A New Term for Search: Enterprise Mashup
May 12, 2010
I received a copy of “Mashups in the Enterprise IT Environment: The Impact of Enterprise Mashup Platforms on Application Development and Evolving IT Relationships with Business End Users”, written by BizTechReports.com. The white paper is about JackBe.com’s software platform.
Here is the company’s description of its product and services:
Enterprise Mashups solve the quintessential information sharing problem: accessing and combining data from disparate internal and external data sources and software systems for timely decision-making. JackBe delivers trusted mashup software that empowers organizations to create, customize and collaborate through enterprise mashups for faster decisions and better business results. Our innovative Enterprise Mashup platform, Presto®, provides dynamic mashups that leverage internal and external data while meeting the toughest enterprise security and governance requirements. Presto provides enterprise mashups delivered to the user in 3 clicks versus 3 months.
You can get more information from the firm’s Web site at www.jackbe.com. If you want a short cut to demonstrations of the firm’s technology, click here.
The company provides a platform and services to convert disparate data into meaningful information assets. What I find interesting is that the phrase “enterprise mashup” is used to reference a range of content processing activities, including content acquisition and processing, indexing, and information outputting. In short, “enterprise mashup” is a useful way to position functions that some vendors describe as search or findability.
The JackBe’s interface reminds me of other business intelligence data presentations.
I want to focus on the white paper because it provides important hints about the direction in which some types of content processing is moving.
First, the argument of in the white paper hinges on an assertion that there is a “hyper dynamic environment.” How does an organization deal with this environment, a different approach to information is required. What is interesting is that the JackBe audience is a blend of developers and business professionals. Some search vendors are trying to get to the senior management of a company. JackBe is interested in two audiences.
Second, the white paper explains the concept of “mashup”. The term compresses a range of information activities into one term. To implement a mashup, JackBe provide widgets to help reduce the time and hassle for building “situation specific” implementations. Some search vendors talk about customization and personalization. The JackBe approach sidesteps these fuzzy notions and focuses on the idea of a “snap in”, lightweight method.
Finally, the JackBe approach uses an interesting metaphor. The phrase I noted was the “Home Depot model of enterprise IT.” Instead of taking disparate components of a typical search engine, JackBe suggests that a licensee can select what’s needed to do a particular information job.
You will want to read the white paper and glean more detailed information. I want to focus on the differences in the JackBe approach. These include:
- Avoiding the overused and little understood terms such as search, taxonomies, business intelligence, and semantic technology. I am not sure JackBe’s approach is going to eliminate confusion, but it is clear to me that JackBe.com is trying to steer clear of the traditional jargon.
- The JackBe approach is more trendy than IBM’s explanation of OmniFind. Examples of the JackBe approach include the notion of a mashup itself and the references to the “long tail” concept are examples.
- To some enterprise procurement teams, JackBe’s approach may be perceived as quite different from the services of larger, higher profile vendors. In my view, this may be a positive step. Search vendors who follow in the footsteps of STAIRS III or Verity are not likely to have the sales success a more creative positioning permits.
To sum up, I think that companies with search and content processing technology will be working hard to distance themselves from the traditional vendors’ methods. The reason is that search as a stand alone service is increasingly perceived as an island. Organizations need systems that connect the islands of information into something larger.
Is JackBe a search and content processing vendor? Yes. Will most people recognize the company’s products and services as basic search? Not likely. Will the positioning confuse some potential licensees? Maybe.
Stephen E Arnold, May 12, 2010
Unsponsored post.
The Guardian Goes Solr
May 12, 2010
A reader sent me two links. One to a consulting firm, Red Monk, and the other to Lucid Imagination’s blog. The idea I took away is that the reader wanted me to acknowledge the diffusion of open source search systems (Lucene and Solr) in the enterprise. I also figured out that the UK newspaper was moving in some directions that in certain publishing circles were a sharp departure from the IBM- and Microsoft-inflected norm. Matthew Wall and Simon Wilson of The Guardian say Solr offers powerful features much like a database: can perform complex queries including full text search, offers scalability to millions of documents, scale well horizontally, can filter results with facets, etc. Matthew is quoted as saying: “Apache Solr is like a database, it works like one for us”. Solr is often being used as a database surrogate: e-commerce, log management for transaction tracking; embedded in business intelligence and analytics applications, gathering and monitoring social media like Twitter and blogs. I have been asked to work on the program committee of a conference that will dissect open source search and content processing technologies. I may just accept. This open source technology seems to be gaining momentum.
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Verizon Sounds Googley
May 11, 2010
Bad news for information technology professionals. Last week I heard a couple of Googlers complaining about traditional information technology methods. I did not pay much attention because Google does not like too many things that are different from the company’s methods. Then I read “Cloud’s Future Is Not Cloudy: Verizon”. Some of the comments in the write up reminded me of Google and its view of the traditional IT set up. There is a chief information officer, one or more system administrators, assorted engineers, and, of course, consultants. The chief financial officer is often the only person in an organization to know the cost of weekend hot fixes, crash programs, and the upgrades that come like the government agents in the Matrix motion pictures.
Here is a passage I noted. The speaker is a Verizon manager and the subject is cloud computing. Cloud computing is becoming more important due to the cost of keeping traditional enterprise systems alive and well. The quote:
We have to educate our companies to change their mindset,” says Crawford. He says that the computing as a service that Verizon offers is a combination of the customer’s own infrastructure and Verizon’s cloud service. So the investment made on the infrastructure would not go waste. “We have to convince them that they have the flexibility of scaling up and down. Infrastructure as a service is based upon standard hardware and software which runs on dedicated environment. We offer 30 days free trial so that they can test it and be convinced,” he adds.
What is happening is that vendors know more than their clients. IT professionals are obstructions to some degree. I have no doubt that Verizon, like Google, will make headway with their approach. I suppose one should see their view as a spur to the job hunting companies. IT, like librarians, are likely to suffer job erosion and disintermediation in m opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Vic Consult, Nifty Twitter Search
May 11, 2010
I know that Twitter is one of those social networking services that baffle most people over 50. I find Tweets quite interesting and often stuffed full of information. If you want to know what’s behind a Twitter handle, you will want to look at Vic Consulting Twitter User Search. We set up a Twitter account which is a method for outputting tweets when new stories are posted on the Beyond Search blog. So who’s “beyond search”. Navigate to Vic Consulting’s service, plug in a Twitter user name, and the system generates a nifty report. Quite useful.
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2010
Freebie.
Open Source to Strap on Patent Body Armor
May 11, 2010
I read “Effort Underway for Defensive Patent Pool for Open Source Developers” and saw the shadows of special ops and legal eagles mottling the headline. More contention ahead I fear. Open source is gaining momentum. Academics and some big outfits are moving beyond kicking tires. Some folks are bolting new parts on the enterprise chassis. Here’s the passage I noted:
It still seems like a pain that those who don’t even believe in software patents have to go through this sort of trouble, but it’s the nature of the system. Also, it does worry me that this creates more incentives for patents to be filed, when those patents could, potentially, end up in others’ hands down the road.
My view: A very big deal. Will it happen?
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2010
Freebie.
Google as Target
May 11, 2010
Android, according to an azure chip outfit, is ahead of the iPhone operating system. Google is ready to blast off with its developer conference that will set the bloggies a twittering. Google even wrote almost a page and a half explaining that it tries hard in the privacy game and even admits it is not perfect.
But – and here is the grit in the Google gullet – a journalist (unlike the addled goose) is making lots of noise about Google. Instead of beautiful music, the trombone slide has grit and the guitar slide is dirtier than a Gulf coast beach.
Navigate to “Consumer Watchdog Targets Google.” The write up is a long tailed dog. Like a pound dog’s tail, the article knocks figurines and lamps to the floor. Not many are broken but the dog’s tail is not likely to tire any time soon. The pound dog chasing Googzilla is John Simpson, who now works for Consumer Watchdog. Don’t blame me for picking up the “dog” metaphor, please.
The point of the article is two fold. First, the Washington Post gets a chance to beat up on the Google about various alleged missteps. The other part of the article seems to give the “watch dog” some teeth.
Here’s the passage I found interesting:
Last month, Simpson organized a news conference with lawyers representing Microsoft, Yahoo and Amazon and other Google competitors after he petitioned the Justice Department for a broad antitrust investigation. He found he was in good company.
Does this matter?
First, yep. The Washington Post is serious work for the DC crowd. Big stick. Watergate. Media giant.
Second, Mr. Simpson has a bark, a loud bark. Barks attract attention. Microsoft and Yahoo don’t show up for a meeting unless there is a reason. Google is a pretty good reason in my opinion.
Third, Google has for 11 years been able to dash through flower beds in its playful pursuit of its vision. Its original competition was search engines. It is risky to generalize, but I think I am on pretty safe ground when I suggest that Google was like an NFL rookie playing grade school football. Not much competition.
Now the Google has money and a killer business model. Despite the economy, Google spins money from its ad program. In the last three years, Google has decided to move into other markets and in those markets, the competitors are not chasing portals like my deaf boxer. Nope, there are some real companies who want to put Google in a zoo with restricted visiting hours and a vet who knows how to use knock out drops.
In short, the Washington Post story is a public relations problem. Now Google has a pound dog yapping, countries annoyed, litigation that would make a lawyer weep with joy for future billable hours, and a pair of companies with more teeth than Lycos and Fast Search & Transfer.
The barking will alert Apple and Facebook. These are serious beasties. Real serious.
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2010
No one paid me to write this.
FirstRain: A Game Changer?
May 11, 2010
Navigate to www.firstrain.com and you will see this headline: “When was the last time search made you money?” Interesting angle. Search is fast becoming a component within other enterprise applications.
You can read the Reuters’ story “FirstRain Announces Game-Changing Intelligent Business Search” and get a sense of the company’s approach to the crowded search and content processing sector. For me the key point was this statement by Penny Herscher, president and CEO of the company:
FirstRain has solved a critical problem for today’s business professionals…For decision-makers, the web represents the most dynamic and current view of companies, markets and management and yet until now, it was not a practical source of useful business intelligence. FirstRain now delivers relevant intelligence like today`s hot trends, emerging market events and unannounced, but visible management moves into the user’s information workflow.
I have been hearing about FirstRain for months. The company obtained an additional $7.3 million earlier this year. The item I saw appeared in Deals & More and stated:
FirstRain, a service that scrapes the Web to deliver relevant research to investors, has brought in $7.3 million of an anticipated $8.8 million round of equity, according to a filing with the SEC. Based in San Mateo, Calif., the company has raised $20.9 million to date and is backed by Oak Investment Partners, DiamondHead Ventures and Ampersand Ventures.
The phrase “scrapes the Web” suggested to me that FirstRain is one of the participants in the business intelligence or competitive intelligence sector.
What I also found interesting is that the Reuters’ story detailed the drawbacks of “traditi0onal search and business information providers”. The weaknesses are quite interesting. Included were these comments which I have extracted or summarized from the news story:
- There’s been a “breakdown of traditional media”, even Web indexes have drawbacks
- Key word systems “are not designed to deliver dynamic intelligence”
- Existing aggregators like Dow Jones or LexisNexis provide access to information “limited in scope and quickly become out of date”
- “Business intelligence applications are usually limited to the documents and databases
related to a company`s own operations, business and resources.”
The FirstRain system, by inference and explicit statement, address these problems. One example is:
Finance professionals can use FirstRain to research and track their vendors and customers directly or through FirstRain integrated into the Dun and Bradstreet DnBI platform. And investor-relations professionals can stay current on market forces impacting their company and its ecosystem as well as events and changes impacting their lead investors.
The value of near real time content processing is recognized by a number of business sectors. However, there are a number of firms nosing into this potentially lucrative market. One can argue that Fetch Technologies and Kapow Technologies are pushing the edge of the open intelligence envelope. Established companies like Alacra have been enhancing their open intelligence content coverage as well.
You can check out the FirstRain Facebook page or you can snag John Blossom’s Content Nation book. The company is profiled in Chapter 4. Among the firm’s customers are Capital IQ. FirstRain mentions other customers on its Web site.
FirstRain is blending some interesting functions and making some strong assertions about its technologies and services. Worth monitoring.
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2010
Freebie!
NASA, Search Death, and Vivisimo
May 10, 2010
In an echo of my article for “Searcher Magazine” five or six years ago, I read this statement by Bob Carter, Vivisimo, “Search is broken. Results are not shared, saved or collected. Search technology doesn’t factor in who I am, what I do, where I am or what I know.” Guess not. I know that I got quite a bit of feedback (positive and negative), when I pointed out that search was dead. Shortly before it left this veil of tears, I could hear the sucking sounds from its chest wound. I think my original write up was on the Information Today Web site, an outfit that publishes some of my for-fee work.
Mr. Carter’s comment appeared in the article “Search Is Dead: Long Live ‘Findability’”. I must admit I was confused. The problems of user-aware search and personalization, retention of search histories, results archiving and sharing, and business process centric results are “sort of searchy” and “sort of findability”. The real angle is that search as I wrote during a wonderful, delayed flight to San Francisco is more like an oil spill or an ash cloud. Search is diffusing, disrupting, and creating both opportunities and dislocations.
The Federal Computer Week write up addresses none of these issues. The article is more of a marketing write up about NASA, a highly regarded Federal entity, and its use of Google technology. My question is, “Is NASA Googley or is NASA using Vivisimo to crack the findability problem?” No wonder people are confused about search and content processing systems. Search is dead and two search systems seem to be alive at least in the write up. What?
Search is dead, then it becomes findability, and then it becomes Googley. With analysis like this, the azure chip crowd looks like the brightest stars in the Bright Starbirth Region NGC 2363. Help!
Stephen E Arnold, May 9, 2010
Obviously an unsponsored post.
Search Vendors Hit the Go Button for Marketing
May 10, 2010
I wrote about ZyLAB’s podcast blitz. Podcasts are useful and pretty easy to roll out.
But those podcasts are a distant second to the Mark Logic rock star video. If you have not seen an XML wizard as a heart throb, American idol, you will want to watch it. The link appears on the Mark Logic CEO Dave Kellogg’s post “Norm Walsh XML Rock Star Video”.
But the marketing moxie award for artistic achievement in a lousy economic climate goes to Autonomy. The company, according to “Mid Season Sponsor Boost for F1 Teams, but Cash Is Still Short”, Autonomy is sponsoring the Mercedes GP F 1 car. My recollection is that Northern Light sponsored an Indy car and Ask.com sponsored a NASCAR. I don’t know how well these auto racing sponsorships work. Perhaps the amount Autonomy paid will surface and hopefully some metrics about the payoff from the sponsorship.
Stephen E Arnold, May 10, 2010
Unsponsored post.
FBLite: An Indication of Next Generation Web Indexing?
May 10, 2010
I wrote my May column for Information Today about user intermediated Web indexes. As you know, Google indexes via brute force and smart software. The approach was state of the art because it combined some AltaVista.com magic with a “clever” dose of algorithmic goodness. The problem is that as the volume of content to be indexed goes up, costs become an issue even for deep pocket outfits like Google. Consider the economic payoff of tapping into a pool of urls identified by those in a membership network as seeds for a Web index. There may be some cost savings because brute force, although sort of fun in a computer nerd play pen, can be side stepped. At some point, the value of the sites in StumbleUpon.com and Delicious.com will become more widely known. Now Facebook is in the selective indexing foyer, and the company may become more aggressive in Web search. Until Facebook makes its intentions more obvious, you may find FBLite.com interesting. I can envision more robust services, but FBLite.com points the way to the arsenal that could blow up Google. A single hit from FBLite or even Facebook won’t devastate the Google. But keep in mind that Apple, assorted lawyers, and even countries are aiming their lasers at the Mountain View company. Why index the entire Web when users can identify potential high value urls. A useful set of pointers without the brute force costs. Social methods with financial payoffs. Could this be a next generation Web indexing method with more legs than the Google spider?
Stephen E Arnold, May 10, 2010
A freebie.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
