Google spokeperson Gabriel Sticker gives a short interview on BeetTV about Google’s approach to video search. Worth a quick watch…
I must have been under a rock, because I missed the news that Doug Cutting (of Lucene and Nutch fame) is now at Yahoo, and working on supporting Hadoop, which is “a software platform lets one easily write and run applications that process vast amounts of data.”
Tim covers this well, writing:
…why is Yahoo!’s involvement so important? First, it indicates a kind of competitive tipping point in Web 2.0, where a large company that is a strong #2 in a space (search) realizes that open source is a great competitive weapon against their dominant competitor. It’s very much the same reason why IBM got behind Eclipse, as a way of getting competitive advantage against Sun in the Java market. (If you thought they were doing it out of the goodness of their hearts rather than clear-sighted business logic, think again.) If Yahoo! is realizing that open source is an important part of their competitive strategy, you can be sure that other big Web 2.0 companies will follow.
“When the Bay of Fundy Swells, a River Roller Coaster Begins”
I figured it had to be a tongue in cheek send up of Web 2 funding practices, right?
Nope. It’s an article about river rafting in Nova Scotia. But boy, it sounds about right, doesn’t it?
It’s still hard to type with this splint, but I have been reading what I missed over the past few days, here’s what I find worthy:
Ars: Microsoft testing ad supported Office suite.
BB: No fly lists work, really, govt claims, but how is a secret….I love this line of thinking.
Google phone fantasies won’t die (Digg)
Om: Answers.com loses 28% of its traffic due to Google moving butt cheek one way or another.
Notes from a lunch with Google’s Susan Wojcicki, I was invited but was traveling, Philipp has the story.
I really can’t wait to fly Virgin America. (Radar)
Searchable database of tech events, since I know you guys go to a lot of em…(ResearchBuzz)
Ask swaps allegiances – aQuantive over Doubleclick, ie, Microsoft over Google. (NextNet)
An older IDG News story points out that the Google/AP deal, which was announced a year ago and caused much speculation about plans to turn Google News into a money making service, has yielded nothing new. In that deal the two companies announced that new products and services would be forthcoming based on Google’s new license to use AP material.
A more jaundiced view might be that Google paid AP to keep AP from suing, and to preserve Google News’ ability to crawl and re-use AP intellectual property. But in order to not have to do this for everyone, the deal was structured in a way that appears that Google’s intent was to create new products. However, that has not occurred.
When describing the AP deal a year ago, Google said that it was intended to let Google use original AP content in a broader manner than in Google News for future features and products.
“We are very excited about the innovative new products we will build with full access to this [Associated Press] content,” Google said in a statement then. “Google News is fully consistent with fair use and always has been.”
However, the licensing deal is now more than a year old — it had been signed a few months before it was actually announced in August of last year — and the promised new Google services and features are nowhere to be seen.
On Wednesday, a Google spokesman confirmed the AP deal hasn’t produced any new offerings yet.
Again, typing is tough so I’ll let John McKinley do the talking, the entire thing is really worth a read:
The challenge with this approach is fourfold:
1. We lost the impact of some of the tips and techniques we had developed as a “veneer” player that maximized the revenue we could get from high-value searches – maybe that will be offset by the private label adwords, but maybe not…
2. Over time, the average consumer is going to develop more of a tendency to just go to google.com directly – I certainly have begun doing that. The value of AOL as part of the value chain in the eyes of the consumer is getting pretty minimal.
3. It under-leverages AOL’s ability to deliver unique rich content assets from within the TWX network.
4. It is, by its nature, defensive in nature – how could you possibly grow search share materially this way?