#Dtsearch desktop v7 license#

One outfit–Paris-based Exalead–reprinted the interview which was subsequently picked up and reproduced in publications as far way from rural Kentucky as Japan. So far, the interview subjects have been reasonably happy. I submit written questions, prepare a draft, and allow the company to review my final write and suggest changes. Without input from dtSearch, I decided to take a quick look at what the company’s products do and then ask myself some questions about the firm’s reluctance to talk after agreeing to my terms. The company wants this goose killed and grilled.), Microsoft (on going investigation so no comment I was told), and dtSearch (Microsoft centric search vendor). The holdouts are Google (no big surprise there. You can find the list of wizards who have participated here. Then without warning, dtSearch refused to participate in the Search Wizards Speak series. I had arranged to get the answers directly from the senior managers at dtSearch last year. What does this mean to vendors who are dependent on Microsoft’s lousy native search system to create a market? Just make sure you know the implications of “resourced”. Microsoft now has a third party solution that is okay if properly resourced. Incentives are standard in search licensing. The customer says, “I will use Microsoft and its search solution.” The idea is not new. The customer says, “I want to buy the Google Search Appliance or some other search system.” Microsoft sweetens the deal. The Microsoft sales professionals assert that the Microsoft solution is the optimal approach. Microsoft visits with a customer with a clutch of Microsoft products and servers. These are matters for wiser geese than I. I want to avoid talking about foam booth handouts and police investigations. Here’s how the Microsoft sales tactics are alleged to work. The only difference in booth handouts has been the addition of the phrase “A Microsoft Subsidiary.” Otherwise, same old, same old.

In fact, the changes have been in trade show swag (see illustration below), the cloud of silence dropped over the police action taken against the company in Norway for alleged wrong doing, and more aggressive sales tactics. Since the deal went through last year, Microsoft has not made substantive changes in the Fast Search technology. Then, when that MOSS (Microsoft Office SharePoint Search) system bumped against an internal document limit, Microsoft bought Fast Search & Transfer SA for $1.23 billion.

#Dtsearch desktop v7 license#

Next, it included a beefed up version in SharePoint but asked customers to license a separate server to get the system. First, the company gave away a baby search application. The Microsoft changed the rules for SharePoint search. Often the only risk was that a competitor would block the shot. As long as the vendor had a way to “fix” the baked in SharePoint search system, the vendor had a shot at a sale. For years, vendors with a snap in solution to Microsoft SharePoint were like a soccer player with an unobstructed path to the goal.