Search Me
|
Throughout 2006, Microsoft has modified its messaging about Windows Vista, to emphasize the value of search. Not so long ago, company execs touted new visual folder views much more. |
I recall sitting with some Microsoft product people in early 2005, discussing Windows Vista. During a review of features, they heavily pitched folder enhancements that would let people visually see the contents. They told me about new tools for better managing folders.
After awhile, I interrupted, "What about search?"
"Oh, we have search in Windows Vista," piped one product marketing manager. "We're going to show you that later." But at the time there wasn't enough to show, and they bored me some more with talk about folders.
"Search is the new user interface," I, again, butted in. "Nobody wants to hear about folders." We went on to a heated discussion about the value of folders versus search, with me arguing that folders are an outmoded motif.
"I challenge you to go to any fifth grade class and ask the kids what they want to be when they grow up," I urged. "None of those kids is going to say, 'Oh, I want to be a file clerk.'"
Fast forward 18 months, and those same people once droning on about folder enhancements now talk about how great Windows Vista search is. I've heard several people call the search capabilities behavioral changing. There is no disagreement from me. I got the search bug earlier from using Mac OS X's Spotlight utility.
Two Motifs to Information
During today's Office 2007 and Windows Vista launches in New York, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer also spoke about search capabilities—and folder views, too. "People suffer from information overland," and Microsoft has the tools to relieve some of that burden, he said.
No question, Windows Vista offers some amazing search tools. This evening I searched for "Adobe" in the Documents folder. The search pulled up some interesting matches—and quickly, I might add. Among the search results: four images of different Windows XP "Start Something" print ads. Huh? Someone had edited the images using Adobe Photoshop CS for the Macintosh, information captured in the images' metadata.
Still, the search capabilities are tied to the older folder motif. Microsoft expects that people will refine searches by using filters visible in file folders. During today's launch event, a Microsoft employee demonstrated some of the filter capabilities. Tonight, I couldn't re-create some of the filters demoed, which means they probably come from features of SharePoint Server 2007. If so, someone, ah, overlooked mentioning this dependency during the demonstration.
The SharePoint dependency is an unfortunate byproduct of Microsoft failing to deliver broad search capabilities promised with the WinFS file system. Microsoft chucked the file system, which promised to revolutionize how people access information by making meaning of disparate files, like a vacation calendar entry and photos taken at Disneyland.
Windows Vista search is pretty good. Office search is OK. To get the big search bang, particularly for Office, businesses will need SharePoint Server 2007. Those aforementioned file folder enhancements are always available in a pinch, too—and they are handy. The visual representation of documents lets the user see them in a fashion reminiscent of paper documents. The person sees something familiar, rather than wondering over an arcane file name.
Strangers on a Train
While working on this post, traveling by train from New York to Washington, I couldn't resist eavesdropping on the man and woman sitting in the sideways seats. The two people, who met on the train, discussed informational access problems at their respective companies.
The woman's company used several products that were poorly integrated. "Shouldn't the CFO and sales force use the same applications?" she asked her seat mate.
"Common platform is what we all struggle with," he responded. He went on to explain how arduous it is sometimes to get at information and share it among different sales teams.
"What salesperson doesn't have to do activity reports?" the woman asked. She then went on to describe how she keeps "Word perpetually open, and I cut and paste from Salesforce"—meaning Salesforce.com.
Apparently, her organization requires that activity reports be generated in Word. Once in Word, however, "I can't move it back to Salesforce," she exasperated. She explained that when the company used ACT!, a desktop application with some Word integration capabilities, she didn't have problems completing activity reports.
After taking a brief BlackBerry break, the man and woman resumed their conversation. The woman was peeved about a phone call she just finished.
"When you sell out here," she said extending her arms, "but you can only show out to here"—pulling back her arms—"what are you going to do?"
The two people went on to, again, discuss their informational access problems.
About 10 minutes later, the man switched the topic to search and questioned whether it could solve some of the informational problems. "Surely, search is a solution," he told the woman.
She rolled her eyes.
Comments (17)
Joe... do me (and all the other people who stupidly read MS Watch) and go over to Linux Watch will you, your talent for CONTINUALLY knocking ANYTHING to do with ANY microsoft product will go totally un-noticed there.
Tell us why you bother to write any articles at all for MS Watch when you are so much biased against them, fair enough when they need it, BUT YOU DO IT ALL THE TIME !
And quite frankly even when you have some good points in some of your arguements, you are TOTALLY BIASED !
Level content is required mate, your so called "conversation" is pure dribble and most likely non factual (in otherwords... made up) so as to reinforce YOUR point of view.
I feel that with the Linux people you would be well and truly at home !
Lastly let me say that I have nothing against Linux, or MAC people but you certainly are one of them !
Posted by Neil | November 30, 2006 10:47 PM
Do us a favor JOE. Write a book about how stupid you are where you have no clue about Microsoft products.
Seriously, if I see another article of this, I would ask my friends to not visit this site anymore.
Posted by Omen Jack | November 30, 2006 11:40 PM
Nice post, you totally nailed the issue. It's much improved but the real question does integrated search give MSFT the home court advantage over Google?
Posted by Michael | November 30, 2006 11:45 PM
You might want to check out ; http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/robert/archive/2006/12/01/vista-and-office-2007-search-is-not-dependent-on-sharepoint.aspx
Dont blame microsoft because you cant work an easy, REALLY easy, to use feature.
Posted by azz0r | December 1, 2006 6:44 AM
Thank you "azzOr" I knew this guy couldn't do a proper write up and now you have gone and proved it !
JOE this just shows that not everyone can be fooled by you, you ought to resign and go somewhere else because you have just been shown up for the biased person that you are !
Go to somewhere where they will appreciate a "MS Basher" MAC World or Linux World !
Here mate you have LOST any credability that you may have had !!
I am not a knowledgable person as far as windows is concerned but I knew from the time that you first started at "Microsoft watch" that I would have to "watch" YOU, and now you have been found completely wanting !
Posted by Neil | December 1, 2006 7:03 AM
I agree with the other posts, you suck Joe, plz someone responsible from this blog, at least someone that cares about the product, either do something or we will go away, we have to stand up with guys like this that invented everything and knew everything and the rest of the world is just stupid compared to them.
Posted by sick of the new MS watch | December 1, 2006 9:23 AM
Please, go back to posting unfounded comments on digg (you sound just like the clueless me-to's from there). As everyone else seems to realize, this "article" goes to show how unfounded and wrong your views are. I mean to go from "I couldn't figure out filtering" to "maybe it has a dependency" to "the SharePoint dependency is an unfortunate byproduct of Microsoft failing to deliver broad search capabilities promised with the WinFS file system".
Hold on their Einstein. Your amazing powers of deduction just swept past me. Did you just go from "I'm an idiot who can't watch a video and follow the steps" to "I am going to state for certain what I just made up in my little mind"? And you get paid for that??
Posted by Nate | December 1, 2006 9:53 AM
Joe,
Just because you couldn't figure out how to use the dang product doesn't make it a failure.
WinFS is not a silver bullet. It is absolutely not required to perform the types of relevant searches you're talking about.
Posted by MikeB | December 1, 2006 10:20 AM
Joe -- the name-calling comments from people responding to your posts are disappointing, especially because they keep coming from the same people.
"Neil" et al -- Joe is a former analyst with Jupiter. As an analyst who competes with his former employer I have always respected his insight and intellect. I am quite sure that he is not being paid to report, but to call them as he sees them. Those opinions, often shaped by direct face-to-face interaction with Microsoft management, are clearly different than yours.
if you don't like what Joe is writing, then don't bother reading. This is a blog, not the Associated Press. The continued "you suck" posts are childish.
Posted by Andrew | December 1, 2006 12:26 PM
Name calling is really easy to avoid. Don't post BS as fact. Don't make stuff up and then claim it's true. To do so, on a public forum, is shear idiocy. That isn't name calling. That's fact.
If he had left it at "I personally couldn't get the search and filter functions working like I had seen advertised. Does anyone have any suggestions as to where I might be going wrong?" that would have been one thing. But to jump right onto that MS-bashing bandwagon that seems so popular and go from "I couldn't get search working" to "Vista fails to deliver on search because it requires Sharepoint" is just lame. I am surprised he didn't manage to sneak in "and I love my iPod better than the Zune" or "I installed Ubuntu on a laptop last weekend".
Posted by Nate | December 1, 2006 1:00 PM
Andrew, I agree with you in part - the author is free to express his opinion and that the readers can walk away if they don't like it. However, as a person who has been reading articles regularly on MS watch, it is personally disappointing to see such low quality and substance recent articles carry - ever since Mary Jo left.
Walk away, we will, surely. But we will voice a few protests on the way out - and we will do so because it is a blog and not Associated Press and it is more open to feedback, good and bad.
Posted by Nathan | December 1, 2006 1:14 PM
Hi Joe, tough audience. As a search software vendor a common theme we hear is that companies view search as a low cost Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) layer. Stay with me here. Accurate, secure search is not expensive, and features and functions aside, when the search works well it can securely expose any number of disparate repositories in effect linking applications for more complete information for decisions and tasks.
On a related note the reason search is more pervasive as a enterprise topic is it is user non-hostile. Folders, and technology stacks aside it is; Keyword = result.
Posted by enegler | December 1, 2006 6:44 PM
I would like to "walk away" from "Microsoft Watch" BUT... then who would expose Joe (and other writers like him) for the non professionals that they are. Sure you don't need "professional" journalists to write for MS Watch but you do need people who are UNBIASED and write a properly researched article when they do wite them... or do people want to fooled by this sort of person who is quite obviously BIASED against microsoft, sure MS needs a "kick in the pants" when it does something wrong, but Joe Willcox (and reporters like him) are just out to rubbish MS no matter what they do !
I'll still be here watching the "so called" MS Watchers, trying to make them report the TRUTH of what they report on !
I am no computer wiz myself but I know when the truth is the truth or not, and after all isn't that what people like Joe are "supposed" to be writing here !
Posted by Neil | December 2, 2006 5:19 AM
i dont no y i read all this, its half an hour til midnight here in melbourne.
Posted by puppet | December 3, 2006 7:33 AM
Andrew: Why do you lie? Everyone knows that before this Joe Wilcox did a circus act where he ate pins and nails and then threw them back up. Plus I think he killed a guy once.
Posted by Sweet Loretta Modern | December 3, 2006 1:55 PM
The FUD from Joe is really starting to get to me as an MS Watch reader as well. MS Watch will definately lose some subscribers if this Microsoft heckling from Joe keeps up.
Wasn't this a site oriented to looking at the new Microsoft products and business moves? Since when did this become a site for touting Google / Mac / Linux as the saving grace of computing?
I wonder if applied for Scoble's position and was turned down and is now trying to reap vengence upon MSFT through mswatch...
Posted by Gus | December 4, 2006 12:02 AM
Here Here Gus !
I totally agree with you !
Joe Wilcox by all his posts to Microsoft Watch has shown himself to be a person who is biased against Microsoft no matter what they do.
I would not mind so much if it was "balanced" but so far EVERY article that he has done has "put down" microsoft in some way or another.
He should not be writing articles for microsoft watch at all ... I feel !
The site is "Microsoft Watch" and not "microsoft ABUSE" !
I am by no means biased "towards" microsoft but when I see the articles that Joe writes about them and their products ...someone has to take a stand and say "Biased reporting CANNOT be tolerated".
Posted by Neil | December 4, 2006 9:54 PM