Deconstructing HP Autonomy and Its Eight Answers
September 26, 2012
All Things Digital ran a story called “Eight Questions for Hewlett Packard Software Head George Kadifa.” Let me nudge aside any thoughts that the interview and the questions were presented as public relations and marketing. I want to view the comments or “answers” as accurate. Once I have highlighted the points which caught my attention, I want to offer some side observations from my goose pond in rural Kentucky.
First, there were two passages which addressed the $12 billion Autonomy purchase.
The first was information about a recent planning meeting. The Autonomy staff were on deck and ready for duty. The key statement for me was this one:
Basically when you look at Autonomy, the core unit is the IDOL Engine, which is the unique capability of meaning-based computing. We’re going to double down on that. In our labs in Cambridge, England, we have 40 or 50 mathematicians writing algorithms. And we’re going to build a team here in the U.S. to productize it and create a platform around it because it has that potential. Frankly, the way Autonomy was managed previously, they put a lot more emphasis into enabling applications, which was fine, but our belief is that there’s a broad agenda, which is creating a platform around meaning-based computing. So we will maintain those apps, but at the same time we’ll open up the capabilities to a broader set of players outside HP.
Makes sense. Pay $12 billion for IDOL. Leverage it.
The second was semi-business school thinking about how to grow Autonomy’s business. Here’s the passage I noted:
In Europe, they tend to make things complex in order to create more value. For example, they saw the IDOL engine as too complex to just give it to people. Instead they thought they should acquire vendors and then create value by enabling applications. Here we take something that’s complex and we ask how we might simplify it in order to give it more scale for a bigger market. So some of that difference was cultural, and some of it was that I think they fell in love with these acquisitions. … We think Autonomy’s technology has broader implications.
I urge you to read the full “eight questions” and the answers. Now my observations:
- Productizing IDOL or any search engine can be difficult. When I use the word “difficult,” I mean time consuming, expensive, and timetable free. Buying a search engine and sticking it in a product or service looks easy. It is not. In fact, IBM has elected to use open source search to provide the basics. Now IBM is working hard to make money from its value add system, the game show winner Watson. There may be a product in “there”, but it is often to find a way to make money. HP has to pay back the $12 billion it spent and then grow the Autonomy business which was within shouting distance of $1 billion.
- The notion that Europeans see the world differently from HP is interesting. I am not sure how European Autonomy was. My view is that Autonomy’s senior management acquired companies and did upselling. As a result, only Autonomy broke through the glass ceilings behind which Endeca, Exalead, ISYS, and Fast Search & Transfer were trapped. Before applying business school logic to Autonomy, perhaps one should look at how other acquired search vendors have paid off. The list is, based on my research, a short one indeed. Microsoft, for example, has made Fast Search a component of SharePoint. With Fast Search nearing or at its end of life, Microsoft faces more search challenges, not fewer. HP may find itself with facing more challenges than it expects.
- The notion of “broader applications” is a popular one. Dassault Systèmes, acquired Exalead, which is arguably better and more recent technology than IDOL. But Dassault’s senior managers continue to look for ways to convert a more modest expenditure for Exalead into a river of revenue. Dassault has a global approach and many excellent managers. Even for such an exceptional firm, search is not what it seemed to be; that is, a broad application which slots into to many customer needs. Reality, based on my research for The New Landscape of Search, is different from the business school map.
HP is making an trip which other companies have taken before. My view is that HP will have to find answers the these questions, which were not part of the interview cited above:
First, how will HP pay off the purchase price, grow Autonomy’s revenue, and generate enough money to have an impact on HP’s net profit? My work has pointed out that cost control is the major problem search vendors face. It takes money to explain a system no matter how productized it becomes. It takes money to support that technology. It takes money to enhance that system. It takes money to hire people who can do the work. In short, search becomes a bright blip on most CFOs’ radar screens. HP may be different, but I am not sure that the cost issue will remain off the radar for very long.
Second, IDOL is a complex collection of software components. The core is Bayesian, but much of the ancillary IDOL are the add ons, enhancements, and features which have been created and applied to base system over the last two decades. Yep, two decades. In search, most of the systems which have figured in big deals in the last two years date from the mid to late 1990s. The more modern systems are not search at all. These new systems leap frog key word search and push into high value opportunities. HP may be forced to buy one of more of these next generation systems just to stay in the “beyond search” game.
Third, HP is a large company and it faces considerable competition in software. What makes HP interesting is that it has not been able to make its services business offset the decline in personal computers and ink. HP now wants to prove that it can make services work, but as the Inquirer pointed out in mid August 2012:
HP’s write-down of EDS might have resulted in just a paper loss – the firm didn’t actually lose $9bn in cash – but it provides an insight into how a decade of mismanagement has left HP in a bad situation. The fact is that HP cannot lay the blame on diminishing PC sales because its enterprise business, printing and services divisions all reported losses, too. For HP to write down the purchase of EDS, a company it paid $13.9bn for just four years ago, strongly suggests that those who were at the helm of HP in the run-up to that acquisition simply had no clue as to how much EDS was really worth and how to incorporate the company into HP. The value of any company can go down over time – just look at AOL, Microsoft or Yahoo – but for an established business such as EDS to be overvalued by almost $10bn just four years after being acquired is nothing short of gross incompetence by HP in both the purchase and the subsequent handling of the firm once it became a part of HP.
I don’t fully agree with the Inquirer’s viewpoint. But one fact remains: HP must demonstrate that it can manage a complex business based on IDOL, a technology which is not a spring chicken. The man who did manage Autonomy to almost $1 billion in sales is not longer with HP. In the history of enterprise search and content processing, Mike Lynch was unique. Perhaps the loss of that talent will continue to impact HP’s plans for a different approach to the market for Autonomy’s technology?
Life extension treatments are available, but these often do not work as expected and can be expensive. Most fail in the end.
Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2012
Sponsored by Augmentext
Concept Searching Enrolls University of California
September 25, 2012
We learned that the University of California has selected Concept Searching technology to process content, automatically classify content, and provide taxonomy management software to the Office of the President. “University of California, Office of the President Using Concept Searching’s Smart Content Framework™” said:
The University of California, Office of the President is the system wide headquarters of the University of California, managing its fiscal and business operations and supporting the academic and research missions across its campuses, labs and medical centers.
The Office of the President is the system wide headquarters of the University of California, managing its fiscal and business operations and supporting the academic and research missions across its campuses, labs and medical centers.
conceptClassifier for SharePoint has enabled the University of California, Office of the President to realize search improvements in SharePoint 2007 and in the recent deployment of SharePoint 2010. The university has integrated with the Term Store and taken advantage of the full support of managed metadata properties provided by conceptClassifier for SharePoint.
Martin Garland, president of Concept Searching said:
Using the first two building blocks of the Smart Content Framework™, Metadata and Insight, the University of California, Office of the President was able to rapidly deploy enterprise taxonomies and build the framework to improve search outcomes. This adoption of Concept Searching technologies continues to show our platform is an important component for any organization that places high value on content assets.
Concept Searching provides software products that deliver conceptual metadata generation, auto-classification, and powerful taxonomy management from the desktop to the enterprise. Concept Searching, developer of the Smart Content Framework™, provides organizations with a method to mitigate risk, automate processes, manage information, protect privacy, and address compliance issues. This information governance infrastructure framework utilizes a set of technologies that encompasses the entire portfolio of information assets, resulting in increased organizational performance and agility.
Concept Searching asserts that it is the only platform independent statistical metadata generation and classification software company in the world that uses concept extraction and compound term processing to significantly improve access to unstructured information. The Concept Searching Microsoft suite of technologies runs natively in SharePoint 2010, FAST, Windows Server 2008 R2 FCI, and in Microsoft Office applications.
A June 2012 white paper explaining conceptClassifier is available at this link.
Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2012
Sponsored by Augmentext
Moving to SharePoint 2013: Planning Necessary
September 25, 2012
Many organizations will want to take advantage of the new features, services, and functions of SharePoint 2013 and SharePoint Search 2013. “Planning the Infrastructure Required for the new App Model in SharePoint 2013” makes clear that a shift to Microsoft’s 2013 enterprise systems requires planning and preparation.
Because the name of the solution is the same, many SharePoint administrators may feel that SharePoint 2013 is a routine upgrade. The article points out: “SharePoint 2013 brings with it a brand new application model, which we euphemistically refer to as the ‘app model’ or ‘cloud app model’. “
The scope of the planning required, according to Steve Peschka, includes, the development model, the security model, and the infrastructure. The article jumps from broad themes into quite specific information about modifications to url formation. For an administrator with this specific concern, the information is useful. The recommendation focuses on creating additional Web applications.
Comperio, one of the world’s leading specialists in search and content processing, approaches SharePoint planning by considering the context of the client’s needs, the existing SharePoint implementation, and the requirements the client has which can benefit from the 2013 solution. Comperio’s search engineers can handle the technical details of an implementation, but these are integrated into the roll out of a SharePoint system which considers budget, timetable, and existing resources.
According to Jørn Ellefsen , CEO and founder of Comperio:
Search matters. Our approach is to gather information, analyze the data, and develop a migration plan which focuses on meeting client requirements. Our engineers specialize in the search element of SharePoint for SharePoint migrations. However, our capabilities embrace the preparation and post-migration work that are important to SharePoint licensees.
Comperio’s approach to SharePoint Search reduces the time and cost of a shift from an existing SharePoint installation to the latest version of SharePoint. For more information about Comperio Search’s SharePoint 2013 planning and implementation services, visit www.comperiosearch.com.
Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2012
Sponsored by Augmentext
The Community Weighs in on SharePoint 2013 Sans Design View
September 25, 2012
The SharePoint community has no doubt noticed the absence of design view in SharePoint 2013 with many MVPs wondering about support for existing applications, as well as what the future of building full-scale applications will look like. Caroline Marwitz continues the conversation in the WindowsITPro.com post, “Will You Miss SharePoint Designer Design View in SharePoint 2013?” Marwitz shares a fellow MVPs perspective on the change:
Ironically, one of the most realistic responses came from a SharePoint MVP who has built his recent professional life around SharePoint Designer. Asif Rehmani wrote, ‘Design View is not coming back and that’s a fact. Now the question becomes: What do we do with all of the solutions that we have made using the Design View? How do you support it going forward? That’s the Million dollar question on everyone’s mind who is close to this functionality change.’
Marwitz explains she leans toward those who want Design View back, but mainly because she can sympathize with those who are losing a tool they’ve come to count on. But some in the community have also voiced their belief that SharePoint Designer is part of what’s wrong with SharePoint.
As the community adjusts to the changes, it highlights that for some users there will be gaps in the SharePoint system. Adding a third party application is one way to extend SharePoint capabilities, such as with the Information Pairing feature from Fabasoft Mindbreeze. Here you can read about increased SharePoint efficiency with Mindbreeze, “A survey by German market analysts has shown that practically every second company uses SharePoint. However, in SharePoint only one facet of a company’s knowledge can be presented. Fabasoft Mindbreeze Enterprise 2012 puts an end to this shortcoming.”
Philip West, September 25, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext.
Coming Article Series to Focus on SharePoint 2013 Features from the Executive Perspective
September 24, 2012
Descriptions and highlights of the coming SharePoint 2013 features have been a hot topic in the community. Symon Garfield takes another look at how these features might be used in the organization in his upcoming series of articles on the topic at CMSWire.com. The series starts off with, “The Executive’s Guide to SharePoint 2013: Understanding Communities.”
Community Sites provide a forum experience in the SharePoint environment which enables members to contribute information and ask for help from fellow members, according to the Microsoft TechNet Web site. Garfield explains that communities of purpose share a common objective while networks share loose associations with the main goal to just stay in touch. And with a community of purpose, members can make contributions and develop ideas and solutions for the purpose. Garfield explains how it relates to SharePoint 2013:
SharePoint 2013 includes a template to use as the basis for creating community web sites. At the heart of a community site is a discussion board which members can use to begin conversations on a specific topic, or to post questions to the rest of the community. Site moderators can create categories to organize the discussion threads. This supports the contribution element of the community process. Members can post replies to topics, or to other replies, and they can rate topics and replies…This facilitates the feedback element of the community process.
Collaboration capabilities are imperative as businesses develop rich community cultures. To tap into the new possibilities, consider a third party solution to complete your enterprise search system. Fabasoft Mindbreeze provides comprehensive access to business knowledge for everyone on the team and is backed by a customer focused support team that shares your purpose.
Philip West, September 24, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext.
Elevating SharePoint through Third Party Additions
September 21, 2012
Relate Technologies is a Microsoft systems integrator, with a stake in third-party application implementation. While some mistakenly view SharePoint as an out-of-the-box answer to all of their organization’s information needs, Relate Technologies builds a strong case for the addition of add-ons for increased customization and functionality. Read more in, “Taking SharePoint to the Next Level.”
The article begins:
‘SharePoint is perceived by companies as a product primarily used for intranets and document management,’ says Geoff Lander, Managing Director of Relate Technologies. ‘As ideal as it may be for these applications, the real tangible monetary return on investment is derived when you start using SharePoint as a development platform to build enterprise applications.’ Companies such as Sanlam Structured Solutions, Coronation Fund Managers, Vodafone and JO Hambro Capital Management are using applications developed in SharePoint to increase the efficiency of a range of business processes.
Apparently SharePoint is also realizing the value of such applications as they recently formed a Marketplace to make integration more accessible:
To encourage the development of such third-party applications or add-ons for SharePoint by the ISV communities, Microsoft launched the Microsoft Office 365 Marketplace in April 2011. The Marketplace incorporates a SharePoint Marketplace that already lists almost 500 SharePoint applications that can be used to extend or enhance SharePoint functionality.
The future of SharePoint definitely appears to be in third-party additions, increasing functionality and accessibility, particularly for smaller organizations that cannot afford a fleet of in-house developers. When reviewing third-party applications that might meet your organization’s needs, take a look at Fabasoft Mindbreeze and their suite of intuitive solutions.
Emily Rae Aldridge, September 21, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext.
Munich International Trade Fairs Depends on Mindbreeze InSite
September 20, 2012
In the online environment, customer service obviously means something different than simply having pleasant face-to-face interactions. Online businesses have to go the extra mile to meet their customers’ needs, but have to assess these needs without the benefit of personal interactions. One key factor in online customer service is an intuitive Web interface and an effective Web site search mechanism.
If customers cannot find what they need, the odds that they will move on to another vendor or site is quite high. Munich International Trade Fairs, which organizes trade fairs around Europe, learned the value of intuitive Web site search through Mindbreeze InSite. Read more in, “Munich International Trade Fairs counts on Fabasoft Mindbreeze InSite.”
The article begins:
Munich International Trade Fairs offers a special service to online visitors of the Communication World 2011: easy, secure, and intelligent search through Fabasoft Mindbreeze InSite. ‘We are pleased to be the first trade organizer in Germany to offer this service on our websites. With a structured overview, the visitor can get to the information he needs faster. I was particularly impressed by the swift implementation. The product was ready for use in less than 10 minutes,’ says Prof. Dr. Manfred Mayer of Munich International Trade Fairs.
So if you are looking for a way to improve your overall customer satisfaction, the painless and hassle-free addition of Mindbreeze InSite will pay dividends in happy customers.
Emily Rae Aldridge, September 20, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext.
Bing vs Google Taste Test
September 20, 2012
Like a Coke versus Pepsi taste test in a 1980s mall, Microsoft has set up Bing It On, a Bing versus Google blind comparison Web site. The first time through, I chose Bing’s results over Google’s twice out of five times, and rated the engines as tied the other three. I experienced no Googley advantages at all. But then, I tried it a second time. Google three, Bing one, a draw once. I guess it depends on what you’re searching for.
In its blog post, “People Chose Bing Web Search Results Over Google Nearly 2:1 in Blind Comparison Tests—Really?” Bing explains that they launched the comparison site in response to its own surprisingly favorable test results. They also say that, in a blind test performed by independent research company Answers Research, which used a representative online sample of almost 1,000 people 18 and up from across the US, Bing outperformed Google two to one. (Survey takers were not told Microsoft was involved in the study.) The write up’s description of that test is very close to what you’ll see at Bing It On:
“In the test, participants were shown the main web search results pane of both Bing and Google for 10 search queries of their choice. Bing and Google search results were shown side-by-side on one page for easy comparison – with all branding removed from both search engines. The test did not include ads or content in other parts of the page such as Bing’s Snapshot and Social Search panes and Google’s Knowledge Graph. For each search, the participant was asked which search engine provided the best results – ‘Left side search engine’, ‘Right side search engine’, or ‘Draw.’ After each participant performed 10 searches, their votes were totaled to determine the winner (Bing, Google or Draw, in the case of a tie).”
The overall sampling error rate was plus or minus 3 percent at the 95 percent confidence level. They say their results were a clear win for Bing, which garnered 57.4 percent of the vote, compared to 30.2 percent for Google and 12.4 percent resulting in a tie. That’s not exactly what I experienced, but perhaps you should try the test for yourself; you might be surprised.
Cynthia Murrell, September 20, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
SharePoint Cannot Meet All Enterprise Needs
September 19, 2012
For all of the talk about what SharePoint can do, sometimes it is good to know what SharePoint cannot do. Avoid an unnecessary expense as well as wasted time and frustration by exploring the BetaNews article, “3 Things Not to do With SharePoint.”
The author begins with an analysis of what SharePoint can do well:
I’m a big fan of SharePoint. I’ve worked with it for years, right back to SharePoint 2001. It does a lot of things very, very well (Since you ask — document management, collaborative working, and increasingly social networking functionality). However, SharePoint also does lots of things, its feature set is simply huge. Not all of these features are as mature as others, and as a result it is easy for SharePoint systems to end up feeling a bit mixed and matched. Some things work well, some less so, and some should have been avoided altogether.
The author then goes on to list the three things you should avoid doing with SharePoint: 1) creating a public facing Web site, 2) customizing graphic design, and 3) treating it like a database. For each of these functions, a smarter choice is to find a third party solution that can work with SharePoint or an existing infrastructure to seamlessly accomplish that goal. For public facing Web sites, we recommend Mindbreeze InSite, a solution that will automatically set up intuitive search on your Web space.
Emily Rae Aldridge, September 19, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext.
Google OneBox Provides Shortcuts to Ease Search Pain
September 19, 2012
Harnessing the power of any search engine can be difficult, especially when one is attempting to find specific information that is quick and direct. To compete with such products as Siri, which provide instant, significant results, Google has released a set of shortcuts leading to what the company calls “OneBox” results. Lifehacker’s recent post, “20 Google Search Shortcuts to Hone Your Google-Fu,” informs us of the numerous shortcuts available, including unit conversion and instant artist discographies and filmographies.
The article tells us about the product:
“Google’s OneBox is the result you get when Google magically knows the answer to a search you perform. Above the normal search results, Google gives your the definitive answer to your search—or a miniature, interactive tool to continue your search. These are different from search operators that help you narrow your search. With the OneBox results you can quickly find the weather, learn what a medication is, peek at a musicians discography, and even find release dates for movies.”
Bravo to the Goog for this small innovation. We found some good tips for some hidden queries we were not aware of before. However, we do not like the coinage “Google Fu.” It makes it seem as if we need to become zen masters of searching skills to be equipped to handle the monster search engine.
Andrea Hayden, September 19, 2012
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
