Slashdot Mirror
Google And IBM Team Up Search Technology
An Anonymous Reader wrote to mention a Reuters report on the teaming of IBM and Google over Google's Desktop search technology. From the article: "IBM is linking up its OmniFind corporate search system with Google's free desktop search for business to make it easier for users to locate information throughout an organisation that is often locked up in many separate systems ... Google wins IBM's endorsement among corporate technical managers for its desktop search product and IBM gives corporate information workers an already popular entry point into back-office databases through Google's search. Searchable data ranges from e-mail to computer files to blog postings to corporate repositories of data, images, audio or video, Prial said. Much of this is not available using public Web search tools. Typically, it is hard to reach inside a company except by trawling through many different programs."
X10 Halloween Webcam is online - is it a "Trick" or a "Treat" ... ;-)
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
I rirst read that as "Google and IBM Team Up with Scientology".
Go Xenu!
Trolling is a art,
It occurs to me that setting up this powerful of a search tool throughout the typical business means at least initially, people are going to dredge up all sorts of unexpected and perhaps unwanted things. (Say, just for example, a middle manager is working on plans for giving out raises or pay cuts for the next year. He might have an Excel or Word document or two out on a shared network drive mentioning some of his rough drafts for the idea. Bad idea of course, because he should be saving that stuff in a more secure place - but you know how things go. Might have even saved a version of a file there completely by accident? Traditionally, it would go unnoticed in most cases. But what if another employee is playing with the search tools, looking for all documents related to salary - and finds out what all of his co-workers are going to get paid next year?)
It'll only take one or two such incidents before management will demand removal or a serious lock-down of people's ability to use the search tools.
Also, think of the shock some people might get when their boss starts searching the contents of everyone's corporate email for key phrases. Once again, sure - we all get the general idea that "business email is not private", but how many of us took what seemed to be an infinitely small risk and made a couple off-color jokes, jabs at management, or other such things in an outgoing email written to a buddy over lunch break or something? Did you remember to make sure all that stuff was removed from your "sent items" or "deleted items" folders?
"Google to help IBM search for more business."
This could be a good thing. The GSA does well for registered websites, but I'm not sure what it will do for standard files. If searchable files on the local machines have to be tagged as searchable by the user, and not done by default, then anyone can publish information to the companies repository of information without having access to a website, or needing to get the document published, just tag the document with a couple of keywords or some such, and off it goes to the internal wiki... or something like that anyway. That could be a very good collaboration tool, despite my poor explanation.
By having to purposely publish a document, the default is that your data is not published, thus allowing you to email your family without fear of publishing the holiday party plans at your mom's house.
Likewise, all those involved with a project can publish to that project's wiki without serious effort, just right-click and select the keywords etc. or something like that anyway.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Google really seems on top of this taking-over-Microsoft thing. Microsoft has openly decreed that they want the search space back, and Google answers by strengthening the front.
"It occurs to me that setting up this powerful of a search tool throughout the typical business means at least initially, people are going to dredge up all sorts of unexpected and perhaps unwanted things. "
The mob's going to be the first customer.
"IBM and Google Inc. are collaborating to make it easier for office workers not only to search for local documents and personal e-mail but to delve deep into corporate databases, the companies said on Friday." FTFA
Have suspicions about something going on in the company you work for? You may soon have an easier way to dig up information to confirm your suspicions.
If this were going to be deployed at my company, I would want to know what was going to be done to control access to the information. Imagine an uncontrolled deployment of this at a government level such as DoD, CIA, or FBI.
If someone finds sensitive information in this fashion and gives it out, will it be called whistleblowing or spying?
THe IBM site es HUGE... really, really huge, and trying to find something specific is very hard, usng the search tool provided by IBM.
For example, trying to get to the Java JRE 1.4 for PPC 32 bits, to use at my IBOOK, is much more easier with google than ibm own serch engine.
Also, my last painfully search at IBM, looking for development information for their JPOS implementation, was almost impossible with IBM serch engine, but using google, wasnt so much..
Really IBM should hire or use the google services...Maybe this is a beggining... And IBM partering with Google, one more thing to worry about for Microsoft.
IBM lately, with porting a lot of apps to Linux, is showing a remarked "low profile" hostility to M$..
They are a lot of benefits if you switch from MS to Linux at IBM products...
Â_Â
I wonder if this means we'll be able to buy a google search appliance that can index Lotus Notes databases in the future. I work for a company that has spent the last 15 years throwing information into lotus notes. We now have several thousand notes "databases" and no one can find anything. It's a complete mess.
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
The result of that IBM research into finding contextual links between documents? Or some other search technology?
Wait till someone finds out the receptionist at a satellite office is paid $250,000/year and the office is located in a downtown penthouse.
Even if the search engine knows that I want Apple Macintosh (the computer), Google still doesn't know if I want pages that describe hardware, software, peripherals, the company's site, old 68k Macintoshes, new machines, stuff for sale, fan sites, technical support, etc. Yes, I can add more search terms, but adding terms has two great problems. First, added terms often end up throwing away the very pages that I seek if the page doesn't contain the words I use (e.g., a search on Apple Macintosh misses all the sites that just call the computer "Mac"). Second, I may not even know what terms to use or how to spell them, but like pornography I'll know good search hits when I see them.
What would help is some interactive process that directly asks or deduces whether the search hits are on target or not. The second page of hits would differ depending on how the searcher interacts with the first page -- giving the user more or fewer of pages similar to those they liked or didn't like respectively.
Search should be more like a game of "hot-n-cold" in which the searcher can easily tell the search engine which hits are "warmer" (more on target) or "cooler" (less on target).
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
In 1988, if you asked me what IBM does, I would say, "They make computers."
Because, while my mom owned a Compaq, my friend had an IBM at his house.
Now, it's 2005, and I find myself asking: "Just what exactly does IBM do do?"
Joel tells me that they make clear plastic telephones. One of my bosses say they provide "business solutions." This post seems to imply that they have something to do with search. Their website is indecypherable to me.
So, please, if someone could explain to me in plain language: What is IBM, and what does it do?
I'm aware of what Wikipedia says, but I'm interested in hearing what juicy nuggets local Slashdot readers may have to offer.
The best part of Zonk's post is the flashing ad from Sun below it: Given how hot and slow our competitor's servers are It's no surprise their name RHYMES WITH HELL The new industry standard x64 servers from Sun
They need to diversify. Having just one source of income is never a good idea.
Looks like Google is already diversifying at a good rate:
http://labs.google.com/
Is there a week that goes by that we do not hear something about Google?
Charles Jo
The mini has been very successful for many small-to-medium size business: Google Mini
And while the 1001 @ $30K is a bit more expensive, it has 5x the doc count, it has many more features... database crawl, feeds, multiple collections, secure doc crawl,etc.
We see now the genius of IBM's rise in tech sales. Who could resist buying the same best stuff any other salespeople sell you, if IBM sold it to you? And who better than IBM to tell you they understand what tech does what your company is working on, and what you'll need further down the road? Why sell IBM hard drives, computers or any other stuff that can break and make the customer think of a competitor to IBM? IBM can make money selling Google's system, integrated with IBM's own software or bundles of other vendors' software? As long as IBM is careful not to create competition for IBM's own brands that locks IBM out of a sales channel, like it did before with Microsoft, it can be everything to everyone. At the most powerful and lucrative point in the supply chain: at the customer.
--
make install -not war
From TFA:
IBM customers can use the Google-IBM search combination by buying IBM products and services and building their own in-house system or rely on IBM to create a pre-packaged system, tailored to the company's industry, the company said.
Does IBM websphere licensing or IBM Global Services even look at any any accounts under seven figures? (not sure, maybe they go as low as six figures) Seems like this would most likely be an incremental thing sold to existing websphere accounts--I can't see anyone embracing websphere just to get this search capability.
Remain calm! All is well!
IBM may find a few hundred additional patents they forgot they had, including one that patents internet searches.
Google buys out Novell, and takes SuSE Linux. Although they have their own specialized search appliances, SuSE would allow business administrators to have some level of control over an IBM/Google supplied server. Why? An IBM/Google based computing system. Imagine, your business uses applications, such as Google office, Google bookkeeping, scheduling, and so on and so forth in one office, or with all of your traveling sales reps. Web based, your system no longer would require VPN access for users to work away from the office.
What's more is, workstations can be made to be nothing more than a glorified web surfing machine for the basic business user. No ability to install applications on a local machine, and therefore no issues with spyware. It would help to combat viruses too. Simplifying IT for the many companies. And lowering costs as compared to a windows based infrastructure.
Google likely would lease equipment and services to businesses. Small businesses would only need an internet connection really. Lease Google equipment and pay monthly, no assets to pay taxes on, and monthly revenue for Google, and they would start with the Novell/ SuSE market share under their belt.
Please remember it's still only speculation, but I'm confident enough to get some shares in Novell. Interestingly enough, while talking about this to the other geeks up here, someone mentioned this, a worthy watch. (I saw this after I came up with my theory) Epic2014
"10001110101 - periodic table with a centerpiece of mind" -Clutch
In these parts, it's business process outsourcing. More than anything, that's what affects our economy.
So if it helps people search for jobs, that's a win.
Now Microsoft has a real reason to worry about Google.
Must...Figure...out...why.... desktop...search...not....working...must...call... .i...b....m.....
"Love is like pi - natural, irrational, and very important." (Lisa Hoffman)
Microsoft has to worry about Google? Why, because Google makes money off of ad revenue? And, er, ad revenue? Microsoft is a giant with its hands in a LOT of things. A lot of very PROFITABLE things. So far, Google has shown no real way of even sustaining itself. I'm not saying it won't happen, but it certainly hasn't yet. Honestly though, things like Linux and FOSS are FAR more thretening to Microsoft, and even that is a huge longshot. Microsoft is a giant, and the only thing going to bring down Microsoft is Microsoft itself. Please stop with the Google worship -- Yes, they do cool stuff, but they're not taking down Microsoft anytime soon.
Suggest you learn about the extra little "features and hacks" google has to offer. In actuality you can search by various different methods, date, only search on site, location, and all with just a few keywords. The different "search types" on google are not really different at all, i figure google just takes the stress of adding teh keywords. And one thing you do not realize is where you are looking. I know that when i search i get as specific as possible because "apple" will only leave me with millions of pages to look through. However "Apple Mac || Macintosh hardware" i limit my search. And if you are in the IT industry using "lingo" helps even more. Searching may be hard to get the knack of, but once you do, you'll never be the same ;/
Ever tried to find something in IBM WebSphere's InfoCenter with the internal search system? Good thing the InfoCenter is on the Web. The other day I spoke to an IBM engineer and he admitted, he never finds something with the InfoCenter search system and he also uses Google to search the WebSphere documentation. :)
On the other hand, it becomes a bit scary. We say, we "google" for information instead of we "search" for information. Where "to google" means you actually expect to find something useful (in the "stop searching, start finding" meaning). A bit more competition would be nice.
IBM's site is a nightmare. I'm glad Google teamed up with them. Now we can use Google hacks to find out all the important shit about AIX that we'd ever need. On a side note, Microsoft teams up with Apple to create new interface to piss off Google and IBM. Kid gets assassinated for making a 'Working Windows' virus. More news at 11.
For example, gbrowser.com is registered to Google inc. What else? googleos.com is not registered to Google inc., but probably to some leech. So Bill Gates doesn't have to loose too much sleep yet.. I heard that google want to go into the DB market. Well, googlesql.com is registered by some Korean guy. another leech probably. gsql.com is due to a company from the Cayman Islands. googledb.com and gdb.com (gdb.com?? (-:) are also not registered to google. So maybe they are not up to databases yet? Well, if they ever do a database, imagine the sql query will look like: 'get NAME where LASTNAME=XXX and IFEELLUCKY'... (pardon my sql French)
gphoto.biz is also registered to Google inc. Yeah, no joke. Why?? Your ideas will be appreciated!!
I started deploying X1 http://www.x1.com/ in a small company where I do the IT service and it beats every other desktop search appliance I tested. I haven't found one necessary file type it doesn't index and the reaction time is usually 1 second. I can't tell how well it works in larger network but for small companies it's really worth testing. I think the company will have their ROI in 4-8 weeks.
*an infinite number of monkeys wrote this sig
A U.S. Government employee (among others) signs a legally binding document that attempts to help make it clear to the employee what his legal responsibilities are with respect to protection of information that has not been formally cleared for public release. In addition, employees are expected to have and exercise good judgment and to be trusted by their employer on that basis. Of course there is a relatively small number of special cases, some of which make the national news media and others of which are never known outside a small circle much less publicly.
Doug Jensen
Thanks for making my point on two levels. First, a search of the term "fruit apple" (just the two words, not the phrase) discards about 3/4 of all pages dealing with apples (the fruit). The vast majority of pages that mention this fruit do not have the word "fruit" on them (this is a very common problem -- its so obvious to the page maker that the page is about fruit that they don't put that keyword anywhere on the page). This a one major problem with keyword search - sometimes the "best" keywords discard large numbers of relevant pages.
Second, yes I am lazy. That is the entire purpose of using a search engine -- to make it easy to find what I want to find.
The bigger issue is that keyword-based search is deeply flawed. Keywords only work to the extent that page creators use them uniformly -- which they don't (as the fruit apple example shows). I'd wager that just as many people fail to find what they want because of over specificity (using too many keywords) as fail due to over generality. Moreover, keywords only work to the extent that the searcher knows the keywords -- which they often don't if the entire point of the search is to learn something new.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
If you have to ask, you can't afford it.
--
$tar -xvf
autonomy.com
They can search into Lotus Notes databases, with security and so on.
HTH.