panel about search engine optimization. I can summarize my endnote in one word: Google. My talk explains how Google will have more impact in the enterprise search market than it did in 2008. If you want to know how and what, you will have to attend or wait until I post a summary of the speech. I don’t make a PowerPoint deck available before my talks. I prefer posting a PDF of my speaker notes and letting those interested link to that version of my remarks.
But SEO. That is the session that could cause me to gulp another blood pressure pill.
SEO: Consultant Heaven
I want to be crystal clear: SEO is a practice that annoys me. The reason is that content and correct code are what I value. SEO is a package of hocus pocus designed to create the sense that tricks will cause a Web page to appear at the top of a results list. Since most people don’t create substantive content, most Web sites don’t provide the indexing systems with much to process. Other outfits use a content management system like the ancient Broadvision or the remarkable Vignette. These systems generate Web pages that some Web indexing systems cannot process. Other people create Web pages with scripting errors. Sure, my team and I make scripting errors, and we try to fix them. If we can’t, we create a page without the offending function and live with the simplified presentation. Other companies pay 20 somethings from Cooper Union to create Web sites entirely in Silverlight, Flash or Adobe AIR. When a Web indexer or crawler hits these sites, the indexing system may not have much to work with or have to work overtime to figure what the site is “about”. I could list some other flaws in Web sites, but you get the idea. Click here for a listing of SEO experts.
Will you be the victim of an SEO consultant’s hold up?
Now people who are clueless about what good content is or what resources are required to create good content, don’t show up in a Google, Yahoo, or Live.com (maybe a new name is coming soon) results list. You can see this problem by running a query for “financial services.” You don’t get much meat because the phrase “financial services” has been co-opted by the SEO consultants.
The Google Search Appliance Gets a Newsletter
November 24, 2008
Update, November 24, 2008, 9 am A reader called my attention to this link to request a subscription: http://services.google.com/appliance/request_info/site
Original Post
After years of marketing by accident, the Googlers have created the “Google GSA Newsletter”. I received my first copy on Sunday, November 23, 2008. This may be old news to most readers, but this item was sent to me by one of my two or three readers. A happy quack, therefore, wings its way to San Francisco. The newsletter provides a great plug for the AIIM study that reports most users think search in an organization is lousy. Too bad for Jane McConnell in Paris, whose study is more comprehensive than the AIIM me-too report or the data reported in the Gilbane Group’s report Beyond Search. I’m not grousing, but I think the US centric nature of the newsletter is interesting.
If you want to know more about Google’s approach to its customers, the newsletter features links to success stories. Some vendors use these customer success stories as opportunities to make a sales call and demonstrate alternative approaches. But the most significant story in the newsletter is “GSA Virtual Edition”. Google has offered a nifty custom search engine which makes it easy to give Google a list of Web sites. The Google then creates an index of the content from those sites. Unfortunately, the Google CSE can go only three levels deep, but the service is free. To read more about “virtual” GSA, click here. The idea is that you can deliver appliance functions without having to have a physical appliance from Google. You get your own server and load the software and pay the fees, which are not mentioned in the write up. You can see some of the costs if you navigate to the General Services Administration Web site and search for one of Google provided devices. Some of these devices have prices in the $400,000 range, so be aware that Google values its technology.
The reason this story is important is that it, in my opinion, marks an important step in Google’s enterprise trajectory. In my Google studies, I walk through a couple of Google patent documents which reveals methods for “hooking” servers in an organization into the broader functions of the Google data centers. The idea is that an organization can tap Google’s capabilities from servers controlled and managed by an enterprise. The reason this is attractive is that some organizations have data requiring Google scale crunching. In a lousy economy, most organizations will want to get the crunching without the capital costs associated with on premises hardware, software, and systems. With the “virtual edition” of the GSA, Google seems to be taking another step toward making life tough for such companies as IBM and Oracle. These firms are Google partners, and executives at IBM and Oracle have told me that Google is their pal and that Google is not in the data management business. Frankly I think the “virtual edition” suggests that the Google is going to be hungry for some of those enterprise fees. That appetite will grow if the rumors I hear about a slow down in online advertising are indeed accurate. Google needs cash and it will do what needs to be done to get it.
In order to get your own copy of the newsletter, you will have to sign up for other Google email publications. Start here. I could not find a “subscribe” link in the email forwarded to me. Google included an unsubscribe link, but that didn’t help me. When I locate the “subscribe now” link, I will add it to this post.
Stephen Arnold, November 24, 2008
Microsoft as She Be Perceived in Arabia
November 24, 2008
My newsreader is set to deliver me items from the whizziest consulting firms in the world. What I saw a few minutes ago surprised me. First, you have to read “Microsoft Brings Out Next-Gen Enterprise Suite,” which ran in Trade Arabia: Business News and Information here.
The article does a reasonable job of summarizing the major Microsoft server initiatives. The big gun is Microsoft’ virtualization technology, which has been a matter of some discussion. One consulting firm reported that it gobbled market share faster than my beautiful but dim boxer show dog. Then Paul Thurrott, publisher of a Windows information site and star of Twit network’s Windows Weekly reported that getting Hyper V to run was no easy task. I am confident Microsoft will get the bugs out of the software, probably already has.
Then the article sales into SQL Server 2008 territory. Microsoft has been investing in SQL Server for many years. Different consultants report different database vendor market shares. I have seen reports that peg Oracle as king of the data mountain. I have also seen studies that make DB2 the big dog. Trade Arabia references a study from the stellar consultancy Forrester, saying:
According to a September 2008 report conducted by Forrester Research, Microsoft SQL Server 2008 already has the strongest combination of price, performance, manageability, security and productivity.
Well, if Forrester and its legions of industry experts in most technologies uses the word “strongest”, I definitely know I have the received wisdom of the best brains money can hire.
The article concludes by describing Silverlight as he industry’s most comprehensive and powerful solution for the creation and delivery of applications and media experiences through a Web browser,”
Now, when I step back from the facts or assertions in the article, I recall that I am seeing more and more Microsoft cheerleading from the Eastern Mediterranean. My hypothesis is that Microsoft is making a push for sales and market share in this sector. I may be wrong, but I will keep my eyes open for more information on this topic.
But the larger issue for me is what is not in the article. Perhaps it was editing, but I keep thinking that Google uses its data management tools and MySQL. In fact, I recall hearing some talk at a recent conference that MySQL is the number one database in terms of Web applications. What about Flash? What about virtualization alternatives.
The Trade Arabia article is a masterful presentation of Microsoft technology as the only game in town. The problem is, I don’t believe it. But if big companies sniff this catnip, who am I to produce facts that get in the path of the baloney machines. This goose could become liver paste in a New York minute.
Stephen Arnold, November 24, 2008
HP: Cloud Threat Looming
November 24, 2008
TradingMarkets.com published “HP Says It Powers 41 Percent Of Computers on Top 500 List.” You can read the full text of this article here. The title suggested to me that this was a routine PR type story, the French verb gonfler covers this type of pumping up action. For me, the most important comment in the article was:
Over the last several years, we’ve seen an explosive growth of blade servers for a widening range of high-performance computing applications – from digital media creation and online gaming to more traditional HPC applications such as computer-aided design,” said Earl Joseph, program VP, High-performance Computing, IDC Research. “Previously, customers’ only choice for HPC was a high-end, multi-million dollar supercomputer. Now, blades offer a highly flexible, scalable, lower-budget alternative to the proprietary systems that historically dominated the Top500 list.”
HP has reported good financial results and is one of a select number of companies to expect good numbers into 2009. But I looked at these figures and asked myself, “What happens if Ford, GM, and Chrysler go out of business or sharply curtail their investments. What happens if the Top 500 become the Top 400 or Top 300?” Then I asked myself, “What happens if the commodity cloud computing option makes significant inroads into the biggest companies who have to decide between their concerns about security and keeping the lights on?”
The news story suggests that today’s rosy tinted picture could turn gray. Branded hardware costs more than commodity hardware. But what really spikes the cost is the support and service that branded hardware drags like a snake moves its rattles through the sagebrush.
After reflecting upon this news story, I concluded that HP could find itself in a revenue pickle that cutting prices on its slick servers won’t be able to correct. Help me understand what I am missing?
Stephen Arnold, November 24, 2008
Microsoft and Post Crash Banking
November 24, 2008
This addled goose does not know much about finance. The Inquirer’s “Microsoft Seeks Unsecured Debt Securities” here seemed interesting. The MBAs of the world will be able to figure out if this is a hog or hog wash. The Inquirier’s point was that in a lousy economy, Microsoft can “get senior unsecured debt”, sort of a Get Out of Jail Free card for money. The fact is that no one knows exactly what Microsoft will do. One thought is buy Salesforce.com, maybe Yahoo? The goose will watch this ripple on the surface of Lake Microsoft.
Stephen Arnold, November 24, 2008
YouTube.com: Big Cleats
November 24, 2008
YouTube.com seems to have new winter tires with big cleats. First, YouTube.com staged a live event. You can read about it here. I was less impressed with the content and more impressed with the fact that Google, like Microsoft, had to resort to third parties to handle the load. Video is expensive, and the GOOG will have to crack the code for revenue in order to keep the bills from exceeding the revenue. Next, SeekingAlpha reported that YouTube.com was the “third largest search engine.” SeekingAlpha said here:
YouTube has long been acknowledged as the far-and-away frontrunner in online video, with close to 63 million US-based visitors in October 2008, according to Compete. Less well-known has been YouTube’s status as a top-ranking search engine. Last month, YouTube served nearly 770 million search queries, making it the third largest search engine, according to Compete’s October Search Market Share.
Google has some patent documents that provides insight into the monetizing options available. The financial winter that is settling upon online means that Google will need some snow tires with big cleats. These are the big, chunky tires with savage rows of grippers.
At the same time, Hulu.com continues to be praised for its professional programming. In addition, Blinkx, another video search engine, is trying to buy Miva (the old FindWhat.com) to get some ad traction itself. My take on all this is that TV is coming to the Internet.
Wonderful.
I don’t watch TV. Another vast wasteland is being created I fear.
Stephen Arnold, November 24, 2008
More about Microsoft’s Data Centers
November 23, 2008
Business Week has tilled an old field with its “Microsoft to Google: Get Off My Cloud” by Peter Burrows. You must read here Mr. Burrows’ description of Microsoft’s initiative to build out its data centers. The multi year effort under the firm hand of the national basketball association’s (if I understood Mr. Burrow’s undefined acronym) former technology wizard, Debra Chrapaty. Mr. Burrows picks up the story in 2003 when Microsoft started its initiative to build “20 supersize data centers that can cost as much as $1 billion apiece,” Mr. Burrows informed me that:
Rather than spend hundreds of hours opening server boxes, and connecting them with cables and loading them with software, Microsoft can roll in a container in just a couple of days. The hope is to run the facility with half as many people as at its previous sites. Even better, it’s easier to monitor and whisk away heat generated in these confined modules than cooling an entire building. One source says Microsoft hopes the design will help cut by one-third the power bills that typically take up some 40% of a site’s operating cost.
Mr. Burrows talks to a Googler who points out that Google’s been doggedly building infrastructure for a decade. The only issue I had is that Mr. Burrows did not seek out one of Google’s infrastructure experts, settlling for a marketing type in my opinion, not a Google research wizard like Jeff Dean of Simon Tong. I guess one Googler is as good as another for Business Week’s fact checkers. The Google source quoted in Mr. Burrows’ article understates what Google has in place. From Google’s point of view understatement is part of the game plan. For the reader, understatement makes Microsoft’s investments and chances look quite amazing.
The story ends with a contrast between Google’s and Microsoft’s approach to secrecy. Microsoft talks about what it is doing. Microsoft talks to Business Week, hence the story. Microsoft talks to Dell, which I am not sure makes Hewlett Packard too happy. Microsoft talks to developers, users, and even addled geese like me.
In my opinion, talk is cheap, a lot cheapter than buckling down and addressing the issues that Google has confronted and resolved to its satisfaction; for example:
- Google has addressed the need for speed in Web type applications. In fact, the GOOG can sort a petabyte of data in a few minutes, and that’s not easy to do even on Microsoft’s whizzy new super computers.
- Google has jumped over the database problems with its dataspace initiative, Chubby, and some innovations in tokenization.
- Google has long been a driver in commoditization and packaging of low cost computing horsepower and lights out data center operation.
I cover more of Google’s innovations from the period 1998 to 2006 in my Google studies. For our purposes in this opinion piece, look at the time span. Google’s been working for a decade, and now Microsoft is starting according to this article later in the game. As a result, Microsoft has to spend money to close the gap. Unfortunately, the closing of the gap does not include confronting the performance issues that will persist in Microsoft’s new data centers. These issues are related to the Microsoft architecture and server software itself.
One quick example. Two load balance, Microsoft has a clever design. The only hitch is that additional servers are needed to prevent bottlenecks at the points originally designed to reduce bottlenecks. The result is a need for additional servers. Does this information mean anything to Business Week? Nope.
It means something to Google, and it will mean something to Microsoft’s financial officers when the costs for resolving some fundamental architectural problems keep Microsoft’s data center investments in the category “hard to control.” If you have other information, please, use the comments section to put me on the true path to understanding. I have the Microsoft technical papers in front of me, and these are indeed quite interesting with regards to core engineering issues in the Microsoft data center initiative. Hardware, gentle reader, can’t solve some performance issues. That’s what makes Google a formidable competitor: software engineering, not commodity hardware.
Stephen Arnold, November 23, 2008
Google: Try This on Windows Server
November 23, 2008
Google has thrown down a gauntlet to the supercomputer crowd. You can read “Sorting One Petabyte with MapReduce” here. To learn more about MapReduce, click here. Now this recent Google gauntlet is digital, not one of those Sir Walter Scott fictional jobs with yellow tassels and brass fittings. Google is saying, “Take a terabyte of data and sort it. Now beat this time: 68 seconds. Once you have that whipped, take one petabyte of data and sort it. Beat this time: 362 minutes. You can read the details, get a comparison so you have a sense how much data a petabyte comprises, and even a touch of Googley humor. The sentence begins, “We are not aware…” If you don’t laugh out loud, well, you aren’t Googley. Why mention this type of lab rat exercise? Four reasons:
- In my opinion Google is reminding the folks who are yapping about how fast their supercomputers are that the GOOG is running a zippy computer too
- Make it clear to Microsoft that it has some work to do to match Google’s as is data center performance
- Show that Google can tackle big data as part of its real world applications. If you allow unlimited block uploads to Google Base, then you darn well have to whip that stuff around withoiut choking the services that pay the bills like ads.
- Put a benchmark in place so that competitors like IBM, Oracle, and Yahoo get a hint about how far ahead in data management Google is now. Today. This instant. IBM’s, Oracle’s, and even Yahoo’s technologists may be able to say their system is as good as Google’s. Google is too polite to come right out and say, “We’re faster across the board on certain key benchmarks.”
Oh, I am feeling frisky this Sunday morning. Here’s a thought for you: if you don’t care about these sort speeds, I guarantee that you will have a tough time understanding what the GOOG has been doing for the last decade while everyone talked about the company as an ad agency.
Stephen Arnold, November 23, 2008
InfoPrint: Complemented or Challenged
November 23, 2008
When I mention the IBM Richoh tie up that is available as InfoPrint, most of my confidantes don’t know what the heck the company is. You can learn more about InfoPrint here. When I read the story “Xerox Partners with IBM for Global Imaging and Document Management Services”, several questions flashed through my mind.
- What has happened to Xerox’s own enterprise publishing system initiative? You can read more about this Xerox business here. My hunch is that Xerox can’t make its enterprise publishing initiative generate significant revenues, so the company has partnered with the “other” consulting firm, IBM.
- Why is IBM teaming with Xerox and not putting its energies into the InfoPrint operation? My hunch is that enterprise publishing is showing some promise, and the more horses IBM has in the race the bettr it is for IBM.
- What will other vendors do; specifically, Hewlett Packard? My thought is that there will be stepped up competition for solid partnering like the HP Exalead deal and more interest in “on the edge” enterprise publishing system vendors. (No, I won’t name these “on the edge” players because some of that detail will appear in my forthcoming Google and Publishing monograph.)
After thinking these thoughts, I went back to the story “Xerox Partners with IBM for Global Imaging and Document Management Services” and noted a comment that had some significance for my work:
IBM will leverage Xerox’s global document management services to give clients digital access to information currently stored in paper-based documents.
The “access” word triggered thoughts of search, business intelligence, and reports that answer users’ questions. To me this means more opportunity for some search and content processing vendors and more head aches for others. Enterprise publishing systems may be a faster path to revenue than fuzzier services such as business intelligence. Your view? Just bring some facts to the table says the addled goose.
Stephen Arnold, November 23, 2008
SurfRay Update 2
November 23, 2008
When I was in Denmark a week ago, I picked up some information about SurfRay. The problem is that the items are either unconfirmed or contradictory. I can tell you that the people with whom I spoke were passionate about SurfRay. Some of the individuals who shall remain nameless because i don’t need any inputs from attorneys and tire kickers were quite optimistic about the company.
One person said:
We are working hard to make improvements at SurfRay. Some of the products are much in demand, and we have big opportunities.
i spoke with a couple of people who were annoyed at the company, but I want to keep the annoyance info in perspective. I can’t get a fix on enough data to figure out if the annoyance is the normal sort of grousing or if there is more to the sniping. Read through the comments on this Web log and you will get a sense of the frustration some feel toward SurfRay.
I fielded a number of rumors, but I am reluctant to mention them in this Web log post. With the financial noose tightening around the neck of a number of companies, my hunch is that the economy is not helping out the SurfRay outfit.
I did speak with one customer of Ontolica on my last trip to Europe. The fellow mentioned that he liked the product but he wanted an update. Development hassles when combined with a tough financial climate can be a volatile mixture.
I am on the fence with regard to SurfRay. If you have any factual information, please, use the comments section of this Web log to tell me what you know. I don’t feel comfortable with personal comments about managers, but I delight in observations about software which are anchored in technical facts.
As I get more information about SurfRay that I can validate, I will share it. In the meantime, we need to keep SurfRay at the top of our search and information access mind. There are too many people reading SurfRay
Stephen Arnold, November 23, 2008
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
