IBM Opens Watson to Developers
November 28, 2013
Exciting news is reported in the article titled Why IBM’s Watson is Huge for Developers on eWeek. IBM announced on November 14 that they will be opening up the supercomputer to developers, who are scrambling for the chance to work on the cognitive computing technology. General manager of ecosystems Sandy Carter clarified that there is a qualification process for developers, and there are short-term goals. IBM is aiming to grow Watson mainly in three areas (for now): health care, retail and transportation.
Steve Mills, an IBM senior vice-president, explained:
“”There is a fair amount of tooling that’s going to be required to make this thing more digestible,” Mills said. “We’ll probably go to a T-shirt-sized approach to Watson delivery in the future, where you get a small, medium and large kind of offering…They’ve done it. IBM will be launching the IBM Watson Developers Cloud, a cloud-hosted marketplace where application providers of all sizes and industries will be able to tap into resources for developing Watson-powered apps.”
For developers, this could mean a quicker and easier path into markets that they had no way to consider due to funding. Now their ideas will have a much better chance of coming to fruition. For quite some time, IBM has been containing Watson, but with this step forward the opportunities are endless. Meanwhile we are holding our breath for a demo.
Chelsea Kerwin, November 28, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
$450M Cloud Contract Stalled Due to DOD Concerns Over Demand
November 28, 2013
The article titled DOD Says “No Mas” On Commercial Cloud, Puts Brakes on $450M Contract on Ars Technica has some concerned that the government is rethinking its commitment to the cloud. Scott Stewart, contracting officer for the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) explained the decision was caused by a lack of demand from the Defense Department.
The article explains:
“The contract, for which the DISA began drafting a request for proposals this summer, would have picked up to 10 cloud providers to supply Internet-accessible file storage, database hosting, Web hosting, and virtual servers—allowing the military to offload public, non-sensitive systems from its own infrastructure. As it turns out, the various military services and other DOD agencies that the DISA serves aren’t terribly interested in doing that. The federal government… has been trying to reduce the number of public-facing websites it maintains.”
It is yet to be determined whether the contract is being adjusted to meet the more modest requirements or scrapped entirely. As mentioned in the quote, this is not the only instance of concerns of overspending. In 2011 the White House froze all creation of new websites. In the meantime, the military has been dealing with security issues that have caused them to rely on DISA’s data centers.
Chelsea Kerwin, November 28, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
HP Autonomy: The Beat Goes On and On and On
November 27, 2013
I read “HP’s Meg Whitman Ordered to Face Autonomy Charges.” Hard on the heels of Hewlett Packard’s quarterly results, the company has to explain to one disgruntled shareholder why the Autonomy deal went south.
The write up states:
In the latest $1 billion (£647m) lawsuit, HP shareholders accused HP’s management team of ignoring warnings before it bought Autonomy for $11.3 billion (£7.3bn) in 2011 and that the company’s financial numbers had been exaggerated. It is also claimed that HP tried to get out of the deal before it closed. The company later took a nearly $9 billion write-down largely connected with the purchase.
The deal put a burr under some digital cowpokes’ saddles. HP paid $11 billion for Autonomy. At the time of the deal, Autonomy was an $800 to $900 million a year company. Some months after the deal closed, the canny HP management took an $8 billion write down on the Autonomy deal.
According to the Tech Week Europe article:
The investors allege that HP’s management was negligent because of the $8.8 billion (£5.7bn) write-down on the deal HP announced in November 2012. HP officials blamed ‘accounting irregularities’ by Autonomy executives in the months leading up to the deal. The investors allege that the resulting drop in HP’s stock price effectively wiped billions of dollars from the company’s market value. The FBI are said to be investigating the allegations, as is the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO).
In the meantime, the HP deal has not generated the big time payoff that someone at HP assumed would result from the deal. HP, like many other search vendor buyers, seems to be learning that:
- Search is an expensive business to fund. Those marketing, research, and support costs are brutal. Most of the failed search vendors ran into financial trouble despite the ministrations of different CEOs. Maybe Autonomy was managed better? Interesting question.
- Search, by itself, is not a compelling product or service to many potential customers. As a result, search is no longer search. Search embraces dozens of functions from text mining to the ubiquitous and fuzzy Big Data. HP is now trying to market lots of search related products and services. My hunch is that this is a bigger job than trying to sell $11 billion worth of key word search licenses.
- Companies that are not really software centric do not understand the oddities of the enterprise search sector. My view is that MBAs at outfits like HP assume that their Swiss Army knife budgeting and managing skills are going to “fix up” an outfit like Autonomy. Billions will flow as a result of the MBA approach. Who needs a PhD with an aptitude for math to run a mere search company. HP is coming to grips with its own shortcomings in the vision and motivation departments of Autonomy.
An ironic twist to the tale is that HP licensed the hugely complex, expensive, and cumbersome Verity system. With the purchase of Autonomy, HP became the owner of Verity’s technology. The six figure license deal for Verity is now free when viewed one way. On the other hand, that Verity technology cost HP billions of dollars.
And what about the founder of Autonomy? Dr. Michael Lynch has set up an investment company called invoke capital. The company took an interest in Darktrace, a security firm. Dr. Lynch, according to the Financial Times,
…is also a defendant in a suit by HP’s shareholders relating to the acquisition. A court in San Francisco this month gave HP a deadline of January to complete an internal audit, a decision welcomed by Mr Lynch.
The year 2014 may hold more fodder for business school case studies about Hewlett Packard and Autonomy. I am eager.
Stephen E Arnold, November 27, 2013
Coveo Explains: Complex Enterprise Search Delivered in a Day
November 27, 2013
The subtitle is the keeper, however: “No, I’m not insane.” The insane person is Wim Nijmeijer or Nicky Singh. Interesting semantic connection to either entity I believe. I learned this “insanity” stuff in a candidate chunk of possible PR ersatz http://goo.gl/ogVgIe. Since the publication of the New York Times’ story about Vocus and its PR spam, I have started a collection of search vendor messaging that may be a trifle light in the protein department.
Here’s the passage I noted:
Today Coveo announced that it will lead a session at Search Solutions 2013 on Wednesday, November 27 in London, UK.
No problem except that Coveo itself announces that its staff will explain the nuances behind “No, I’m not insane.” A third party “voice” might help.
There were some supporting “facts”. Here’s an example of a fact:
The reality is that many enterprise search implementations are far from simple, and often match the complexity of the systems they need to interface with. Coveo understands the complexity and challenges of enterprise search. Our revolutionary Search & Relevance Technology securely connects with all of an organization’s systems, and harnesses big, fragmented data from any combination of cloud, social and on-premise systems — without complex integrations.
Okay. Okay, well, “facts” may be too strong a word. I think the “revolutionary” and the “all” are going to be tough for me to accept. In a large organization, figuring out what not to make available can be time consuming in my experience. Toss is the information that will cause the company to feel a bit of heat, and you have some heavy lifting.
For instance, is “all” possible in today’s regulated environment. What about employee medical records, documents related to secret contracts and research work, salary information, clinical trial data, information related to a legal matter, and “any combination of cloud, social, and on premises systems”? Insane? Okay.
Well, maybe Coveo can deliver?
My observations:
- On a conference call with an enterprise search vendor, I pointed out that marketing enterprise solutions has changed. Hyperbole and cheerleading have replaced the more mundane information that answers such questions as, “Will this system work?” There continues to be skepticism in some circles about the claims of search vendors.
- Sending messages about oneself are interesting but even Paris Hilton and Lady Gaga employ publicists. Sure, Lady Gaga uses a drone dress to get media coverage, but she doesn’t issue a news release that says, “No, I’m not insane.”
- Enterprise search groups on LinkedIn are struggling with the question, “Why do vendors get fired?” The reason goes back to the days of Verity. That company charted the course that many vendors wittingly or unwittingly followed; that is, promise absolutely anything to get the job. The legacy of Verity’s mind boggling complexity are marketing assertions that enterprise search works and can be up and running in a day.
Not even Google can make that eight hour assertion stick for the new Google Search Appliance with 100 percent confidence in my experience.
Anyway, by the time you read this, the lecture “No, I’m not insane” by a Coveo expert will be over. I suppose I can catch the summary in the Guardian. Stop the presses.
Stephen E Arnold, November 27, 2013
DIY SharePoint Site Usability
November 27, 2013
There is always enough SharePoint chatter to keep enterprise experts at every level occupied. And a current popular topic of conversation is SharePoint usability. CMS Wire continues the conversation in their article, “The Missing Link in SharePoint Site Usability.”
The author writes:
“The topic of SharePoint site usability never grows old. With every new version of SharePoint that comes out, Microsoft has touted that it is extremely intuitive and easy to use, and judging from the number of licenses sold, many organizations seem to have bought into this myth. What they are not told is what it actually takes to make SharePoint sites user-friendly.”
Customization, customization, customization. That’s what it takes to make SharePoints sites user-friendly. And customization is costly. Most people just can’t make do anymore with a bare bones SharePoint implementation. Organizations are looking to third party add-ons to round out their installation. Stephen E. Arnold, a longtime enterprise expert and man behind ArnoldIT.com, relays this message frequently. Stay tuned to ArnoldIT for ways to enhance or replace a SharePoint implementation, depending on your organization’s needs.
Emily Rae Aldridge, November 27, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
The NSA and Google Compete for the Internet, and We All Lose
November 27, 2013
An article posted on Tech Eye titled US Spying is Killing the Internet Claims Google explains the outrage expressed by Google when it was released that the NSA had tapped into their system in order to obtain user information. Google’s security director Richard Salgado warns that the US government’s snooping could eventually lead to a “splinter net” in which governments put up barriers and cause the market to be restricted.
The article explains:
“Salgado warned that the NSA operations led to “a real concern” inside and outside the United States about the role of government and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which decides in secret on legal problems about electronic surveillance efforts.”
But is the lady protesting too much? Google has been accused of its own plans to take over the Internet, as this article titled Google’s Latest Scheme to Control the Internet May Surprise You investigates on Worldcrunch. Google Plus in particular might warrant extra attention. In spite of being considered a failure when likened to Facebook, the article suggests that comparison is faulty. The number of Google Plus members may be small, but more important is Google’s ability to track and store the information we input.
And the money talks:
“Perhaps the proof is in the numbers: Google generated $50 billion in 2012 revenue, $40 billion of it from advertising. And though 2.7 billion Facebook “likes” are being registered every day, its revenue during the same period was just $4 billion.”
So let Google worry about the NSA all they want. Some of us are preoccupied with our paranoia about another company, which the article sums up as a Keanu Reeves style matrix in which we will all stay happily ignorant of our dependence.
Chelsea Kerwin, November 27, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Surprise Ruling on Fair Use Favors Google in Scanning Project
November 27, 2013
The article Google Gets Total Victory Over Authors Guild: Book Scanning Is Fair Use on TechDirt celebrates the decision that Google’s scanning project was fair use. Judge Denny Chin made the decision that Google Books was transformative, “opening up new fields of research.” The decision also revolved around the point that the digitized books were not replacing traditional books.
The article explains:
“Google does not sell its scans, and the scans do not replace the books. While partner libraries have the ability to download a scan of a book from their collections, they owned the books already — they provided the original book to Google to scan. Nor is it likely that someone would take the time and energy to input countless searches to try and get enough snippets to comprise an entire book.”
Furthermore, any individual who made such an attempt would actually need a hard copy of the book anyway since some sections are blacklisted. The ruling also looked at the opportunities available through the technology, like preserving texts, allowing for more comprehensive research and enabling access to more people. The article is particularly hard on The Author’s Guild leader Scott Turow, who was foolish enough to try and fight Google.
Chelsea Kerwin, November 27, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Mobile Advertising Still Leaves Much to Be Desired
November 27, 2013
At least there is plenty of room for improvement. Business Insider tells us that “Execs from Criteo and the Weather Channel Both Agree: Mobile Ads Still Kinda Suck.” Hmm, we predict more fancy dancing around ad pricing in the future. In the meantime, The Weather Company‘s chief money man sums up the current state of affairs; writer Aaron Taube reports:
“Though Curt Hecht, chief global revenue officer for The Weather Company, had a more explicitly positive view of the creative offerings available on mobile platforms, he said that as it stands now, the mechanisms used to buy and sell ads on smartphones and tablets are a ‘complete mess.'”
Taube notes that Hecht knows what he is talking about, considering that his company’s Weather Channel app is extremely popular. What will it take to create better advertising systems for mobile devices? Greg Coleman, president of ad serving platform Criteo, points out that new technology calls for new expertise. The article informs us:
“In order for ads to improve, Coleman said, the industry would need to see advertising made by creatives who had come up with a mobile background and who possess what Coleman calls the mobile DNA. ‘If you go back to the late 90s when the digital world started to crop up, every editor-in-chief wanted to be in charge of their website,’ Coleman said. ‘They’re the last people who should have been allowed to tinker with the new medium. A new skillset is going to emerge that doesn’t exist to a large degree today.'”
Coleman goes on to observe that mobile ad exchanges that fail to build or embrace that skillset quickly will be in trouble in a few years. Marketers are impatient for new ways to leverage all this data they increasingly collect, and will become more choosy as better options emerge. Mobile ad folks who want to stay in the game had better be on their toes.
Cynthia Murrell, November 27, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
SharePoint Over the Years
November 26, 2013
SharePoint has come a long way since its inception in 2001 with SharePoint Portal Server. And while many criticize SharePoint for not being able to keep up with the times, it has made progress over the years. Chris McNulty of CMS Wire covers the history of SharePoint in his article, “SharePoint 2013, This Old House Style – Moving In and Living Together.”
McNulty says:
“SharePoint 2013 is not what it was 10 years ago. Its expanded capacity and security capabilities mean that your layout of sites and libraries — information architecture — can match actual usage patterns more closely, bringing content and stakeholders more closely together than before. Advances in sharing and publishing helps assure that your documents start out life in the right place, and minimize the degree of redundant or obsolete copies of the same document being randomly distributed around the farm. The introduction of user-friendly document lifecycle management helps assure the documents are automatically curated, retaining what’s essential and purging or archiving old information.”
And while the author outlines many improvements that SharePoint has made over the years, most users are reporting that in order to have full enterprise functionality, they are supplementing with add-ons. Stephen E. Arnold of ArnoldIT.com is a longtime leader in enterprise search. His recent research points to the fact that while SharePoint is widely adopted, it is also widely supplemented with add-ons to complete functionality.
Emily Rae Aldridge, November 26, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Facebook Usage Shrinks
November 26, 2013
Last month, Facebook admitted that users, particularly teens, are using the site less these days. The Guardian reports, “Teenagers Say Goodbye to Facebook and Hello to Messenger Apps.” (Messenger apps function much like text messaging, but without the extra charges on the phone bill.) Writer Parmy Olson blames the shift on the wider audience Facebook has successfully attracted over the years.
She writes:
“Their gradual exodus to messaging apps such as WhatsApp, WeChat and KakaoTalk boils down to Facebook becoming a victim of its own success. The road to gaining nearly 1.2 billion monthly active users has seen the mums, dads, aunts and uncles of the generation who pioneered Facebook join it too, spamming their walls with inspirational quotes and images of cute animals, and (shock, horror) commenting on their kids’ photos. No surprise, then, that Facebook is no longer a place for uninhibited status updates about pub antics, but an obligatory communication tool that younger people maintain because everyone else does.”
I’m sure that is a factor, but the Reference Heap provides another perspective. It isn’t so much that Facebook’s user base has changed, but that changes to the site have made it less useful. At the same time that its algorithm presents us with pointless information, it often fails to deliver truly relevant missives from friends and family. In a note beginning “Dear Facebook, You Suck,” the angry pastebin writer charges:
“One of my best friend’s mother lost her battle with cancer the other day, my friend wrote a beautiful status update commemorating her mother, it got 297 likes and tons of comments before I noticed it… You know how I noticed it? My mother called me and told me about her mother dying and I went to her actual page to see for myself. But you know what I did notice? Becky hates Mondays. My 3rd cousin whom I haven’t seen since a family reunion 10 years ago started playing his umpteenth game on Facebook.”
I can relate. I know I have missed important news on Facebook in a similar fashion, and messages I really wanted folks to see got little traction. Is this a deliberate attempt to get us to pay Facebook the seven bucks (well, $6.99) to “promote” posts we actually want others to view? Perhaps I’m being too cynical.
Cynthia Murrell, November 26, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
