Benchmark Study of Desktop Search Tools

There’s More to Search than Google & Yahoo!

April 20, 2005

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 Usability Enterprise Readiness Versatility Based on our evaluation, the best overall desktop search tool is Copernic 1.5 Beta with Coveo. Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta was rated the second best tool in our evaluation. See other notes. Likasoft Archivarius 3000 came in a surprisingly close third in our evaluation. Security Efficiency 1. copernic 1.5 Beta with coveo 2. yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta 3. likasoft archivarius 3000
Source: UW E-Business Consortium

Accuracy

This software is available commercially from Likasoft. Archivarius’ 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.

TaBlE OF cOnTEnTS
2 3 3 4 4 11 12 Executive Summary Overall ratings Benchmark criteria criteria ratings Product reviews appendix a appendix B

BEnchmarK nOTES
The benchmark evaluation testing was performed in March, 2005. This research was not funded or supported by any specific companies or institutions. The benchmark evaluations were conducted solely by the UW E-Business Consortium.

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 1.5 Beta 1.1 Beta 3.14 2.0 Beta 1.0 1.0 Beta 6.1 6.0 6.5 1.0.1 3.0 Beta 2.34 2.63 2.63 Source: UW E-Business Consortium 3.66 3.62 3.45 3.26 3.16 3.10 3.05 3.02 Score (Min = 1.00, Max = 5.00) Better 4.11

copernic Desktop Search yahoo! Desktop Search likasoft archivarius 3000 mSn Toolbar Suite google Desktop ask Jeeves Enfish Professional iSyS Desktop dtSearch Desktop diskmETa Pro Blinkx hotBot Desktop

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. 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. 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.

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.

5. Security Security and privacy are big concerns, especially in an enterprise environment. This criterion considers how well vendors have incorporated security mechanisms.

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
Copernic Archivarius Google MSN Ask Jeeves 4.80 4.75 4.40 4.40 4.25

2. Versatility
Copernic Yahoo! Blinkx ISYS 4.14 3.88 3.75 3.75

3. Accuracy
Copernic MSN dtSearch 3.50 4.50 4.20

4. Efficiency
Archivarius Copernic Ask Jeeves 3.80 4.40 4.20

5. Security
Yahoo! Ask Jeeves Google 3.29 3.14 3.13

6. Enterprise Readiness
Copernic ISYS Yahoo! * Copernic with Coveo, and Yahoo! with X1 Source: UW E-Business Consortium 4.00 4.00 4.00

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.
Usability

1.50

Spider charts
Versatility

Enterprise Readiness

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.

3.00

5.00

Security

3.50

Accuracy

3.00

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.

Efficiency

2.00

www.uwebc.org

© 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Decision Tools | Desktop Search

5

copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta
Usability

www.copernic.com

4.80

Copernic is the most well-balanced desktop search tool among those evaluated.
Versatility

Enterprise Readiness

The tool is intuitive and easy to use. The new beta version supports FireFox for Web history search, and Thunderbird and Eudora for e-mail (as well as IE, Outlook and Outlook Express) “Search as you type” and “dynamic indexing,” which detects new and modified files/e-mails on the fly, are useful features. Filtering,

4.00

4.14

4.11
Security

3.00

Accuracy

4.50

sorting and grouping search results are well refined. The application has a small technology footprint and provides detailed index controls. One potential improvement, however, is that it should let

Efficiency

4.20

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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 such as Microsoft SharePoint.
Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta

yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta
Usability

desktop.yahoo.com

4.00

Yahoo! Desktop Search is based on X1 Desktop Search, so usability will be
Versatility

Enterprise Readiness

familiar to existing X1 users. Yahoo! integrates X1’s technology into its own portal services such as Yahoo! E-mail and Instant Messaging. It can index Yahoo! IM logs as well as Yahoo! Address Book. Versatility is excellent, as Yahoo! claims their tool supports more than 200 types of documents. It indexes Adobe Pho-

4.00

3.88

3.66
Security

3.29

Accuracy

3.20

toshop and Illustrator files in addition to many media files. Contents of zip files are examined and displayed in a tree

Efficiency

3.60

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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.
Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta

www.uwebc.org

© 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Decision Tools | Desktop Search

6

likasoft archivarius 3000 3.14
Usability

www.likasoft.com In contrast to Copernic or Yahoo!, this is a commercial product, which costs from $25 to $45, depending on your status and purpose of use. Usability and efficiency are astonishing. It is a very simple GUI design, yet organizes a lot of features compactly. It demonstrated the fastest initial indexing time among all products, and memory usage was relatively low in idle time. It does not support

4.75

Enterprise Readiness

Versatility

3.00

3.38

3.62
Security

3.00

Accuracy

3.20

any media file indexing (image, audio or video) or web/web history searches. On the other hand, e-mail

Efficiency

4.40

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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.
Likasoft Archivarius 3000 3.14

mSn Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta
Usability

toolbar.msn.com MSN Toolbar Suite is similar to Google Desktop, and has almost the identical functionality and navigation scheme. Moreover, it includes a Popup Blocker and “Auto Form Fill” features which are already available with the Google Toolbar. MSN performed well in terms of search accuracy. Word accuracy was very good in our test. “Shortcut keyword” is a unique feature, which lets users associate

4.40

Enterprise Readiness

Versatility

2.00

3.63

3.45
Security

2.86

Accuracy

4.20

a keyword with specific files. With this association, users can type a keyword in Windows Explorer’s address bar to fetch a file,

Efficiency

3.60

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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

7

google Desktop 1.0
Usability

desktop.google.com Google seamlessly integrates desktop search into its popular web search enVersatility

4.40

Enterprise Readiness

gine. The browser-based desktop search tool is easy to use and will be familiar to anyone who has used Google. A floating bar is a unique feature and allows users to type keywords from anywhere on the screen. Google Desktop API is another promising feature, allowing software developers to develop add-ins to

2.00

3.50

3.26
Security

3.13

Accuracy

3.20

enhance the tool’s functionality. OpenOffice and ICQ index add-ins are already available. Unfortunately, filtering and sorting

Efficiency

3.33

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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
Usability

sp.ask.com/docs/desktop

4.25

Ask Jeeves’ usability is remarkably simple and well refined. It searches all types
Versatility

Enterprise Readiness

of documents simultaneously, and users can look through each type of results via tabbed panes. It has a nice preview pane, which even plays Windows Media Player. The application is very small and efficient. Users are given index control when they can choose either fast or gradual indexing. However, Ask Jeeves’ big-

2.00

2.57

3.16
Security

3.14

Accuracy

3.20

gest challenge is to improve versatility. Currently, the supported document types are very lim-

Efficiency

3.80

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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

8

Enfish Professional 6.1
Usability

www.enfish.com Enfish is a commercial software product. We tested the Professional version, which costs $199.95. Enfish is a lot different from the other 11 tools in terms of usability. It gives users full customization of views. It provides calendar, contacts and weather views in addition to search/preview views. It almost simulates a Microsoft Outlook
Accuracy

3.40

Enterprise Readiness

Versatility

3.00

3.38

3.10
Security

3.00

2.40

environment. Users can create multiple index files and associate them with different views. However,

Efficiency

3.40

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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 “support@amazon.com,” which made us wonder why.
Enfish Professional 6.1

iSyS Desktop 6.0
Usability

www.isys-search.com ISYS is a versatile tool. It supports multi-language indexing, FTP indexing, SQL
Versatility

1.75

Enterprise Readiness

indexing (requiring XML output), and supports many e-mail clients including Compuserve, Eudora and VIM. It is also good at enhancing search accuracy. It includes a spell checker, synonym rings, fuzzy logic search (which correct misspells in indexed documents) and intelligent date/number format (e.g. find

4.00

3.75

3.05
Security

3.00

Accuracy

2.80

“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

Efficiency

3.00

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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

9

dtSearch Desktop 6.5
Usability

www.dtsearch.com dtSearch Desktop is outstanding in terms of word accuracy features. It provides
Versatility

2.50

Enterprise Readiness

phonic and fuzzy search, boolean and wildcard keywords, multi language and encoding support, noise word list, which excludes common words such as “is” or “a,” and case/accent sensitive indexing. The most regrettable aspect, however, is that it does not deliver

3.00

3.25

3.02
Security

2.88

Accuracy

3.50

those features very well to the end user because of poor usability. There is no search keyword field on the main window, and

Efficiency

3.00

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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
Usability

www.diskmeta.com diskMETA is also a commercial product. We tested the most advanced version,
Versatility

2.50

Enterprise Readiness

“Professional,” which costs $97.50. The application is one of the simplest, but 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 pane. However, it does have remarkable word accuracy features. It includes a

2.00

2.43

2.63
Security

2.86

Accuracy

2.60

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

Efficiency

3.40

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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

10

Blinkx 3.0
Usability

www.blinkx.com 3.00 Blinkx 3.0 has a Metal theme, which makes it look somewhat similar to the MaVersatility

Enterprise Readiness

cintosh user interface. The tool’s versatility is somewhat limited, but it does have some unique features. “Blinkx Visualizer” produces a tree view of search results, and users can see the tree growing. “Smart-

2.00

3.75

2.63
Security

2.63

Accuracy

2.60

folder” crawls the web to find relevant information to the documents in the folder. Unfortunately, the application

Efficiency

1.80

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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
Usability

www.hotbot.com/tools/desktop HotBot is a toolbar-based desktop search tool and displays output in the browsVersatility

2.00

Enterprise Readiness

er’s left pane, where Favorite and History links are often displayed. The tool 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>” for eBay search). Unfortunately, we couldn’t complete indexing on this tool for

2.00

3.00

2.34
Security

2.86

Accuracy

2.20

unknown reasons. The software seems to have been rushed for the beta release. HotBot offers a deskbar version, but usability is very

Efficiency

2.00

Source: UW E-Business Consortium

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

11

Appendix A - CompArison TAble
Criteria / desktop search Tools 1. Usability 1.1. Application Types 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 Costs overall ratings 3.16 Free 6 2.63 Free 10 4.11 Free 1 2.63 $97.50 10 3.02 $199.00 9 3.10 $199.95 7 3.26 Free 5 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.14 2.63 3.00 2.86 2.88 3.00 3.13 3.80 1.80 4.20 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.33 3.20 2.60 4.50 2.60 3.50 2.40 3.20 2.57 3.75 4.14 2.43 3.25 3.38 3.50 Ask Jeeves 4.25 SA blinkx 3.00 SA, TB Copernic 4.80 SA, DB diskmeTA 2.50 SA dtsearch 2.50 SA Enfish 3.40 SA Google 4.40 BW, DB, FB

bW=Browser base, db=Deskbar, Fb=Floating bar, sA=Standalone Application, Tb=Toolbar

Hotbot 2.00 BW, TB, DB

isYs 1.75 SA

msn 4.40 BW, TB, DB

likasoft 4.75 SA

Yahoo! 4.00 SA, TB

3.00

3.75

3.63

3.38

3.88

2.20

2.80

4.20

3.20

3.20

2.00

3.00

3.60

4.40

3.60

2.86

3.00

2.86

3.00

3.29

2.00 2.34 Free 12

4.00 3.05 $570.00 8

2.00 3.45 Free 4

2.00 3.62 $25.00 - 45.00 3

4.00 3.66 Free 2

Source: UW E-Business Consortium © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

www.uwebc.org

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 1.2 Features 1.3 Simplicity 1.4 Navigations 1.5 Aesthetics 1.6 Others in Usability Is the tool standalone, browser based, toolbar or deskbar? (not rated) How many useful features, preferences and options are available? How does the tool deal with the following tradeoffs (more features vs. simpler application design)? 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? How are the user interface components and functions refined and organized? Does it look professional? How about commands, forms, icons and images? 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 2.3 Supported Media Files Which file formats are supported? Office, PDF, IM files, Zip, RSS and folder names? Which image/audio/video files are supported?

www.uwebc.org

© 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Decision Tools | Desktop Search

13

2.4 Supported Applications

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 2.6 Web Search Integration 2.7 E-mail Integration

Does the tool support multi language searches? Can it search Asian text? Does it support Unicode or other specific encoding types? How does the tool seamlessly integrate local machine search, web history, and web site search into one platform? 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 3.6 Others in Accuracy Can users easily filter or sort search output? What kinds of filtering/sorting options are available? How easy are they to use? 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

14

4.3 Initial Index Time 4.4 Index Controls

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? 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 4.6 Others in Efficiency

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? Other remarkable efficiency features if any. This score is only applied if it raises the average.

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 Can users search SSL web histories? Do users have an option to prevent those pages from being indexed? Can the tool allow users to search someone else’s personal folders? Or does it restrict indexable folders, primarily for privacy/security reasons? Is there any possible intrusion or security breach? 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? How does the vendor address privacy and security issues? Is it clearly stated on the web site or during installation? Does the tool secretly install Spyware or Adware? Is there any unusual network activity occuring when the application is running? 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 Does the vendor provide enterprise desktop search solutions?

www.uwebc.org

© 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 clpaschen@wisc.edu

www.uwebc.org

© 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful