I won't subject you (or me!) to another 4 month blog hiatus, but... my life is increasingly busy, so updates may be sparse for a while. As an example, this week (in addition to continuing to work two jobs as usual...), here's my schedule:
- Mon: Auditioning for a Stanford performing group
- Tue: Dinner with a friend, Halloween party
- Wed: Another Halloween party + dancing
- Thu: Swing dancing at the 9:20 Special
- Fri: Halloween party
- Sat: Birthday party
- Sun: Swing dancing in the park
I'm also working on a substantial academic-type paper on Social Networking (will publish it or a link here soon, hopefully!), beta testing some very cool but complex services, and doing advance-research/reading for a fascinating conference I'm attending in less than two weeks.
So this week, I'll be (as usual) getting up around 7am for my first job, working up 'til lunch, going to my afternoon job, then heading off straight from there to an audition or party or dance, getting home around midnight, and doing it all again. In the meantime, I suppose if I leave my dishes in the sink long enough, helpful and friendly bacteria will eat the food scrap remains, eliminating the need for me to either buy a dishwasher, hire a dishwasher, or dishwash in my sleep. Hey, I already outsource my laundry :D. Don't think I'll be able to outsource sleep, though. I guess that's what lunchbreaks are for.
In the meantime, thanks for sticking by my blog through thick and thin and, uh, long periods of emptiness. And yeah, I'll clean up the UI soon, with or without the help of e-bacteria. :-)
Sunday, October 24, 2004
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Odd signs and other miscellaneous tidbits
The other night at Stanford, I noticed a sign on the wall of their Roble Gym: "Maximum Occupancy 299"
What's up with that? I mean, really, who decides this sort of thing? Do they actually do a test of some sort? "Okay, people... 295, 296, 297... alright, squish in a bit more... 298, 299... come on... almost there... aaaaaaaaaaghhhhh!"
Or is it less fun and more devious than that?
"Hmm... the laws say that if we allow 300 or more people in here at once, we have to install a hypermodular rotor'd thingamabob, and that would be bad. Ah ha! I got it! Let's just say that we can only fit 299. What are the inspectors going to do, actually test it? There are only 247 inspectors around here anyway... ha!"
* * *
I see head-scratching signs when I drive, too. The other day during my oh-so-fun commute from San Francisco to Mountain View, I noticed a sign for Fashion Island. I almost took the exit, but I was wearing kinda ratty jeans, and -- not wanting to be the first person kicked off the island -- I just drove straight to work instead.
Which raises another question. Is there any relation between Fashion Island and Fantasy Island? Is the latter where people go when they only DREAM they have a sense of style? If so, -- de plane, de plane! -- here, I come!
And then, also on my commute, is the Air Museum. What I want to know is how they display the specimens. Behind air-tight glass? If so, geez, where's the fun in that? Can't touch it, can't smell it... no fun at all.
Still, though, I've pondered about what exhibits I might find there.
"Air Through the Ages"
"The Seismic and Combustible Potential of Flatulent Air" (I wonder what they pay for sample contributions?)
"Air from Politicians" (WARNING: May be superheated!)
One good thing is that, since air takes little space, they probably have a lot more room for people in this museum. They may not even need a maximum occupancy sign!
What's up with that? I mean, really, who decides this sort of thing? Do they actually do a test of some sort? "Okay, people... 295, 296, 297... alright, squish in a bit more... 298, 299... come on... almost there... aaaaaaaaaaghhhhh!"
Or is it less fun and more devious than that?
"Hmm... the laws say that if we allow 300 or more people in here at once, we have to install a hypermodular rotor'd thingamabob, and that would be bad. Ah ha! I got it! Let's just say that we can only fit 299. What are the inspectors going to do, actually test it? There are only 247 inspectors around here anyway... ha!"
* * *
I see head-scratching signs when I drive, too. The other day during my oh-so-fun commute from San Francisco to Mountain View, I noticed a sign for Fashion Island. I almost took the exit, but I was wearing kinda ratty jeans, and -- not wanting to be the first person kicked off the island -- I just drove straight to work instead.
Which raises another question. Is there any relation between Fashion Island and Fantasy Island? Is the latter where people go when they only DREAM they have a sense of style? If so, -- de plane, de plane! -- here, I come!
And then, also on my commute, is the Air Museum. What I want to know is how they display the specimens. Behind air-tight glass? If so, geez, where's the fun in that? Can't touch it, can't smell it... no fun at all.
Still, though, I've pondered about what exhibits I might find there.
"Air Through the Ages"
"The Seismic and Combustible Potential of Flatulent Air" (I wonder what they pay for sample contributions?)
"Air from Politicians" (WARNING: May be superheated!)
One good thing is that, since air takes little space, they probably have a lot more room for people in this museum. They may not even need a maximum occupancy sign!
Life-B-here
"What I really want is Life-B-Here."
- Mitch Altman, creator of the TV-B-Gone, a keychain device that turns off nearly any TV in the surrounding area
Saturday, October 16, 2004
Too shy or lazy to sneak peeks in the bookstore? Here's Google to the rescue.
I know that Google Print -- Google's initiative to scan and place online full-text and searchable book pages -- is not really new news.
But tonight is the first time I recall actually seeing a book result within a regular Google search:
One thing that's both interesting and refreshing to note is that Google does not get a kickback from any book sales. As usual, it makes money solely off the clearly-marked paid ads on the right-hand side of its pages.
(But sorry, folks, a search for Kama Sutra doesn't yield any book hits).
But tonight is the first time I recall actually seeing a book result within a regular Google search:
One thing that's both interesting and refreshing to note is that Google does not get a kickback from any book sales. As usual, it makes money solely off the clearly-marked paid ads on the right-hand side of its pages.
(But sorry, folks, a search for Kama Sutra doesn't yield any book hits).
A gym jolt
Recently I decided to FINALLY go back to the gym.
Looking through the schedule, I settled on a "Camp 24" class. I figured, how bad could camp be? You know, Camp Snoopy, leisure camping, and so on.
D'oh. It was a BOOT CAMP class!
Hurdling, crab walks, squats, 5,132,781 pushups, situps, and so on. Ouch ouch ouch ouch!
Boy am I sore!
One of the interesting parts was when the instructor -- a so-adorable-why-is-she-teaching-this-class woman -- explained just why we were there.
"To help you get through this... think of your spouse! This is the way you appeal to your spouse... getting all toned, fit, full of energy..."
"But what if we don't have a spouse!" I stammered, in between situps.
"Pray!" she suggested.
"To get a spouse, or to get through this class?" I persisted.
"Both," she answered.
Looking through the schedule, I settled on a "Camp 24" class. I figured, how bad could camp be? You know, Camp Snoopy, leisure camping, and so on.
D'oh. It was a BOOT CAMP class!
Hurdling, crab walks, squats, 5,132,781 pushups, situps, and so on. Ouch ouch ouch ouch!
Boy am I sore!
One of the interesting parts was when the instructor -- a so-adorable-why-is-she-teaching-this-class woman -- explained just why we were there.
"To help you get through this... think of your spouse! This is the way you appeal to your spouse... getting all toned, fit, full of energy..."
"But what if we don't have a spouse!" I stammered, in between situps.
"Pray!" she suggested.
"To get a spouse, or to get through this class?" I persisted.
"Both," she answered.
Friday, October 15, 2004
Someone's either really stupid or a VERY strange fetishist
So here I am, alone on a Friday night, thinking about deep issues such as global prosperity, world peace, and...
Oh, who am I fooling. I'm thinking about... computer stuff, and I'm looking through all the e-mail I've not yet dealt with.
One message particularly caught my eye: "Adam, let's get to know each other."
Hell, yeah, I could take a break from my computer for something like that! ;-)
That is, until I noticed who had sent the note:
Well I don't know about you, but that pretty well killed the mood for me right there. I realize that there are all sorts of people into weird, uh, stuff, but seriously...!
Either I was just hit by the world's dumbest spammer, or he/she was aiming for a niche that I don't even want to think about.
Oh, who am I fooling. I'm thinking about... computer stuff, and I'm looking through all the e-mail I've not yet dealt with.
One message particularly caught my eye: "Adam, let's get to know each other."
Hell, yeah, I could take a break from my computer for something like that! ;-)
That is, until I noticed who had sent the note:
Well I don't know about you, but that pretty well killed the mood for me right there. I realize that there are all sorts of people into weird, uh, stuff, but seriously...!
Either I was just hit by the world's dumbest spammer, or he/she was aiming for a niche that I don't even want to think about.
Lipless lesbians (there's Something About Mary!)
Living in San Francisco and having gay and lesbian friends, you'd think that I'd be pretty savvy about this demographic. But this week, I learned something fascinating:
Some lesbians have no lips.
You think I'm crazy, eh? But how else can we explain the freaky fact that -- with all the brouhaha over comments about Mary Cheney -- we've not heard a single peep from... Mary Cheney.
This, folks, is not a cringing wallflower. She's been openly lesbian for more than a decade, and she's been campaigning actively for her dad and his assistant, er, co-president, whatever-you-wanna-call-him. As most folks with a pulse and an IQ higher than the diameter of Bush's bulge know, her dad's even spoken of his daughter's sexuality at various public functions... apparently without shame or indignation from Mary or anyone else.
So why hasn't Mary opened up her mouth? Why hasn't she blurted out "Kerry, you're a jerk-off" or "Mom, Dad, would you just shut up already, I can speak for myself, thank-you-very-much."
From henceforth, then, I'll call her (and those like her) a "Lipless Lesbian." A perfect counterpart to unapologetic Republican homosexuals, whom I'll dub "Guileless Gays."
And if she's got a problem with that, well, she can act like an adult and let me know herself.
Some lesbians have no lips.
You think I'm crazy, eh? But how else can we explain the freaky fact that -- with all the brouhaha over comments about Mary Cheney -- we've not heard a single peep from... Mary Cheney.
This, folks, is not a cringing wallflower. She's been openly lesbian for more than a decade, and she's been campaigning actively for her dad and his assistant, er, co-president, whatever-you-wanna-call-him. As most folks with a pulse and an IQ higher than the diameter of Bush's bulge know, her dad's even spoken of his daughter's sexuality at various public functions... apparently without shame or indignation from Mary or anyone else.
So why hasn't Mary opened up her mouth? Why hasn't she blurted out "Kerry, you're a jerk-off" or "Mom, Dad, would you just shut up already, I can speak for myself, thank-you-very-much."
From henceforth, then, I'll call her (and those like her) a "Lipless Lesbian." A perfect counterpart to unapologetic Republican homosexuals, whom I'll dub "Guileless Gays."
And if she's got a problem with that, well, she can act like an adult and let me know herself.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Google Desktop Search -- A review via an EXCLUSIVE interview!
I was able to score an exclusive interview with Adam Lasnik, supreme geek, Google connoisseur, and Google Desktop Search expert, and I'm very pleased to offer the full transcript below.
Adam, thanks for coming today. To start, why don't you give us a quick overview of what Google Desktop Search ("GDS") does?
It's delightful to be here!
Well, GDS enables any personal and business user to search their computer's hard drive much as they would search Google... typing in a search term using Google's general search syntax and getting a results page in under one second.
Specifically, GDS searches both the filenames and contents of the following: Outlook and Outlook Express e-mail, AOL instant messages, Internet Explorer (Web page history), text files, and also files from Microsoft Word, Excel, and Powerpoint.
Do note that GDS only works on Windows XP and 2000 at this time.
So is this all pretty easy to use, or is it a tool just for geeks?
Perhaps unsurprisingly, GDS is quite user-friendly from end-to-end. It installs very quickly (it's 400K) and it politely uninstalls just as easily. And actually using the tool is a snap: When you click on the GDS icon in your system tray, a browser window opens; you simply type in a search query, and BOOM, Google lists results are shown, formatted very similarly to regular Google searches.
Whoa... regular Google searches... does this mean other people can search my hard drive? Or can Google see what I'm searching for or what's on my hard drive? I better start removing those porn...er, confidential business plan documents!
No, no... unlike with Google Web Search, the index of your files remains on your computer. While you have the OPTION to let Google learn about your search stats (not terms!), Google doesn't peek into your hard drive contents or examine what you're personal searching for. So if you're looking for a big ass barbeque to grill a fluffy bunny, you don't have to worry about Google notifying the ASPCA (I
hear rabbit meat is tasty, though... but I digress). In a nutshell, Google's GDS privacy policy should make you feel better.
Okay, so GDS is easy to use and it's not going to get me in trouble. So far so good. How about a few more techie details?
You got it! First, let me say that -- while GDS isn't a power tool yet -- it performs well on machines of power users like myself.
I have a decent rig (2.4 ghz Pentium with 512 megs of RAM), but it's loaded down with other file indexing programs, numerous Outlook plugins, more than a dozen apps in the systray, two routers (one wireless, one phone adaptor), a firewall (XP SP2-based), a virus checker (AVG), and many general programs running concurrently (Trillian, Dreamweaver, Outlook, and so on... and GDS has worked flawlessly. No install problems, and no noticeable slowdown of the system during indexing. Furthermore, searching with GDS is LIGHTNING FAST... both on my rig, and on the machine of a less-geeky friend of mine who's sadly cursed an older machine. The downside of that, understandably, is that GDS is pretty conservative. It initially indexes quite slowly in the background (you'll need to leave this puppy on overnight to get a full index!), and overall the product doesn't try to do too many things for too many people.
Hmm... well, tell us a bit more about the limitations of GDS, then
GDS provides ease-of-use at the expense of power-tool complexity. Whether in the interest of not overwhelming non-geeks or simply due to the fact that this is still a version 1 (0.9?) beta release, Google has chosen not to offer much functionality customization or ANY UI customization.
In some cases, this is a mere minor annoyance. We can't opt to have the system go into a turbo mode (using more processor cycles) to get everything indexed quickly.
There's no way that I can see to have the system wholly refresh the index without doing an uninstall and reinstall.
Some holes are a bit more frustrating. GDS doesn't monitor e-mails and files after it indexes them, which can result in an inability to pull up items, or a duplication of listings in search results. Additionally, while you can tell GDS not to index certain sites or folders, you can't block it from indexing specific Outlook folders. Luckily, it does ignore (perceived) spam folders by default.
From a UI perspective, GDS is generally streamlined and will please folks who are looking for an experience that matches what they're used to with general Google search results. Power users, though, may be a bit disappointed.
The key issue is that GDS doesn't yet offer search results in a contextual way. For instance, when you're searching for an image on your hard drive, you probably want to see image thumbnails. When you're searching for a particular e-mail, you likely want an easy-to-scan list of mail-related headers. However, GDS treats all search results alike, except for a little icon next to each search listing. In a way, this is understandable. In order to offer more strongly contextual search results, GDS would have to do one of the following:
1) Show only one type of results per screen, which would require extra navigational clicks.
2) Divide up results by column (e.g., e-mail results on the left, image results on the right), which could be problematic when there are more than 2 file types returned or when someone's browser window space is limited.
3) Limit search queries to one file type at a time.
As you can see, none of these options are particularly desireable. Furthermore, many folks might find it disconcerting to see a shifting UI with search results.
Therefore, it's not surprising that Google has decided to go with a more generic but consistent results UI at this point.
So GDS is sounding like a useful and effective, if not revolutionary product. How does it compare to existing desktop search solutions?
It's easier to install, it behaves more nicely, and it returns results faster than any other desktop search program I've seen.
And speaking of other solutions, here's a list of other desktop search programs I know about, with an asterisk by those I've tried:
- X1*
Seemingly one of the most popular desktop search tools, X1 distinguishes itself in several ways: it displays search results as you type each letter, it shows previews of documents, it offers special fields for different searches, and it supports a ton of different file formats. Downside? It's pricey, it can be a resource hog. [See license giveaway; still some left as of 10/15/04 2:46pm PST]
- LookOut*
Recently bought out by Microsoft, this program integrates into Outlook, but searches many different types of files. It's more flexible and powerful than GDS, but it's not as fast... and it's not useful for those who don't have Outlook.
- Enfish*
Big, pricey, and highly customizeable, with an especially useful saved-searches feature and decent integration with ones Outlook data overall.
- Copernic
- dtSearch
- 80/20
- Superior Search
- Wilbur
Wow, that's a lot of competition for Google. So what makes GDS so special and important, then?
Several things:
1) Speed, stability, and ease of use.
2) The trusted and liked Google brand.
3) Integration with Google Web searches (you can configure the program to show desktop search results when you do a general Web search)
4) Potential later integration with existing popular Google tools (toolbar, Gmail, etc.)
5) Perhaps somewhat controversial... but there's also the possibility that Google could -- at the user's option -- use desktop search fingerprinting to steer or filter that individual's Web results.
Okay, I can see why GDS may be particularly noteworthy for consumers, but what does it mean for Google?
It will enable Google to take over the world, though not all at once.
But seriously, folks... I think GDS suggests several significant ramifications for Google (and yes, its shareholders):
1) This may increase the frequency and quantity of Google Web (or integrated Web + GDS) searches, thus augmenting ad revenues.
2) As many others have noted, it's a clear strike-ahead at Microsoft, who is building desktop search capabilities into their future operating system. Why does this matter from a revenue standpoint? GDS will help insure that more people remain loyal to Google (and its advertisers), instead of defecting towards the possibly-OS-default MSN search feature.
3) Each foray into Windows tools allows Google to build up an aggregate competency in this area, strengthening not only each individual tool, but the broad set of desktop-based tools overall (Picasa, Deskbar, etc.).
Well, I'm pretty sold on Google Desktop Search at this point, I must admit. But how do I know if it's right for me?
I'd suggest that you simply give the tool a try. But if you're really gung-ho about this space and have some extra time, you may want to give the other desktop search program a look-see as well. It's notable that all of them are either free or offer free trials, so you have little to lose. Just remember to fully un-install any desktop search programs you decide not to use to insure that their likely-sizable indexes aren't continuing to clutter up your hard drive.
And in the meantime, here's my humble list of what to look for in a desktop search tool:
1) Ease of install (and, indeed, uninstall!)
2) Comprehensiveness of indexing (how many different file types does it support?)
3) Speed of indexing (initial and ongoing)
4) Load on computer (during initial indexing, ongoing indexing, searching)
5) Speed of searching (how long does it take for it to deliver search results?)
6) Power of searching (Boolean expression support? Ability to search particular fields?...)
7) Usefulness of search results (relevance, completeness, formatting)
8) Cost of program
9) Support from company (FAQs, e-mail support. etc.)
10) And I almost forgot the most important thing -- does it work on your system (platform, necessary specs, etc.)
Adam, thanks so much for all of this information and for taking the time to stop by here today
Absolutely a pleasure. It's always been my dream to appear on BLADAM, and I thank you for the opportunity to address your wonderful, smart, and attractive readers who will no doubt eagerly link to this page and share it with all their friends. But tell me one thing: Why has it been more than four months since you posted anything in this blog?
Ahem... um... well, I was in the process of changing blog software, but never got around to actually finishing the transition, plus I started two new jobs recently and...
Ah, no worries! Just glad to see BLADAM back up, even temporarily.
:blushing: It's nice to be back.
---
Relevant and cool links:
- A Net Takeway examination of the desktop search space
- Excellent overview of GDS from SearchEngineWatch
- SearchEngineWatch - Privacy and Google Desktop Search
- John Battelle's take on GDS
---
Edits: (Times are Pacific Standard Time)
- 10/14/04, 21:45: Actually linked to the product. What a revolutionary idea, eh? [smacks head]
- 10/15/04, 14:46: Added x1 license giveaway link (not likely to be applicable for long!)
---
[P.S. -- Please feel free to leave a comment with any corrections, or suggest any additional aspects of GDS to cover. Thanks!]
Adam, thanks for coming today. To start, why don't you give us a quick overview of what Google Desktop Search ("GDS") does?
It's delightful to be here!
Well, GDS enables any personal and business user to search their computer's hard drive much as they would search Google... typing in a search term using Google's general search syntax and getting a results page in under one second.
Specifically, GDS searches both the filenames and contents of the following: Outlook and Outlook Express e-mail, AOL instant messages, Internet Explorer (Web page history), text files, and also files from Microsoft Word, Excel, and Powerpoint.
Do note that GDS only works on Windows XP and 2000 at this time.
So is this all pretty easy to use, or is it a tool just for geeks?
Perhaps unsurprisingly, GDS is quite user-friendly from end-to-end. It installs very quickly (it's 400K) and it politely uninstalls just as easily. And actually using the tool is a snap: When you click on the GDS icon in your system tray, a browser window opens; you simply type in a search query, and BOOM, Google lists results are shown, formatted very similarly to regular Google searches.
Whoa... regular Google searches... does this mean other people can search my hard drive? Or can Google see what I'm searching for or what's on my hard drive? I better start removing those porn...er, confidential business plan documents!
No, no... unlike with Google Web Search, the index of your files remains on your computer. While you have the OPTION to let Google learn about your search stats (not terms!), Google doesn't peek into your hard drive contents or examine what you're personal searching for. So if you're looking for a big ass barbeque to grill a fluffy bunny, you don't have to worry about Google notifying the ASPCA (I
hear rabbit meat is tasty, though... but I digress). In a nutshell, Google's GDS privacy policy should make you feel better.
Okay, so GDS is easy to use and it's not going to get me in trouble. So far so good. How about a few more techie details?
You got it! First, let me say that -- while GDS isn't a power tool yet -- it performs well on machines of power users like myself.
I have a decent rig (2.4 ghz Pentium with 512 megs of RAM), but it's loaded down with other file indexing programs, numerous Outlook plugins, more than a dozen apps in the systray, two routers (one wireless, one phone adaptor), a firewall (XP SP2-based), a virus checker (AVG), and many general programs running concurrently (Trillian, Dreamweaver, Outlook, and so on... and GDS has worked flawlessly. No install problems, and no noticeable slowdown of the system during indexing. Furthermore, searching with GDS is LIGHTNING FAST... both on my rig, and on the machine of a less-geeky friend of mine who's sadly cursed an older machine. The downside of that, understandably, is that GDS is pretty conservative. It initially indexes quite slowly in the background (you'll need to leave this puppy on overnight to get a full index!), and overall the product doesn't try to do too many things for too many people.
Hmm... well, tell us a bit more about the limitations of GDS, then
GDS provides ease-of-use at the expense of power-tool complexity. Whether in the interest of not overwhelming non-geeks or simply due to the fact that this is still a version 1 (0.9?) beta release, Google has chosen not to offer much functionality customization or ANY UI customization.
In some cases, this is a mere minor annoyance. We can't opt to have the system go into a turbo mode (using more processor cycles) to get everything indexed quickly.
There's no way that I can see to have the system wholly refresh the index without doing an uninstall and reinstall.
Some holes are a bit more frustrating. GDS doesn't monitor e-mails and files after it indexes them, which can result in an inability to pull up items, or a duplication of listings in search results. Additionally, while you can tell GDS not to index certain sites or folders, you can't block it from indexing specific Outlook folders. Luckily, it does ignore (perceived) spam folders by default.
From a UI perspective, GDS is generally streamlined and will please folks who are looking for an experience that matches what they're used to with general Google search results. Power users, though, may be a bit disappointed.
The key issue is that GDS doesn't yet offer search results in a contextual way. For instance, when you're searching for an image on your hard drive, you probably want to see image thumbnails. When you're searching for a particular e-mail, you likely want an easy-to-scan list of mail-related headers. However, GDS treats all search results alike, except for a little icon next to each search listing. In a way, this is understandable. In order to offer more strongly contextual search results, GDS would have to do one of the following:
1) Show only one type of results per screen, which would require extra navigational clicks.
2) Divide up results by column (e.g., e-mail results on the left, image results on the right), which could be problematic when there are more than 2 file types returned or when someone's browser window space is limited.
3) Limit search queries to one file type at a time.
As you can see, none of these options are particularly desireable. Furthermore, many folks might find it disconcerting to see a shifting UI with search results.
Therefore, it's not surprising that Google has decided to go with a more generic but consistent results UI at this point.
So GDS is sounding like a useful and effective, if not revolutionary product. How does it compare to existing desktop search solutions?
It's easier to install, it behaves more nicely, and it returns results faster than any other desktop search program I've seen.
And speaking of other solutions, here's a list of other desktop search programs I know about, with an asterisk by those I've tried:
- X1*
Seemingly one of the most popular desktop search tools, X1 distinguishes itself in several ways: it displays search results as you type each letter, it shows previews of documents, it offers special fields for different searches, and it supports a ton of different file formats. Downside? It's pricey, it can be a resource hog. [See license giveaway; still some left as of 10/15/04 2:46pm PST]
- LookOut*
Recently bought out by Microsoft, this program integrates into Outlook, but searches many different types of files. It's more flexible and powerful than GDS, but it's not as fast... and it's not useful for those who don't have Outlook.
- Enfish*
Big, pricey, and highly customizeable, with an especially useful saved-searches feature and decent integration with ones Outlook data overall.
- Copernic
- dtSearch
- 80/20
- Superior Search
- Wilbur
Wow, that's a lot of competition for Google. So what makes GDS so special and important, then?
Several things:
1) Speed, stability, and ease of use.
2) The trusted and liked Google brand.
3) Integration with Google Web searches (you can configure the program to show desktop search results when you do a general Web search)
4) Potential later integration with existing popular Google tools (toolbar, Gmail, etc.)
5) Perhaps somewhat controversial... but there's also the possibility that Google could -- at the user's option -- use desktop search fingerprinting to steer or filter that individual's Web results.
Okay, I can see why GDS may be particularly noteworthy for consumers, but what does it mean for Google?
It will enable Google to take over the world, though not all at once.
But seriously, folks... I think GDS suggests several significant ramifications for Google (and yes, its shareholders):
1) This may increase the frequency and quantity of Google Web (or integrated Web + GDS) searches, thus augmenting ad revenues.
2) As many others have noted, it's a clear strike-ahead at Microsoft, who is building desktop search capabilities into their future operating system. Why does this matter from a revenue standpoint? GDS will help insure that more people remain loyal to Google (and its advertisers), instead of defecting towards the possibly-OS-default MSN search feature.
3) Each foray into Windows tools allows Google to build up an aggregate competency in this area, strengthening not only each individual tool, but the broad set of desktop-based tools overall (Picasa, Deskbar, etc.).
Well, I'm pretty sold on Google Desktop Search at this point, I must admit. But how do I know if it's right for me?
I'd suggest that you simply give the tool a try. But if you're really gung-ho about this space and have some extra time, you may want to give the other desktop search program a look-see as well. It's notable that all of them are either free or offer free trials, so you have little to lose. Just remember to fully un-install any desktop search programs you decide not to use to insure that their likely-sizable indexes aren't continuing to clutter up your hard drive.
And in the meantime, here's my humble list of what to look for in a desktop search tool:
1) Ease of install (and, indeed, uninstall!)
2) Comprehensiveness of indexing (how many different file types does it support?)
3) Speed of indexing (initial and ongoing)
4) Load on computer (during initial indexing, ongoing indexing, searching)
5) Speed of searching (how long does it take for it to deliver search results?)
6) Power of searching (Boolean expression support? Ability to search particular fields?...)
7) Usefulness of search results (relevance, completeness, formatting)
8) Cost of program
9) Support from company (FAQs, e-mail support. etc.)
10) And I almost forgot the most important thing -- does it work on your system (platform, necessary specs, etc.)
Adam, thanks so much for all of this information and for taking the time to stop by here today
Absolutely a pleasure. It's always been my dream to appear on BLADAM, and I thank you for the opportunity to address your wonderful, smart, and attractive readers who will no doubt eagerly link to this page and share it with all their friends. But tell me one thing: Why has it been more than four months since you posted anything in this blog?
Ahem... um... well, I was in the process of changing blog software, but never got around to actually finishing the transition, plus I started two new jobs recently and...
Ah, no worries! Just glad to see BLADAM back up, even temporarily.
:blushing: It's nice to be back.
---
Relevant and cool links:
- A Net Takeway examination of the desktop search space
- Excellent overview of GDS from SearchEngineWatch
- SearchEngineWatch - Privacy and Google Desktop Search
- John Battelle's take on GDS
---
Edits: (Times are Pacific Standard Time)
- 10/14/04, 21:45: Actually linked to the product. What a revolutionary idea, eh? [smacks head]
- 10/15/04, 14:46: Added x1 license giveaway link (not likely to be applicable for long!)
---
[P.S. -- Please feel free to leave a comment with any corrections, or suggest any additional aspects of GDS to cover. Thanks!]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)