Overflight Adds Coveo
June 21, 2009
Short honk: If you want to see what’s new with Coveo, you can navigate to the ArnoldIT.com Overflight service. There’s no charge for this auto-generated page that provides a brief description of the company, contact information, and highlights from public information sources about the company. Twitter Tweets about this company are now included.
Stuart Schram IV, June 21, 2009
Another Knock against Amazon and Google
June 20, 2009
Cory Doctorow’s “Internet Crapshoot: How Internet Gatekeepers Stifle Progress” opens a new front in the copyright, objectivity, and intellectual property war. The article appeared in Internet Evolution. Mr. Doctorow has a high profile and will elicit significant discussion in the blogosphere. He said:
That danger is that a couple of corporate giants will end up with a buyer’s market for creative works, control over the dominant distribution channel, and the ability to dictate the terms on which creative works are made, distributed, appreciated, bought, and sold. And the danger of that is that these corporate giants might, through malice or negligence, end up screwing up the means by which the world talks to itself, carrying on its cultural discourse — a discourse that ultimately sets the agendas for law, politics, health, climate, justice, crime, education, child-rearing, and every other important human subject.
The article contains five additional sections that lays out clearly Mr. Doctorow’s argument that Amazon and Google represent a challenge to innovation. I found the hooking of the market driven economy to a stifling of innovation refreshing. His conclusion comes right from Speech 101 with a call to action: “Stop working for gatekeepers.” The idea is that individuals can exercise considerable influence over the Amazons and Googles of our market driven world. He asserted:
For so long as copyright holders think like short-timers, seeking a quick buck instead of a healthy competitive marketplace, they’re doomed to work for their gatekeepers, rather than the other way around.
Interesting. There are several thoughts flapping through my mind. I will mention one. The short term thinking is going to be tough to shake. There’s the old hierarchy of needs notion. Then there’s the stock market and the imperative to make a buck. And there’s a human’s less than stellar skill in dealing with uncertainty.
In short, gatekeepers have an advantage. Game’s not over, but time is not on the side of anyone except Amazon and Google. Both continue to expand and pretty soon the “space” will be exhausted. A new paradigm will emerge if our pal Hegel is correct. But can those short sighted folks “see” that and make here and now decisions that will exert sufficient influence before monopolies take hold. Maybe? Maybe not? Great for lawyers, though.
Stephen Arnold, June 21, 2009
Three Months, Eight Outside Consultants, and Microsoft Staff= One Web Site
June 19, 2009
Here’s the sentence that made me quack happily:
In only three months we were able to understand the existing Web site content, create a new information taxonomy and Web site design, develop the components, move content, conduct performance tests, and roll out the site to production. Building on the SharePoint platform allowed us to meet or exceed all of the project goals in a short amount of time. The product group is already realizing the benefits of the improved content publishing model and the Web site is growing and improving every day.
Who built what?
Microsoft’s SharePoint team created its own SharePoint Web site. If you find this expensive and a bit much for your constrained budget, you will want to read the case history “How We Did It: SharePoint.Microsoft.com” on the Microsoft SharePoint Team Web log.
The case is a lengthy write up with a number of workarounds and their solutions. One example:
Another interesting requirement was to display content for targeted audiences at the bottom of the home page. When users click tabs at the left side of the home page, relevant content is displayed without refreshing the page. Additionally, content authors needed to be able to update the content inside a Web browser without requiring Web site coding skills. To implement this requirement, Advaiya created a custom content type and page layout to store information that corresponds to the audience content requirements, and to provide an interface for authoring. Based on the custom page layout, we created publishing pages that correspond to each audience tab on the home page. Content is stored in a page layout so authors can easily write and update it, track versions, and take advantage of the Web content management approval functionality that SharePoint provides. Content authors can create and edit the audience content with out-of-the box SharePoint publishing functionality. Only authenticated users have permission to create, edit, and delete content in these pages, and publishing approval workflows ensure that only approved content appears on the home page.
Keep in mind that Microsoft’s engineers did not do this work. I find that quite interesting. I recall the “dog food” references I have heard at Microsoft conferences. Perhaps the notion does not apply to SharePoint because the system is too complex, too resource intensive, and too interdependent for Microsoft employees to tackle. Enter Advaiya. You will need Silverlight and some other plug ins to view this company’s Web site.
The vendor is described by Microsoft in this way:
The Microsoft® Office SharePoint® product group teamed with Advaiya, Inc. to rebuild the SharePoint Web site using the SharePoint Server 2007 platform. Microsoft chose Advaiya, a consulting company in Kirkland, WA, to work with the SharePoint product group because Advaiya has a long history of working closely with many Microsoft teams to develop strategies to roll out new technologies, content, and solutions.
Good work for Advaiya. Maybe not such good work for a small shop struggling with SharePoint. When the vendor needs help implementing a Web site, I think outfits like SquareSpace.com have a real business opportunity. Also, nary a word about search. I wonder how many people it would take to hook Fast ESP into this site. The SharePoint build, according to the write up, involved eight people from Advaiya. No report of the number of Microsoft engineers pressed into service. Quack!
Stephen Arnold, June 19, 2009
The Future of Search: Capturing Paper and Digital Records
June 18, 2009
Short honk: I read Pharmaceutical Business Review’s “Autonomy GCB to Safely Capture, Manage Patients Records”. (The split infinitive and the possessive error are not mine, folks.) The point of the article is that Autonomy has landed a big contract with Greater Cincinnati Behavioral Health Services.” What strikes me as interesting is that Brainware, ZyLAB, and now Autonomy are starting to look a great deal like the original Excalibur Technologies’ business of a decade ago. Sure, there are some differences, but I think that this end-to-end content processing service is bringing search back to its roots. I am not sure of the ramifications of this “blast from the past” approach to information, but I wanted to note my observation about this retrenchment or rediscovery of the roots of information management as a process within an organization’s work flows.
Stephen Arnold, June 17, 2009
Microsoft Fast, Dagens IT, and Deloitte Accounting
June 17, 2009
Dagens IT is a Norwegian information service (Dagens Næringsliv). On Wednesday, June 17, 2009, the article “Føler seg lurt av Fast” appeared here. My Norwegian is not too good, but I have the source story and a comment from a reader in Scandinavia.
From my vantage point in rural Kentucky, the gist of the Dagens IT write up is that an allegation has arisen that Fast Search & Transfer recorded sales that were possibly not solid sales. I think this means that revenue booked may have been false.
The firm’s auditor at the time was Deloitte. The story seems to suggest that the accountants from Deloitte were somehow fooled or in some other way unable to ferret out the real money from the phantom money reported by Fast Search & Transfer.
I ran the Dagens IT story through Google Translate, and I received a rendering of what struck me as a key paragraph:
The reason is that Fast Search & Transfer 2006-manipulating accounts. Contracts for over 100 million turned out to not be real. At the same time was over 30 million paid to directors in the Fixed-system via straw companies.
The authorities in Norway are exploring this allegation. One of those of interest is the present head of the “new” Microsoft Fast unit in Norway. Dagens IT said:
Neither the CEO of Fast, Bjørn Olstad or former CEO, John Markus Lervik, answered yesterday the DNS [official inquiry body] requests.
Deloitte, the accounting firm, seems to be one organization who had access to the company’s financial information. Microsoft, as part of its due diligence, may have had access to similar information. Given the type of issues involved with phantom sales, how thorough were the reviews of Fast Search’s financials.
Microsoft paid about $1.2 billion for a company that, if these allegations are true, may have been smaller than the financial statements issued prior to the buy out suggested. The next question is, “Why would a company with a blue chip client list and strong PR face charges of inventing revenue?”
Maybe the Fast ESP technology, not just the Fast Search management, deserves a closer look? Another question I have is, “What did Microsoft know at the time it paid a premium for Fast Search & Transfer?”
Stephen Arnold, June 17, 2009
Google Trilogy Now Available
June 17, 2009
Infonortics Ltd., a publisher in the United Kingdom, has announced “The Google Trilogy”. Stephen E. Arnold’s three monographs, said Harry Collier, Managing Director, Infonortics in Tetbury, Glos.:
comprise a comprehensive review of the Californian web behemoth. The first volume — The Google Legacy — concentrated on an overview of Google and of its technology. The second volume — Google Version 2.0 — drilled down into Google’s technology as revealed or suggested by its patents. The third and final volume — Google: The Digital Gutenberg — looked in depth at Google’s potential outside of its classic and traditional search origins.
The Google Legacy provides a look at the foundation technologies and their use within Google and at such core Google services as maps, search, and data management.
Google Version 2.0 describes key Google technical innovations developed between 2005 and 2007, a period that Mr. Arnold describes as the thrusters for Google’s current line up of products and services.
Google: The Digital Gutenberg explains how a publisher, developer, or innovator can use Google to build a business that “surfs on Google”. The reference to Google’s Wave is not an accident, because “Wave” is the first of the digital bundling services that Google will deploy.
Portions of these studies have been published by such organizations as BearStearns and IDC, the Boston consultancy. The trilogy comprises about 500 pages of text, technical diagrams, and tabular material. Unique in these monographs is the analysis of Google’s patent documents and technical papers spanning the period from 1998 to 2009.
A person interested in knowing how Google delivers its products and services will find these monographs an essential guide. For a competitor, these monographs provide a long view of Google’s scope and impact. For a person wanting to make money using Google as a platform, these studies provide a forward looking, informed view of what Mr. Arnold calls a “new type of company.”
The cost of the three books in PDF download versions only is US$650 / €490. Site licenses on application to harry.collier [at] Infonortics.com.
Stuart Schram IV, June 17, 2009
Overflight on Treatment Centers
June 16, 2009
The Overflight intelligence service provides drug rehabilitation information for Treatment Centers. Treatment Centers is an information service for health care providers and families looking for actionable information about a dependency condition. The new service provides access to selected information from the Treatment Centers database as well as information that is refreshed in real time from a range of sources. Included is information from Web logs, major news services, and Twitter. Stephen E. Arnold, provider of the Overflight service, said:
The Twitter information was a surprise. We ran several tests and found that Twitter messages provided useful links as well as specific recommendations about what resources were found to be useful. The Twitter information is filtered, eliminating the need to run key word queries, so real time content is available without the need to visit the search box. The combination of original information from the Treatment Center professionals and the real time information creates a useful resource available with a single mouse click.
There is no charge for the service at http://www.treatment-centers.net/drug-rehab.html. If you want an Overflight service for your Web site, write seaky2000 at yahoo dot com and put “Overflight” in the subject field. Users find auto generated reports useful because information is available at a glance without the need to create a key word query to unlock the needed information.
Stuart Schram IV, June 16, 2009
IBM Equals Cost and Complexity
June 16, 2009
I had heard that this PR push was coming. That’s the reason I posted the story detailing the steps required to connect OmniFind to other IBM software. If you don’t recall that post and the eight Web pages of technical procedures and code snippets, you can read “Teaching IBM OmniFind to Index IBM’s Portal Document Manager Content” or my other Web log posts about IBM’s technology.
The New York Times’s “IBM. to Help Clients Fight Cost and Complexity” is a Big Bertha information blast, and I was delighted to see the story getting such strong pick up and play. Disinformation is a wonderful thing in the opinion of the addled goose.
The story, by Steve Lohr, stated:
In the cloud market, I.B.M. plans to take a tailored approach. The hardware and software in its cloud offerings will be meant for specific computing chores. Just as Google runs a computing cloud optimized for Internet search, I.B.M. will make bespoke clouds for computing workloads in business. Its early cloud entries, to be announced on Monday, follow that model. One set of offerings is focused on streamlining the technology used by corporate software developers and testers, which can consume 30 percent or more of a company’s technology resources.
Mr. Lohr concluded:
I.B.M.’s cloud strategy, the company said, is the culmination of 100 prototype projects with companies and government agencies over the last year, and its research partnership with Google. “The information technology infrastructure is under stress already, and the data flood is just accelerating,” said Samuel J. Palmisano, I.B.M.’s chief executive. “We’ve decided that how you solve that starts by organizing technology around the workload.”
Several comments:
- Nary a mention of IBM’s previous cloud initiatives. I was hoping to read about the IBM Internet dial up service or the grid system that I learned about from a person in West Virginia (definitely a hot bed of massively parallel computing). I was hoping for a reference to the early cloud system used inside IBM for its own technical information center. No joy.
- Complexity is not reduced with cloud computing. If anything, data interchange and access becomes more complex, particularly if the IBM customer has other hosted services plus a vegetable medley of mainframes, mid range, and client server IBM gear. Hooking this stuff up and reducing latency without using the equivalent of the GNP of Switzerland perhaps should have warranted a comment?
- IBM is a trend surfer. It is becoming more and more dependent on engineering and professional services. I was looking for a comment, maybe a hint of doubt that the IBM cloud push would assist companies now, not at some vague time in the near future.
Will IBM run a full page ad about its new cloud services in the newspaper? I don’t know, but I will be looking for one. An ad will be a nice complement to the story I just read. Just my opinion, Big Blue and Gray Lady. Just my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, June 16, 2009
Semi Social Collaboration Wins Some Fans
June 16, 2009
Wikipedia is a useful service. There is some disinformation in its listings, but I find it helpful for certain types of information. The US government looked upon Wikipedia and realized that the same approach might have utility for the intelligence community. Thus was born Intellipedia. A news story that appeared on one of my Google centric tools pointed me to this story: “CIA Adopting Web 2.0 Tools Despite Resistance”. For me, the operative words were “some resistance”.
I am writing this in Washington after a couple of meetings that reminded me that silos exist and still being constructed.
The notion of a semi collaborative system has utility. I can’t provide details of my meetings or the parties involved, but I can say, “Silos big and small remain.” Some military social events just aren’t like a frat party or a neighborhood BBQ. Probably never will be and probably a good thing.
Stephen Arnold, June 16, 2009
The Half Life of Online Info and Services
June 15, 2009
You have a chunk of radioactive material. With each tick of a clock, the chunk loses some of its radioactivity. Some chunks are dead in the blink of an eye (less if you are unlucky enough to have the wrong chunk around for a second or two) or maybe centuries. The idea is that the chunk goes dead. Those who worry about radioactive decay think in terms of half life; that is, how long for the chunk to lose half its punch.
I am working on a new study which should be wrapped up before the end of summer. One idea I have been exploring is the half life of online information. Time is important to value and time is expensive to manage. The cost of some computer systems is gated by one’s definition of “acceptable time”. An example is an index refresh. It’s cheaper to update an index once a month via a batch process than deal with Twitter’s Tweets in near real time.
I enjoyed “MySpace Problems May Spread to Facebook, Twitter” by Anthony Massucci. He has hit on one of my study’s findings, and this gives me an opportunity to comment, following my no news policy for this free Web log. He began the story with the key idea:
As Facebook and Twitter watch what’s happening at MySpace, they should be worried and heed the warning of potential problems to come. Social-networking sites grow like weeds and, well, die like weeds too.
Yep, dead on. He continued:
As exciting as it must be for these executives to be working at these companies as they grow quickly, there’s cause for concern. Grow too fast and the costs can’t be contained. Grow slowly and you are in danger of becoming irrelevant. Take a buyout and you likely lose control. Decline buyout attempts and take the risk that there won’t be enough money or revenue to help sustain future demands.
Well said. Let me add several observations:
- The decreasing half life has significant implications for investors, users, and technology companies. The reward for fielding a success is not going to be sustainable. In effect, the rapid degradation releases more particles that can be recombined or can, acting in unexpected ways, kill other things, probably companies in adjacent businesses. Like a radiation victim, the illness looks like one thing, but it quite another. A diagnose and remedy are often tough to deliver in the time the victim has left. Scary thought in today’s lousy financial climate.
- The recombination of particles such as programming languages, methods, and user needs can produce one of those artificially fertile Petri dishes that puzzle first year biology students. if something wild and crazy emerges, that could overrun one’s lab mate’s Petri dish, spoiling a well planned, predictable exercise book project. Wasted time for sure.
- The ecosystem in which rapid decay takes place may be altered and quickly. Mt Etna goes boom and lots of changes took place quickly. Lots of scrambling obviously. Disruptive. Maybe that’s not a sufficiently strong word.
Just my opinion. The half life is a big deal in electronic information. More on this topic in my new study. “Wave” at the parade of innovations. Then pick the right “wave” to surf.
Stephen Arnold, June 15, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
