Joe Cincotta: Thoughts and such…

Icon

Nerdism for the masses.

Multilingual Searching is not International Searching

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/helpful-suggestions-around-globe.html

I was reading this status update post from the Google team and it made me think about multilingual searching. The deeper issue of globalization is not necessarily the language – its the character set. The character set is what makes searching for Russian content from a computer in the United States very difficult. You need to set up your keyboard language to Russian and then try to figure out how to make all the symbols. This probably doesn’t seem like a big deal to someone in the United States, however when you work for a multinational company in Europe it really is.

About four years ago I was working on a project which was using the early version of BizBlox and the client was NASDAQ listed with US offices but the primary user group was a European food conglomerate. The system I was developing managed advertising assets for over 2000 brands across about ten different languages. The core problem was that some of the most important people searching the system were based in the United States and they didn’t know anything about character sets or international search – but they knew what they wanted because they knew what the words ‘looked like’.

The solution was actually really simple. For every latin based character set (non Asian, Aramaic or Sanskrit) there are similarities in letterform which can be assigned to a standard ‘sort-of’ equivalent US keyboard character or combination thereof. This solution was about leveraging the visual recognition of the end user against the foreign character set – so sometimes – especially with the Greek character set – there is more than one character which can match (not necessarily a one to one relationship between letterform similarity). The BizBlox codebase to this day has the simple version of the visual-multi-lingual character mapping table in its very simple search engine.

This concept is by no means original – it has existed for as long as multiple symbol sets and languages have… the real idea here is that there is more than one way to recognize symbols of other languages and all of them should be treated equally. To the untrained eye is the word ἄβουλος transcoded to the English character set as aboulos or abovaos? It should not matter.

By using this idea in a search query it means that – in its simplest form – a search for the letter e in a word could also find words containing è, é, ê, or ë – or using a much more complex example – a search for a word with the letters TH, T or O could find a word with the letter Ɵ in it (the Greek letter Theta).

So how does this have anything to do with Google? Well, the suggestion feature allows for powerful and truely global search -but by adding this multi-directional character search context to suggestions it would be powerful across borders as well as inside them.

[Updated a ping back to a new article which outlines some of the ideas made in this post over a year ago. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/our-international-approach-to-search.html ]

Filed under: BizBlox, Google, Industry Opinion

The Great 3G/Next-G Data Scam

Telstra to Double NextG Speed

Read the article and then realize that every standard Telstra plan would use up their allocated monthly data in about half a second. Thats right, customers still only have 1MB allocated in their plans and that also means that if you go and download something using standard data (as opposed to their bandwidth rich video on demand service) you could be paying about $30 PER SECOND!

That’s right, the Next G pay as you go data plans (which are bundled with everyone’s standard phone plan) are charging $15 per MEGABYTE meanwhile, you can watch streaming video which is a multi-megabyte exercise with a cap of 200 MINUTES for $12 a month! Does this seem a little strange to anyone else?

Don’t think that Three, Optus, Vodafone or Virgin do things any differently – its the same story of extortion for business users trying to actually do something with mobile devices other than watch TV or download music. If you ever wonder why it takes so long for innovation on mobile devices, I think I have the answer right here.

Filed under: Industry Opinion

You Don’t Get Gears!

Well, maybe you do, but there seems to be a heck of a lot of people out there who don’t. Feast your eyes on this article in the Sydney Morning Herald for example.

Developers are comparing this technology to ‘offline web pages’ provided by Internet Explorer but I’m afraid that just like Google Maps, its going to take a little time before people catch on.

So what is it?

Well, think about Gears as a proxy which sits between an AJAX web application and the web server which is providing the application. This proxy can serve up the application with its online functionality and transactional data through an intermediary web server to provide the XMLHttpRequest functionality from a local webserver. The intermediary technology is accessible to the web application througha browser plug-in which provides a rich persistance and sync library for the web application to use so it can intelligently work with Gears.

You can already see that this is not a technology for the feint hearted.

So whats the deal with Gears? Well, its more than just about going offline – its about reliability. Look at the background of Google – where have they invested millions and millions of dollars? Answer: In web applications. There are many issues with deploying web applications and if they are the bread and butter of a business as big as Google, it makes sense for them to create a platform which makes browser based applications act as first class citizens on desktop computers.

So what are the issues hindering web applications from becoming first class citizens on the desktop?

First of all, of course – offline capabilities. This is the selling point for Gears, but its deeper than just ‘road warriors’ needing this to sync when they get an internet connection. Its about application reliability. Internet connections by their nature are unreliable. There are too many points of weakness in the fabric of application delivery to guarantee performance to a desktop or a laptop. Providing a local proxy for the application the way Gears does may add a layer of complexity in development, but it also REMOVES a layer of complexity in crazy error handling for all the situations where the XMLHttpRequest can freak out and fail because the connection was just dropped or partially lost for no apparent reason. This reliability makes for a robust experience which business users demand.

Secondly its all about performance. Gears is not just a technology, platform or a plug-in. Its an entire shift in metaphor. It truly is moving to an Internet Operating System. Any complex application can be installed in to the Gears proxy server which allows the web application being installed to be non-trivial, with no installation process. The performance of the application becomes that of a local application.

When the performance of the application becomes comparable to traditional ‘desktop’ applicatons and the weak point of reliability of the persistance layer is also diminished it makes for any web application to be a first class citizen on the PC desktop. At the same time it is making the native computer’s operating system irrelevant by using the ubiquitous browser as the delivery platform.

If Gears catches on, it will fundamentally change the way we use the web for delivering application functionality and shape the next generation of browser platform.

Filed under: Industry Opinion

Google Apps Redux: The Wishlist…

After using Google Apps for the Enterprise for nearly two months I have rounded up everyones key likes and dislikes and combined them all in a single blog entry with the key desirables which should be in upcoming versions of Google Apps. 

  1. Notebook
    This tool kicks the ass of OneNote to the CURB! How is it not in the Google Apps package? Notebook is the essential meeting tool. As Google Notebook has native sharing built in which is the half baked ‘killer app’ of OneNote today, all you can do is email your meeting notes.

    Imagine then, using the real time collaboration that Google Notebook provides with the ability to share notes amongst team members or external users you invite in – and the ‘view only’ mode which does not require a login is just brilliant as it is.   Anyways, it should be in Google Apps.

  2. GMail: Checkboxes on Labels
    It sounds so simple. If the mail labels had checkboxes next them to control visibility the  you would be able to see your emails as if you had multiple folders.
  3. GMail: Keyboard Controls
    GMail is so intuitive until you try to use a keyboard and then you feel like you’re using VI or some other unix command line tool with insane keyboard shortcuts. This should be replaced with commonsense keyboard shortcuts as well as cursor key controls and delete key (delete selected message)
  4. Start: Moving ToDo Widget data (Tasks) from GPrefs to its own proper place
    GPrefs is a sort of data limbo where widgets from the start page store their data when you play with them on your Google Apps account Start page. Think of how the Start page remembers which feed widgets you have placed on the screen and your scrap book and other things. This data is unstructured and therefore can not really have anything useful done with it. ToDo (Tasks) should be a first class citizen just like on every other organizer platform around. It should also have its own API for third party integration.
  5. Providing a native Google SyncML platform for Contacts, Calendar and Tasks
    How could this not exist? I am shocked. Part of being in the enterprise of today is the ability to be mobile. SMEs need this like air.
  6. At least providing API support for Contacts
    Even if Google does not want to get in to this mobile sync (SyncML) development space, there are a lot of vendors out there trying to bridge the gap such as GooSync – which upon a second attempt is brilliant!One notable void is the reliable sync of contact data. It makes sense that we would want to centralize and sync this data along with calendar and tasks between our email applications, online and PDA/Phones – there is very strong strong demand for this feature. Why no API?
  7. Documents: PLEASE allow any files to be shared using Google Documents (not just Doc and XLS)If you have a list of downloadable files, why not make it more like a filesystem with more granular control over sharing. I know that this would not be a high priority as most companies would have a problem with keeping their corporate documents in an off site repository – but its an idea that has got legs for a lot of SMEs who would use the version management, audit trail and backup capability of Google to give them a huge leg up. The cost of implementing those tools in the enterprise reliably is very high – even with FUD tools like Sharepoint.This would also align with the web only approach of Google, allowing for more and more web 2.0 friendly viewers for different doc formats to come online as time progressed – and possibly editors. Imagine if you could use something like Gliffy to view and edit your Visio documents online, or a DXF editor to allow for model touch-ups when you are on location. 

    This is why my original critique of Google Docs still holds true – there needs to be a central place for file management, not just one kind of file – it is too disjointed to be a reliable solution for business insofar as being a document management system – and it is not reliable, compatable or complete enough to be a replacement for Microsoft Office. It is still looking for a home…

 Well there you go, our thoughts on getting Google Apps to the next level.

Filed under: Industry Opinion

Norton says ‘No’ to Nopey

Looks like the days of Nopey are numbered! As of Friday last week, Norton Anti Virus signatures classified Nopey as a malicious hacking tool and the default action was to quarantine it. No doubt other vendors will quickly follow suit.

In reality, Nopey is a system management tool which is invaluable in performing low-level operating system actions using high level shell tools. For example, we used to use Nopey in our NSIS scripts to kill running instances of an application or force a PC restart. I can see how it is extremely powerful - and as such potentially dangerous, but the question has to be asked; at what point is a utility classified as malicious? And why would the classification for a freely available tool change now?

We have used Nopey in various guises in production installers for over three years and only now has its classification been changed. Admittedly, we have not used this application in our broadly released commercial application installers (for precisely the reason it has been reclassified by Symantec) and instead use more specific tools for the job like the ones from the guys at Beyond Logic.

How much control do security vendors really have over our desktop? Maybe too much.

Filed under: Industry Opinion, Open Source, Software Development

Drinking the CeBIT Kool Aid

Keynote

Well, its been a few solid hours on the floor here and I have mixed emotions. The general theme of the show – set by the CeBIT director’s keynote – is that the technology industry in Australia is somewhat fragmented. It seems we suffer somewhat by our level of expertise combined with geographic isolation. Our ability to build community around geographic centers of innovation is limited.

We seem to be devoid of a ‘Silicon Valley’, we don’t seem to have a communal focus outside of universities where technology breeds as a natural occurance here. So we miss out on the innovation that occurs between the lines in the cross pollination of ideas of like minded people in a community environment. Yet there is a wealth of brilliant minds doing amazing things.

This issue is something which both government and industry bodies are trying to resolve. The government in Australian at every level – federal, state and local – is aimed at supporting the development of a local ICT community and supporting this innovation. There is testament to this beyond the lip service delivered in the keynote… There were several huge stands supported by state and federal government programmes showing the products of their incubation. You have to understand that Federal and State governments are opposing parties: both have a committment to supporting the growth of the ICT sector.

In running Pixolüt Industries, business incubation is a subject dear to my heart and this subject seems to be one of the underlying themes of the show. As well as a huge number of exhibitors placed locally who are the subject of government support, there are also government export support programmes. The ‘export alley’ was another great place to see, watch and learn from. 

Another interesting facet of the exhibition is that there are a set of large booths dedicated to technology investment projects from all over the world including Germany, South Africa and the United Kingdom have turned up here looking at cross pollination of ICT investment across boarders.

It will be interesting to see how this community focus evolves over the next 12 months for local investment, export support and global partnerships. One thing I can guarantee is that it is my focus of attention over that period and I will write about my findings in dealing with both governement and industry bodies.

Google Keynote

Moving on to the micro; I am excited by the keynotes and calibre of speaker we have seen here this morning. I was ecstatic that Google had corporate representation. It was quite funny to feel like Dave Girouard was preaching to the converted – but as you can see from our previous post on the Google Apps for the Enterprise review – we’re already sucking up the kool-aid and we have had positive reactions to it overall (even though there are of course some reservations). It was also great to see an insight in to how the open source movement operates within some kinds of economic framework; both in the keynote from Mitchell Baker and also from speaking with some very interesting people in the Open CeBIT area of the show.

The volume of trade on the floor was great, but I could not help but feel a voice harking back to that keynote. The spectrum of technology was so diverse that it seemed no one area within the industry had a really solid coverage of exhibitors – with one exception. VoIP.

Let me tell you a little secret; VoIP in both residential and business guise within the Australian market is a tidal wave breaking. Critical mass. The amount of buzz around this technology in services, in consumer devices, in commercial PABX technology – even within the open source community with TrixBox and Asterix hardware is immense. The flow on effect of the VoIP tidal wave is in networking infrastructure. The role of the delivery infrastructure for data has been reborn with the wave of VoIP and this has had a hugely positive effect for the sectore locally and I think we should see benefits of rapid uptake flow on to the broader ISP sector within 3 months. SMEs are also starting to see the real benefit of this technology in reducing exploding business communication costs.

So thats round one. More tomorrow when I have had a chance to go through my library of marketing materials which I gathered. In the mean time I have a days worth of work to be done over night and need to make a start on it…

Filed under: Industry Opinion

CeBIT Foreplay

Off we go to the official launch of CeBIT. I’m at the show as an official ‘blogger’ which is quite a novelty as I am certainly no journalist – just a highly opinionated member of the software development industry.

 That being said, there is plenty here to look at from many facets of the industry, so its going to be tough expressing an opinion about everything, but as usual – I will focus on the micro and the macro. It is my intention that by coming here I can zoom in on a few great exhibitions and presentations and also look at the greater trends emerging in the Australian industry.

 Off we go… 

Filed under: Industry Opinion

Why does my application throw up UAC dialogs?

We recently launched the iTOK HelpDesk R3 for all the wonderful supporters of iTOK. The new application has an integrated mini-app which removed a lot of complexity of the old application by setting up the customer account on its first use. This little wizard is not a setup application, its just called helpdesksetup.exe and is invoked from the helpdesk.exe core application when it cannot get login details.

The release of the HelpDesk R3 was released at the same time as the release of Vista. We have performed testing with several of the Microsoft release candidates to ensure compatibility prior to its deployment, but it certainly was not the focus of our testing. The testing did all seem to go well, so we finally went live. Then something strange happened. On Vista, the first time the application was run would throw up a UAC dialog. This never happened on the release candidates we had tested on and I was shocked. There was no reason this executable should throw a UAC dialog – it didn’t need admin privlegdes!

After much brow beating and consternation I accidentally stumbled upon the answer. I was listening to the fabulous PodCast called Security Now by Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte and I heard about the kludge which is how UAC treats installers… it checks the executables filename to determine if it should throw up the UAC dialog before executing it – even without knowing what the installer does.

h-e-l-l-o

All of a sudden the pieces fell in to place. If I simply RENAME MY EXECUTABLE it will no longer bring up the UAC dialog. I’m sorry, but that is pretty lame for a uni undergrad project let alone a commercial operating system.

[UPDATE]

There was another article on this issue in The Register which sparked furious debate. There is a comment and trackback to this article in there. 

Filed under: Industry Opinion, Software Development

First Impressions: Google Apps for the Enterprise

Pixolüt runs a lot of great IT infrastructure for such a small shop – but there were a few issues which we started running in to which we felt could be better handled by having a centralized cost-effective solution for email, calendar, contact management.

I chose to move to Google Apps for the Enterprise and it was a very painless transition from our existing hosting/POP scenario with disconnected calendars. I simply set up the DNS entries for the Google servers to resolve our host header aliases and then used the WYSIWYG tools to create our home portal page and set up the app configurations and users. All told it was a deployment which took 4 hours from start to finish.

Now, here are my impressions of each of the key areas of the GA suite:

1. GMail
2. Calendar
3. Home/Start portal page
4. Web pages
5. Google Docs
6. Google Chat
7. Administration

GMail 
GMail has a great minimal web user interface – but it is now a good generation behind other web mail technologies out there.

Pixolut ishosting with an Australian company called Destra, we do this to improve local performance for .au web sites which we host. We used their POP services to handle our email and they royally sucked. The webmail user interface was absolute trash and had not been updated since 1996. So GMail was very much in the lead on this front – but if you look at other less decrepit hosts, for example GoDaddy webmail, they make you feel more like you are using Outlook – and after using the GoDaddy webmail services for some time going to GMail webmail is most certainly a step BACKWARDS.

Now, even thoughthe GMail UI is simplistic and maybe a bit limiting by todays standards, it is certainly powerful and fast. The real benefit is in the underlying features of external POP sync and bundled POP/SMTP services which allow you to use Outlook or any other email client with GMail, and the performance of Google email is so much better than any other host out there – that is, less bounces sending and less bounced emails receiving with a near 100% correct hit rate for SPAM emails. It really is quality engineering under the surface and you can feel it.

The ‘contacts’ feature of GMail is underdeveloped with very very limited capabilities for import and export and at this point I do not think that any third party app which connects to Google Apps allows for sync with Outlook (or other PIMs) or OTA sync for cell phones. I am hedging bets that this feature will be available soonish as there will undoubtedly be huge demand for it – but right now this is a WEAKNESS. Enterprise users need one repository of contact information and calendar information and if it cannot be accessed on mobile devices and synced to multiple PIM solutions including mobile devices like PDAs and cell phones then there is a problem. 

Calendar
This was a huge drawcard for us – the Google calendar is by far the most powerful feature of the Google Apps suite and really shines. It has a snappy user interface, it allows you to share calendars and overlay existing calendars (such as public holidays and the like). We love it.

The only down side of the Calendar is the same thing as mentioned with contacts regarding import/export and sync. There is a third party solution called GooSyncwhich can do OTA sync of calendar entries with cell phones and PDAs -but I was not impressed with its performance on first use. NOTE: This may not be the fault of GooSync; I need to try clearing out my cell phone calendar completely to give it a fair chance as the issueI had was that entries which were deleted from the web calendar did not delete on the phone – this is a common problem with SYNCML implementations.

Home/Start portal page
Very nice indeed – we have a home portal which acts like the Google home page. You can create custom widgets – like links to company systems – or use applications like world clock or todo list or sticky notes. All in all, this is killer functioanlity to create a central place of cohesion for the enterprise which can link all business systems and act as a starting place for employees.

Web pages
Useless for us, but very small businesses may find this useful. I have no conclusions on this functionality at this point.

Google Docs
I was really not too stoked about this – I think its half baked – not that it isn’t a powerful solution for editing online docs, but that its too single minded for real business content.

The thing that makes Microsoft Sharepoint a killer web app is that it can store any kind of document and organize it in a structured filesystem – and when its time to edit docs which it knows how to – it provides access to the appropriate editor. If Google Docs allowed users to upload anything and structure their content more like a document management system – with the features of the online word processing and spreadsheet editors as peripheral features then I would see immense value. Right now, useless. 

Chat
The chat feature is a bit lost on me – I can certainly see huge value, but we use Skype and the ability for us to make ad-hoc voice calls, video conferences or chat with one application made this simple tool somewhat redundant. Now, I know that Google Chat is adding voice and video services but since we already use Skype for our US phone services it made little sense to migrate to this application. I would reserve judgement at this point. Some businesses may indeed find this indispensable.

Administration
In the Google tradition the management of the system is very very simple. The minimalist user interface hides the complexity of managing the setup and there are enough power tools on there to simplify integration even for more abitious administrators who want single sign on capabilities or bulk user creation.

There you go – I hope this helped you get some independant point of view if you are considering a migration to the Google Apps for the Enterprise suite. Overall I highly recommend it but it is certainly early days. As these tools evolve we will find an extremely powerful solution for IT administrators of the SME.
 

Filed under: hosting, Industry Opinion

Crytek CryEngine2 Game Engine

Fresh from GDC’07 is the amazing game engine from Crytek used in their upcoming game Crysis. From what I can tell Crytek is an EA dev studio – and you have to really give these guys props for such an amazing engine. I have no idea how many guys are working on this dev team – but from the looks of it, its pretty neat. Some of the physics could be tidier (dynamic building damage) but all up as a package it really is amazing.

Filed under: design, Industry Opinion

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.