SharePoint Yearns for Some of SQL Server 2008
September 27, 2009
I am interested in how the Microsoft teams create interesting puzzles for me to solve. Example: Install SharePoint and then figure out which pieces of SQL Server are really needed. If you are interested in this type of problem and its answer, then you will want to read “How SQL Server 2008 Components Impact SharePoint Implementation”. The title promises more than the article delivers, but what it does provide was useful to me. Ross Mistry lists the four components of SharePoint that SharePoint absolutely, positively needs tonight. The list triggered a question in my addled goose brain, “Why not deliver SharePoint to a client with the requisite components in one package?” Nah, that would be too complicated. Now about that search system without the 50 million document ceiling? Free extra or for fee standalone component? I don’t know the answer.
Stephen Arnold, September 27, 2009
Microsoft Fast ESP with the Microsoft Bing Translator
September 27, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to a write up and a screenshot of the integrated translation utility in the new Fast ESP. The idea is to run a query and get results from documents in different languages. Click on an interesting document and get the translation. To my eye the layout of the screen looked a little Googley, but that’s because I look at the world through the two oohs in the Google logo. The write up is “Enterprise Search and Bing Services – Part 1: The Bing Translator” and you should read the story. Here’s the screenshot that caught my attention:
The article said:
In this example, not only is the user’s query translated and expanded to include other languages (French, German, and Chinese), but the user has the ability to translate the teasers or the entire document using the Bing Translator. The search results also include query highlighting for each of the multiple translations of the query. Finally, the user can use the slider bar (or the visual navigator) to favor documents written in certain languages. Any slider action causes the result set to update automatically. The relevance control behind this slider widget is actually a feature of FAST ESP, but it shows another way of surfacing cross-lingual search.
No information was provided about the computational burden the system adds to a Fast ESP system. Interesting, however. I prefer to see a translated version of the document’s title and snippet in the results list with an option to view the hit in its original language. The “old” Fast Search & Transfer operation had some linguistic professionals working Germany. I wonder if that group is now marginalized or if it has been shifted to other projects. Info about that linguistic group would be helpful. Use the comments section of this Web log to share if you are able.
Stephen Arnold, September 27, 2009
Oracle Spells Out Flaw in Its Core Data Management System
September 27, 2009
Another white paper on Bitpipe. Sigh. I get notices of these documents with mind numbing regularity. Most are thinly disguised apologia for a particular product in a congested market. I clicked on the link for the Line56 document “A Technical Overview of the Sun Oracle Exadata Storage Server and Database Machine” and started speed reading. [To access this link you may have to backtrack and get a Bitpipe user name and password.] I made it to page 29 but a fish hook was tugging at my understanding. I back tracked and spotted the segment that caused a second, closer reading. The headline was “Today’s Limits on Database I/O” on page 2. Here’s the segment:
The Oracle Database provides an incredible amount of functionality to implement the most sophisticated OLTP and DW applications and to consolidate mixed workload environments. But to access terabytes databases with high performance, augmenting the smart database software with powerful hardware provides tremendous opportunities to deliver more database processing, faster, for the enterprise. Having powerful hardware to provide the required I/O rates and bandwidth for today’s applications, in addition to smart software, is key to the extreme performance delivered by the Exadata family of products. Traditional storage devices offer high storage capacity but are relatively slow and can not sustain the I/O rates for the transaction load the enterprise requires for its applications. Instead of hundreds of IOPS (I/Os per second) per disk enterprise applications require their systems deliver at least an order of magnitude higher IOPS to deliver the service enterprise end-users expect. This problem gets magnified when hundreds of disks reside behind a single storage controller. The IOPS that can be executed are severely limited by both the speed of the mechanical disk drive and the number of drives per storage controller.
After the expensive upgrades and the additional licenses, I wonder how Oracle shops are going to react to this analysis of the limits of the traditional Oracle data management system. Even more interesting to me is that the plumbing has not been fixed. The solution is more exotic hardware. Do I hear the tolling of the bell for the Codd database? I do hear the sound of more money being sucked into the the “old way”. Check out Aster Data or InfoBright. Might be useful.
Stephen Arnold, September 27, 2009
Gmail Is a YAGG-aholic
September 26, 2009
Short honk: YAGG means “yet another Google glitch.” I have stopped using my Gmail account, so the addled goose is paddling happily. If the news report in Forbes is accurate, some of the lucky Gmail users are in the midst of YAGG-aholic recidivism. In English, Gmail is having problems again. Read “Some Google Gmail Users Losing Contacts”; judge for yourself. I just came from a meeting at the Library of Congress and now regret suggesting that Google was the cloud services outfit to watch. I hate being wrong. I think those who are struggling with Gmail problems feel less enthusiasm than I do at the moment.
Stephen Arnold, September 26, 2009
Goggle Points Out that Canada Is Lost Amidst the Maple Leaves
September 26, 2009
I liked the power play that turned the piggy Internet Explorer into sleek Chrome. Microsoft can deal with marginalization. But I was not too happy to read the story “Google Exec Says Canada Missing Web’s Potential.” Assume the story is accurate. I don’t perceive Canada as missing much in technology. I was on the Board of the Sports Information Research Center, which was Webby and one of the first government supported entities to generate a profit and then sell a chunk of its business to a big American publishing company. Tim Bray figured out how to do a nifty SGML database and find time to help with Web standards. I pay attention to Web developments from PEI to Vancouver. I even did a job for the Canadian government to use the Internet to get Métis children educational materials where distance and weather disrupt routine educational access. What interests me is why Google executives, who are obviously bright, find it necessary to make political statements that are interpreted by me as stupid. I recall the Googler Cyrus from Google’s LA office, who told me a diagram from a Google patent application was photoshopped by me. Stupid, stupid AND uninformed. May I suggest that Google focus its brilliance on issues that add some spice to my technical life like challenging Oracle in the data management sector or keeping mum when lists of Google acquisitions conveniently omit one of Google’s most important acquisitions in its history. I want to wrap up with this statement from the article cited above. The Googler is talking about online advertising, but I won’t cut this gleaming, wizard any slack:
“It’s not as competitive a business market, which basically suggests that there’s not as many businesses online because they’re not competing for more share amongst each other or there are not enough businesses competing in certain areas,” said Nikesh Arora, Google’s president of global sales operations and business development…”
Yikes. I can see Mr. Arora’s Googley grin as he displays data that shows Canadian businesses’ scores that qualify them for the short bus. In my opinion, this type of comment qualifies him to swim with me in the pond filled with mine drainage.
Stephen Arnold, September 26, 2009
More Innovation in Search
September 26, 2009
I read the TechCrunch interview with Steve Ballmer. Useful information. One point was germane to this Web log. TechCrunch reported:
Ballmer says that search innovation, both as a product and a business model, has largely stagnated over the last five years. He also thinks competition will drive more innovation in the future. “I think if you look out the next 10 years we’re going to see more innovation in search,” he said.
Interesting. I wonder what the word “search” means. Is it Web search where Microsoft is innovating by paying for traffic and using jazzy graphics to shift attention from usability. Or, does search mean finding information in an enterprise. Microsoft’s approach has been to buy people and technology. The Fast Search & Transfer acquisition was an intriguing purchase for a technology anchored in Linux and Web indexing. Powerset contributes semantic functions to Bing.com. I assume innovation means more than interface tweaks.
Stephen Arnold, September 26, 2009
Security Poker: Google Calls Microsoft
September 26, 2009
Software and security are like one of the combinations in chemistry lab. Get calcium carbine and hydrochloric acid. Mix. Ignite. Interesting. With Google marginalizing Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, Microsoft responded with an assertion about security. Wow. Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, for me at least, has been one of the software applications that gives me headaches. My father gathers malware the way I do news stories in my RSS reader.
Microsoft’s response to Google’s marginalization play is summarized in “Microsoft believes Google Chrome Frame lowers security of IE”. Google’s response is described in “Google Barks Back at Microsoft over Chrome Frame Security.”
I have to tell that I think this is quite exciting. My knowledge about Microsoft’s security in its browsers and related software comes from Steve Gibson’s Security Now podcast. My recollection is that Mr. Gibson is quite conservative when it comes to security. For that reason, I have switched to Firefox. I don’t know if this is the optimal path for me, but I changed my father over to Firefox, and I had fewer nasties to kill when he used Firefox.
My hunch is that the war of words will escalate and quickly. Security is not Microsoft’s strong suit in my opinion. Google may continue to probe this decayed tooth.
Stephen Arnold, September 26, 2009
SAP Surprises Me with a Crackerjack Prize Sales Tactic
September 26, 2009
I read an article with some information that surprised me. The story appeared in The Industry Standard and was titled “SAP Offers Free CRM for ERP Buyers”. The article reported that a mid-sized company could buy SAP’s enterprise resource planning system or its bundle called Business All-in-One Suite and get a bonus. When I was younger, I would try to get my father to buy me a box of Crackerjack. I hated the popcorn coated in caramel but I loved the prize. I would get a plastic elephant or a plastic pig. I loved the “prize”. When a giant company embraces what I call the Crackerjack approach to software, I wonder if the “prize” won’t sell or if the “prize” is really what the buyer wants. In either scenario, what’s I conclude is that the idea of getting a customer to license a product that solves a problem seems to need a Crackerjack solution. I suppose there is an upside to this approach. Customers get something as a bonus. The downside is that those who bought the “prize” may find that their purchase has been devalued. Will this boost SAP’s sales? I see this as one more example of big software vendors trying to find ways to prevent a slow decline in market impact and revenue. I have heard that other vendors are bundling high end software with more desirable products in an attempt to get “shelf space” in an organization. The strategy puts pressure on other vendors and may trigger some unexpected cost spikes. What if the free stuff doesn’t do the job. There’s opportunity cost, indirects, and probably consulting expenses. If these mount up, maybe free is not a bargain. Maybe the prize is a booby trap? I just don’t know.
Stephen Arnold, September 26, 2009
Quality Defined for the Search and Content Processing Industry
September 25, 2009
Short honk: The Web log article “The Experience Is the Product” is important in my opinion. I think that any company developing search, content processing, and finding products may want to print out Cindy Alvarez’s essay and take it to lunch, think about it, and then use it as a yard stick against which to evaluate their products. The killer sentence is one that I will appropriate, use in my talks, and try to pass along, which is what Ms. Alvarez intended in my interpretation of her words:
As for my engagement ring, we finally walked into a store where I explained what I wanted and the jeweler simply said, “OK.” I found a ring that was almost perfect – but the stone wasn’t quite right. “You know what you want,” he said, “here’s what you do, you order the diamond online. Pick exactly what you want for the stone, size, color, etc., bring it here, and we’ll build you this setting to go around it.” All the other jewelers had taken the sentence “Since I’m going to wear this for the rest of my life,” and finished it for me, “you want the biggest, most expensive stone possible.” We’re the experts, this is what you want. How insulting! But finally this last guy “got it”; he listened and heard “Since I’m going to wear this for the rest of my life” and then he let me finish, “I want it to be exactly what I want.” My definition of quality. [emphasis added]
Well said, Ms. Alvarez.
Stephen Arnold, September 25, 2009
Like Law? Revel in Hearings Online
September 25, 2009
I am delighted that I don’t have to wrestle with the bottom-line at Westlaw or LexisNexis. In the gold old days, these companies had few competitors. Now the world is awash with legal information and the river of data surged recently if the report in Ars Technica is accurate. The article “Federal Courts Now Offer Hearings Online as MP3 Files” makes clear that this potentially useful stream of information is now making recordings of hearings available for $0.16. I am pretty sure that the cost will fluctuate over time, but the info is available. Suppose your download some of these audio files. Then what? Are you going to listen to hours of lousy audio? No me, grasshopper. I would turn to one of the tools that convert audio into searchable text. My weapon of choice comes from Exalead in Paris. If you are not familiar with this system, take a look at Voxalead. Audio and video data are searchable. When a hit comes up, a click plays the segment in which the term is recognized. BBN had a system, but with names changes and acquisitions, I have lost track of that technology. I suppose the for fee services will offer a searchable service, but for me the surcharge of these giant outfits is not for me.
Stephen Arnold, September 25, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
