Benchmark Study of Desktop Search Tools
Transcription
Benchmark Study of Desktop Search Tools
April 20, 2005 Benchmark Study of Desktop Search Tools There’s More to Search than Google & Yahoo! An Evaluation of 12 Leading Desktop Search Tools Tom Noda Shawn Helwig www.uwebc.org/decisiontools Decision Tools | Desktop Search 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A new generation of desktop search tools is emerging that allows users to quickly find relevant documents in computers across the enterprise the same way search engines help locate information on the Internet. Companies expect that this technology will boost employee productivity and creativity and allow them to compete successfully in today’s knowledgedriven economy. Desktop search technology itself is nothing new. In fact, it has been around for years. However, some well know names (i.e. Google and Yahoo!) have recently entered the space giving this technology a well-deserved boost in visibility. In an effort to help understand the differences between the latest desktop search tools on the market, the UW E-Business Consortium recently conducted a benchmark study of 12 popular desktop search tools. The benchmark criteria that were used for the evaluation included usability, versatility, accuracy, efficiency, security, and enterprise readiness. When all the results were reviewed, it was determined that most of the desktop search tools were still too immature for significant business use due primarily to a lack of mature security and overall manageability. However, considering the evolution of Instant Messaging from a pure consumer tool to a valuable enterprise application, desktop search may have similar potential. KEY FINDINGS TOP 3 DESKTOP SEARCH Beta with Coveo. Usability Enterprise Readiness Based on our evaluation, the best overall desktop search tool is Copernic 1.5 Versatility Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta was rated the second best tool in our evaluation. See other notes. Wizetech Archivarius 3000 came in a surprisingly close third in our evalua- Security Accuracy Efficiency 1. Copernic 1.5 Beta with Coveo 2. Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta 3. Wizetech Archivarius 3000 tion. This software is available commercially from Canada-based Wizetech Software. Wizetech’s index efficiency is outstanding and was the clear winner in our tests. The user interface and navigation scheme is well designed and easy to use. Source: UW E-Business Consortium TABLE OF CONTENTS BENCHMARK NOTES 2 Executive Summary The benchmark evaluation testing was performed in 3 Overall Ratings March, 2005. This research was not funded or supported 3 Benchmark Criteria by any specific companies or institutions. The benchmark 4 Criteria Ratings evaluations were conducted solely by the UW E-Business 4 Product Reviews Consortium. 11 Appendix A 12 Appendix B www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search 3 OVERALL RATINGS These are the overall benchmark evaluation ratings. Some tools are very good in specific areas such as usability, versatility or search accuracy (explained later), but to be the best desktop search tool, a balance of all criteria is critical. Desktop Search Tool Version Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta Wizetech Archivarius 3000 MSN Toolbar Suite Google Desktop Ask Jeeves Score (Min = 1.00, Max = 5.00) Better 4.11 3.66 3.62 3.14 3.45 2.0 Beta 3.26 1.0 3.16 1.0 Beta Enfish Professional 6.1 ISYS Desktop 6.0 3.05 dtSearch Desktop 6.5 3.02 diskMETA Pro Blinkx HotBot Desktop 3.10 1.0.1 2.63 3.0 2.63 Beta 2.34 Source: UW E-Business Consortium BENCHMARK CRITERIA Our benchmark evaluation was performed across six main criteria. Each criterion was quantified and was given a rating, ranging from 1 (worst) to 5 (best). The rating is based on sub criteria, which align with the main criterion’s objective. For sub criteria and their rating details, please refer to Appendix A - Comparison Table. 1. Usability Good desktop search tools must be easy to use, have a lower learning curve, have professional aesthetics, and require fewer steps to reach desired output. 2. Versatility Versatility describes how wide and deep the tool allows you to search. This includes factors such as supported document types, web/e-mail integration, and multi-language support. 3. Accuracy “Can you find what you are looking for?” This criterion addresses accuracy of search results as well as other factors that help users find the desired information. 4. Efficiency This criterion assesses the tool’s technical efficiency including memory usage, indexing time or indexed file sizes. The best tool should not jeopardize overall PC performance. 5. Security Security and privacy are big concerns, especially in an enterprise environment. This criterion considers how well vendors have incorporated security mechanisms. 6. Enterprise Readiness While most tools are designed for the consumer/home PC environment, some are ready to be used in an enterprise. This criterion may be especially helpful for IT managers. www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search 4 CRITERIA RATINGS The following charts summarize the best tools’ ratings for each criterion. Blinkx and ISYS are versatile tools but struggle to deliver their powerful features in a user-friendly fashion. On the other hand, Ask Jeeves excels in usability, efficiency and security, but lacks versatility. Copernic is excellent in almost all criteria. 1. Usability 2. Versatility Copernic 4.80 Copernic Wizetech 4.75 Yahoo! 4.14 3.88 Google 4.40 Blinkx 3.75 MSN 4.40 ISYS 3.75 4.25 Ask Jeeves 3. Accuracy 4. Efficiency 4.50 Copernic 4.20 MSN 3.50 dtSearch 4.40 Wizetech 4.20 Copernic 3.80 Ask Jeeves 5. Security 6. Enterprise Readiness 3.29 Yahoo! Copernic 4.00 Ask Jeeves 3.14 ISYS 4.00 Google 3.13 Yahoo! 4.00 * Copernic with Coveo, and Yahoo! with X1 Source: UW E-Business Consortium PRODUCT REVIEWS This section examines the details for each desktop search tool individually. The benchmark performance for each tool is expressed with a Spider Chart (see description), in order to convey the performance in each one of six criteria as well as the overall balance. Spider Charts Usability 1.50 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 5.00 3.00 Spider Charts have been used to show how each criterion was scored, as well as the overall balance. For instance, the chart at left indicates that this tool is extremely good at Versatility but needs some improvement in Usability and Efficiency. Security Accuracy 3.50 3.00 Efficiency 2.00 www.uwebc.org Achieving the maximum scores in all criteria and maintaining a good hexagon shape are ideal, but that is not required by all users. For instance, if Enterprise Readiness is not critical for a specific user, an unbalanced shape that lacks Enterprise Readiness features may still be a solid fit. © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta 4.80 Versatility 4.14 4.00 Web history search, and Thunderbird and Eudora for e-mail (as well as IE, Outdetects new and modified files/e-mails on the fly, are useful features. Filtering, Accuracy 3.00 The tool is intuitive and easy to use. The new beta version supports FireFox for look and Outlook Express) “Search as you type” and “dynamic indexing,” which 4.11 Security www.copernic.com Copernic is the most well-balanced desktop search tool among those evaluated. Usability Enterprise Readiness 5 4.50 sorting and grouping search results are well refined. The application has a small technology footprint and provides detailed index controls. Efficiency 4.20 Source: UW E-Business Consortium One potential improvement, however, is that it should let users choose a default web search engine. It only supports the “alltheweb.com” web search within the application, which is not as popular as Google or Yahoo! For business use, Coveo, a spin-off company from Copernic, provides enterprise desktop search products, which enhance security, manageability and network capability. The client applications are identical. However, the enterprise version works with additional server products Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta such as Microsoft SharePoint. Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta Yahoo! Desktop Search is based on X1 Desktop Search, so usability will be Usability 4.00 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.88 4.00 services such as Yahoo! E-mail and Instant Messaging. It can index Yahoo! IM their tool supports more than 200 types of documents. It indexes Adobe Pho- Accuracy 3.29 familiar to existing X1 users. Yahoo! integrates X1’s technology into its own portal logs as well as Yahoo! Address Book. Versatility is excellent, as Yahoo! claims 3.66 Security desktop.yahoo.com 3.20 Efficiency 3.60 Source: UW E-Business Consortium toshop and Illustrator files in addition to many media files. Contents of zip files are examined and displayed in a tree structure. The tool’s preview feature is well refined, but its search results are somewhat clumsy because too many columns are displayed in a vertical view. As opposed to Copernic, there is no dynamic indexing or web history search. X1 offers an enterprise version of the desktop search tool as a server-based product. IT managers may want to check it out. www.uwebc.org Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search Wizetech Archivarius 3000 3.14 4.75 Versatility 3.38 3.00 efficiency are astonishing. It is a very simple GUI design, yet organizes a lot of products, and memory usage was relatively low in idle time. It does not support Accuracy 3.00 from $25 to $45, depending on your status and purpose of use. Usability and features compactly. It demonstrated the fastest initial indexing time among all 3.62 Security www.wizetech.com In contrast to Copernic or Yahoo!, this is a commercial product, which costs Usability Enterprise Readiness 6 3.20 any media file indexing (image, audio or video) or web/web Efficiency 4.40 Source: UW E-Business Consortium history searches. On the other hand, e-mail support is wide, ranging from Outlook and Outlook Express to Eudora, Thunderbird and Lotus Notes/Domino. One unique feature is that it offers remote search functionality. The application acts as a small Web server, allowing remote users to search the computer through a web browser. Of course, it has user/group account management capability built-in. Wizetech Archivarius 3000 3.14 MSN Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta MSN Toolbar Suite is similar to Google Desktop, and has almost the identical Usability 4.40 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.63 2.00 “Auto Form Fill” features which are already available with the Google Toolbar. in our test. “Shortcut keyword” is a unique feature, which lets users associate Accuracy 2.86 functionality and navigation scheme. Moreover, it includes a Popup Blocker and MSN performed well in terms of search accuracy. Word accuracy was very good 3.45 Security toolbar.msn.com 4.20 Efficiency 3.60 Source: UW E-Business Consortium a keyword with specific files. With this association, users can type a keyword in Windows Explorer’s address bar to fetch a file, instead of crawling multiple folders. One challenge is that it does not support PDF files by default. To index PDF contents, users must download and install an add-in tool called “IFilter.” MSN Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search Google Desktop 1.0 desktop.google.com Google seamlessly integrates desktop search into its popular web search en- Usability 4.40 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.50 2.00 to anyone who has used Google. A floating bar is a unique feature and allows another promising feature, allowing software developers to develop add-ins to Accuracy 3.13 gine. The browser-based desktop search tool is easy to use and will be familiar users to type keywords from anywhere on the screen. Google Desktop API is 3.26 Security 7 3.20 enhance the tool’s functionality. OpenOffice and ICQ index add-ins are Efficiency 3.33 Source: UW E-Business Consortium already available. Unfortunately, filtering and sorting functions are quite limited. It appears as if Google is so focused on its relevance algorithm that other sorting functions seem to be ignored. Google Desktop 1.0 Ask Jeeves Desktop Search 1.7 Beta Ask Jeeves’ usability is remarkably simple and well refined. It searches all types Usability 4.25 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 2.57 2.00 via tabbed panes. It has a nice preview pane, which even plays Windows Media when they can choose either fast or gradual indexing. However, Ask Jeeves’ big- Accuracy 3.14 of documents simultaneously, and users can look through each type of results Player. The application is very small and efficient. Users are given index control 3.16 Security sp.ask.com/docs/desktop 3.20 Efficiency 3.80 Source: UW E-Business Consortium gest challenge is to improve versatility. Currently, the supported document types are very lim- ited. Also, the preview pane does not render Microsoft Excel or PowerPoint. Web history search is not supported, either. If it would support more file types, Ask Jeeves has the potential to become one of the top desktop search tools. Ask Jeeves Desktop Search 1.7 Beta www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search Enfish Professional 6.1 www.enfish.com Enfish is a commercial software product. We tested the Professional version, Usability 3.40 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.38 3.00 usability. It gives users full customization of views. It provides calendar, contacts Microsoft Outlook Accuracy 3.00 which costs $199.95. Enfish is a lot different from the other 11 tools in terms of and weather views in addition to search/preview views. It almost simulates a 3.10 Security 8 2.40 environment. Users can create multiple index files and associ- Efficiency 3.40 Source: UW E-Business Consortium ate them with different views. However, this customization creates a steep learning curve. It takes some time to get used to its operations. Enfish has “Relevant Search” features, but its purpose appeared unclear. When we searched “Open Office,” for example, the relevant search highlighted “[email protected],” which made us wonder why. Enfish Professional 6.1 ISYS Desktop 6.0 www.isys-search.com ISYS is a versatile tool. It supports multi-language indexing, FTP indexing, SQL Usability 1.75 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.75 4.00 misspells in indexed documents) and intelligent date/number format (e.g. find Accuracy 3.00 Compuserve, Eudora and VIM. It is also good at enhancing search accuracy. It includes a spell checker, synonym rings, fuzzy logic search (which correct 3.05 Security indexing (requiring XML output), and supports many e-mail clients including 2.80 Efficiency 3.00 Source: UW E-Business Consortium “1/1/05” from “Jan. 1, 2005”). In contrast to those valuable features, however, usability is significantly poor. The application creates multiple Windows menus and confuses users. Custom query syntaxes create another steep learning curve for users who do not want to memorize them. Toolbar icons don’t have text descriptions, yet their symbols are somewhat vague. When we searched MP3 files, we were stuck because it did not provide any links or enable us to play them inside the application. ISYS must improve its usability to be able to capitalize on its powerful versatility and accuracy features. ISYS Desktop 6.0 www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search dtSearch Desktop 6.5 www.dtsearch.com dtSearch Desktop is outstanding in terms of word accuracy features. It provides Usability 2.50 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.25 3.00 encoding support, noise word list, which excludes common words such as “is” or is that it does not deliver Accuracy 2.88 phonic and fuzzy search, boolean and wildcard keywords, multi language and “a,” and case/accent sensitive indexing. The most regrettable aspect, however, 3.02 Security 9 3.50 those features very well to the end user because of poor usability. There is Efficiency 3.00 Source: UW E-Business Consortium no search keyword field on the main window, and users have to go through the menu. Setting up the above features one by one is also a tedious task. The indexer treats most of the binary files as text and messes up the index file with none characters. If it enhanced the GUI and refined the usability, it could become a very interesting desktop search tool. dtSearch Desktop 6.5 diskMETA Pro 1.0.1 www.diskmeta.com diskMETA is also a commercial product. We tested the most advanced version, Usability 2.50 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 2.43 2.00 pane. However, it does have remarkable word accuracy features. It includes a Accuracy 2.86 comes with very limited functionality. diskMETA does not support any web history or e-mail search. Filtering and sorting are also limited, and there is no preview 2.63 Security “Professional,” which costs $97.50. The application is one of the simplest, but 2.60 Efficiency 3.40 Source: UW E-Business Consortium dictionary feature that can identify a word, like “criterion” from a keyword “criteria.” Surprisingly, most desktop search tools cannot do this. Iterating search results is another nice feature. Most desktop search tools we tested show all search results regardless of its amount (e.g. 2,000 matches), which can often overwhelm users. diskMETA’s page iteration is intuitive and easy to use. diskMETA Pro 1.0.1 www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search Blinkx 3.0 10 www.blinkx.com Blinkx 3.0 has a Metal theme, which makes it look somewhat similar to the Ma- Usability 3.00 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.75 2.00 tree growing. “SmartAccuracy 2.63 some unique features. “Blinkx Visualizer” produces a tree view of search results, and users can see the 2.63 Security cintosh user interface. The tool’s versatility is somewhat limited, but it does have 2.60 folder” crawls the web to find relevant information to the documents Efficiency 1.80 Source: UW E-Business Consortium in the folder. Unfortunately, the application has major problems with efficiency. Indexing is painfully slow. In fact, in our test, the application couldn’t complete the process. It runs four instances and consumes significant memory. In consequence, search outputs are slow, and a window often flickers. Hopefully, this will be improved in the future release. Blinkx 3.0 HotBot Desktop Beta www.hotbot.com/tools/desktop HotBot is a toolbar-based desktop search tool and displays output in the brows- Usability 2.00 Enterprise Readiness Versatility 3.00 2.00 for eBay search). Unfortunately, we couldn’t complete indexing on this tool for Accuracy 2.86 is very compact and has some unique features. It supports RSS indexing and allows users to associate keywords to custom web sites (e.g. “eb <keyword>” 2.34 Security er’s left pane, where Favorite and History links are often displayed. The tool 2.20 Efficiency 2.00 Source: UW E-Business Consortium unknown reasons. The software seems to have been rushed for the beta release. HotBot offers a deskbar version, but usability is very inconsistent from the toolbar. Configuration is text file based, and this is simply not user-friendly. It provides a lot of custom search syntaxes but has a steep learning curve. Search results are automatically saved as HTML files, and this may cause some security concerns. We expect significant improvements in its final release. HotBot Desktop Beta www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search APPENDIX A - COMPARISON TABLE Criteria / Desktop Search Tools 1. Usability 1.1. Application Types 11 BW=Browser base, DB=Deskbar, FB=Floating bar, SA=Standalone Application, TB=Toolbar Ask Jeeves Blinkx Copernic diskMETA dtSearch Enfish Google HotBot ISYS MSN Wizetech 4.25 3.00 4.80 2.50 2.50 3.40 4.40 2.00 1.75 4.40 4.75 Yahoo! 4.00 SA SA, TB SA, DB SA SA SA BW, DB, FB BW, TB, DB SA BW, TB, DB SA SA, TB 2.57 3.75 4.14 2.43 3.25 3.38 3.50 3.00 3.75 3.63 3.38 3.88 3.20 2.60 4.50 2.60 3.50 2.40 3.20 2.20 2.80 4.20 3.20 3.20 3.80 1.80 4.20 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.33 2.00 3.00 3.60 4.40 3.60 3.14 2.63 3.00 2.86 2.88 3.00 3.13 2.86 3.00 2.86 3.00 3.29 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 1.2. Features 1.3. Simplicity 1.4. Navigations 1.5. Aesthetic 1.6. Others in Usability 2. Versatility 2.1. Supported PC Environment 2.2. Supported Files 2.3. Media Support 2.4. Application Support 2.5. Multi-language Support 2.6. Web Integration 2.7. E-mail Integration 2.8. Others in Versatility 3. Accuracy 3.1. Word Accuracy 3.2. Additional Word Support 3.3. Index Accuracy 3.4. Output Format 3.5. Filter & Sort 3.6. Others in Accuracy 4. Efficiency 4.1. Download/Installed File Size 4.2. Indexed File Size 4.3. Initial Index Time 4.4. Index Controls 4.5. Memory & CPU Usages 4.6. Others in Efficiency 5. Security 5.1. HTTPS Cache Indexing 5.2. Personal Folder Search 5.3. Possible Intrusion 5.4. Protection Features 5.5. Privacy 5.6. Spyware & Adware 5.7. Product Update 5.8. Others in Security 6. Enterprise Readiness 6.1. Enterprise Products Overall Scores 3.16 2.63 4.11 2.63 3.02 3.10 3.26 2.34 3.05 3.45 3.62 3.66 Costs Free Free Free $97.50 $199.00 $199.95 Free Free $570.00 Free $25.00 - 45.00 Free 6 10 1 10 9 7 5 12 8 4 3 2 Overall Ratings April 20, 2005 Source: UW E-Business Consortium © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search 12 APPENDIX B Test Environment We performed benchmark evaluations for all the desktop search tools on the same machine. To prevent any index conflicts, we installed/uninstalled one tool at a time. The details of the computer environment information are shown below: Test Computer : DELL Optiplex GX240 CPU : Pentium 4 (1. 7GH) Memory : 512 MB HDD : 80 GB OS : Windows XP Professional Indexed Folder Size : Documents & Folders = 672 MB, Outlook pst file = 4.13 MB (the same message contents for Outlook Express and Thunderbird), IE web cache = 8 MB, FireFox web cache = 19.2 MB File Types in Indexed Folders : Text (Unicode & ASCII), DLL, Java, Class, HTML, XML, RTF, MS Office (doc, xls, ppt, mdb), sql, OpenOffice files, IM logs for Yahoo! & MSN, Adobe PDF, Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, archives (zip, tar, g-zip, rar), images (bmp, jpg, gif, tif, png, eps), video (asf, wmv, mov, avi, mpeg), audio (mp3, acc), and Asian text file and email. Benchmark Sub Criteria Descriptions The followings are the descriptions for the benchmark sub criteria. 1. Usability 1.1 Application Types Is the tool standalone, browser based, toolbar or deskbar? (not rated) 1.2 Features How many useful features, preferences and options are available? 1.3 Simplicity How does the tool deal with the following tradeoffs (more features vs. simpler application design)? 1.4 Navigations How simple and easy is it to execute the search and results? How many steps does it take from inserting search keywords to reaching the target file? 1.5 Aesthetics How are the user interface components and functions refined and organized? Does it look professional? How about commands, forms, icons and images? 1.6 Others in Usability Other remarkable usability features if any. This score is only applied if it raises the average. 2. Versatility 2.1 Supported PC Environment Which operating systems does the tool support? Windows, Mac OS, Linux? 2.2 Supported Files Which file formats are supported? Office, PDF, IM files, Zip, RSS and folder names? 2.3 Supported Media Files Which image/audio/video files are supported? www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search 2.4 Supported Applications 13 Check which applications are supported. This is related to the criteria above, but what about IE or FireFox in terms of web history searches? What about e-mail clients? Does it support Outlook, Express, Thunderbird, Lotus Notes or Eudora? What about IM? 2.5 Multi-language Support Does the tool support multi language searches? Can it search Asian text? Does it support Unicode or other specific encoding types? 2.6 Web Search Integration How does the tool seamlessly integrate local machine search, web history, and web site search into one platform? 2.7 E-mail Integration How far does the tool search in the e-mail client? Does it search just e-mail messages, or does it also search attachments, address books, schedules and tasks as well? Does it require the e-mail client be running while indexing? 2.8 Others in Versatility Other remarkable versatility features if any. This score is only applied if it raises the average. 3. Accuracy 3.1 Word Accuracy How exactly does the tool recognize keywords? If a user types “apples,” does it also look for the word “apple”? What about “criterion/criteria” or “it/IT”? Does it support synonyms or a thesaurus? 3.2 Additional Word Support Does the tool have spell checker? What happens if users misspell “Massatusets”? How does the tool handle an ambiguous person’s name? Does it support wildcard (* character)? What about double equations or boolean keywords? 3.3 Index Accuracy What will happen if users move or delete indexed files and then try to search them? What about new files or modified files? Does it support dynamic indexing, or does it require reindexing? What about received/sent e-mail? 3.4 Output Format How accurate and user-friendly is the output? Does it pinpoint exact word locations in files or just display the file name? How easy is it for users to find documents from hundreds of outputs? 3.5 Filter & Sort Can users easily filter or sort search output? What kinds of filtering/sorting options are available? How easy are they to use? 3.6 Others in Accuracy Other remarkable accuracy features if any. This score is only applied if it raises the average. 4. Efficiency 4.1 Download/Indexed File Size How large are downloaded and installed file sizes? Are they small or large, considering its features and capabilities? 4.2 Indexed File Size How large are the indexed files? Are they small or large, considering its supported file types? www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search 4.3 Initial Index Time 14 How long does the tool initially take to index files and e-mail? Considering its indexed file size and supported file types, is it fast or slow? 4.4 Index Controls How can users control index performance and frequency? Can users control how much hardware resources the tool can use? How to schedule indexing? Automatic indexing during idle time? 4.5 Memory & CPU Usages How much memory does the tool require during the idle and indexing time? How much CPU power does the tool require during the usage and indexing time? 4.6 Others in Efficiency Other remarkable efficiency features if any. This score is only applied if it raises the average. 5. Security 5.1 HTTPS Cache Indexing Can users search SSL web histories? Do users have an option to prevent those pages from being indexed? 5.2 Personal Folder Search Can the tool allow users to search someone else’s personal folders? Or does it restrict indexable folders, primarily for privacy/security reasons? 5.3 Possible Intrusion Is there any possible intrusion or security breach? 5.4 Protection Features Can users protect certain folders or documents from desktop search? How about password protected documents? Does the tool index them or ask users for a decision? 5.5 Privacy How does the vendor address privacy and security issues? Is it clearly stated on the web site or during installation? 5.6 Spyware & Adware Does the tool secretly install Spyware or Adware? Is there any unusual network activity occuring when the application is running? 5.7 Product Update Does the tool have auto update features so that users can apply updates as quick and easily as possible? Or does it require uninstall/install? How easy is it to uninstall and reinstall the new one (keep indexed files)? 5.8 Others in Security Other remarkable security features if any. This score is only applied if it raises the average. 6. Enterprise Readiness 6.1 Enterprise Products www.uwebc.org Does the vendor provide enterprise desktop search solutions? © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium Decision Tools | Desktop Search 15 About UW E-Business Consortium The UW E-Business Consortium (the industry membership base of the UW E-Business Institute) is Wisconsin’s premier organization that helps companies gain a competitive advantage through e-business. Our members - business executives and senior managers from the Midwest’s leading companies - tap into world-class university resources and the collective experiences of this B2B and B2C group to address and share strategic e-business and information technology challenges, best practices and lessons learned. For more information, contact Assistant Director of Member Relations, Christina Paschen (608) 265-0645 or [email protected] www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium