Desktop Search

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
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 knowledge-
driven 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 Con-
sortium 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 Based on our evaluation, the best overall desktop search tool is Copernic 1.5
Usability Beta with Coveo.
Enterprise Versatility Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta was rated the second best tool in our evalu-
Readiness
ation. See other notes.
Likasoft Archivarius 3000 came in a surprisingly close third in our evaluation.

Security Accuracy This software is available commercially from Likasoft. Archivarius’ index effi-
ciency is outstanding and was the clear winner in our tests. The user inter-
Efficiency face and navigation scheme is well designed and easy to use.
1. Copernic 1.5 Beta with Coveo
2. Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta
3. Likasoft Archivarius 3000
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

Overall Ratings
These are the overall benchmark evaluation ratings. Some tools are very good in specific areas such as usability, versatil-
ity or search accuracy (explained later), but to be the best desktop search tool, a balance of all criteria is critical.
Desktop Search Tool Version Score (Min = 1.00, Max = 5.00) Better
Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta 4.11
Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta 3.66
Likasoft Archivarius 3000 3.14 3.62
MSN Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta 3.45
Google Desktop 1.0 3.26
Ask Jeeves 1.0 Beta 3.16
Enfish Professional 6.1 3.10
ISYS Desktop 6.0 3.05
dtSearch Desktop 6.5 3.02
diskMETA Pro 1.0.1 2.63
Blinkx 3.0 2.63
HotBot Desktop Beta 2.34

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 2. Versatility
Good desktop search tools must be easy to use, have Versatility describes how wide and deep the tool al-
a lower learning curve, have professional aesthetics, lows you to search. This includes factors such as sup-
and require fewer steps to reach desired output. ported document types, web/e-mail integration, and
multi-language support.
3. Accuracy 4. Efficiency
“Can you find what you are looking for?” This criterion This criterion assesses the tool’s technical efficiency
addresses accuracy of search results as well as other including memory usage, indexing time or indexed file
factors that help users find the desired information. sizes. The best tool should not jeopardize overall PC
performance.
5. Security 6. Enterprise Readiness

Security and privacy are big concerns, especially in an While most tools are designed for the consumer/home
enterprise environment. This criterion considers how PC environment, some are ready to be used in an
well vendors have incorporated security mechanisms. enterprise. This criterion may be especially helpful for
IT managers.

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 4.14
Archivarius 4.75 Yahoo! 3.88
Google 4.40 Blinkx 3.75
MSN 4.40 ISYS 3.75
Ask Jeeves 4.25
3. Accuracy 4. Efficiency
Copernic 4.50 Archivarius 4.40
MSN 4.20 Copernic 4.20
dtSearch 3.50 Ask Jeeves 3.80
5. Security 6. Enterprise Readiness

Yahoo! 3.29 Copernic 4.00
Ask Jeeves 3.14 ISYS 4.00
Google 3.13 Yahoo! 4.00
* Copernic with Coveo, and Yahoo! with X1
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 Spider Charts

1.50
Spider Charts have been used to show how each criterion was scored, as well
Enterprise Versatility
Readiness 5.00 as the overall balance. For instance, the chart at left indicates that this tool is
3.00 extremely good at Versatility but needs some improvement in Usability and Ef-
ficiency.
Security Accuracy
3.50 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
Efficiency Readiness is not critical for a specific user, an unbalanced shape that lacks
2.00 Enterprise Readiness features may still be a solid fit.

Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta www.copernic.com

Usability Copernic is the most well-balanced desktop search tool among those evaluated.
4.80
The tool is intuitive and easy to use. The new beta version supports FireFox for
Readiness 4.14 Web history search, and Thunderbird and Eudora for e-mail (as well as IE, Out-
4.00
look and Outlook Express) “Search as you type” and “dynamic indexing,” which
4.11 detects new and modified files/e-mails on the fly, are useful features. Filtering,
Security Accuracy sorting and grouping search results are well refined. The application has a small
3.00 4.50
technology footprint and pro-
Efficiency vides detailed index controls.

4.20 One potential improvement,
however, is that it should let
users choose a default web search engine. It only supports the “all-
theweb.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, manage-
ability and network capability. The client applications are identical.
Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta
However, the enterprise version works with additional server products
such as Microsoft SharePoint.
Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta desktop.yahoo.com

Usability Yahoo! Desktop Search is based on X1 Desktop Search, so usability will be
4.00
familiar to existing X1 users. Yahoo! integrates X1’s technology into its own portal
Readiness 3.88 services such as Yahoo! E-mail and Instant Messaging. It can index Yahoo! IM
4.00
logs as well as Yahoo! Address Book. Versatility is excellent, as Yahoo! claims
3.66 their tool supports more than 200 types of documents. It indexes Adobe Pho-
Security Accuracy toshop and Illustrator
3.29 3.20
files in addition to many
Efficiency media files. Contents of

3.60 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.
Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta

Likasoft Archivarius 3000 3.14 www.likasoft.com

Usability In contrast to Copernic or Yahoo!, this is a commercial product, which costs
4.75
from $25 to $45, depending on your status and purpose of use. Usability and
Readiness 3.38 efficiency are astonishing. It is a very simple GUI design, yet organizes a lot of
3.00
features compactly. It demonstrated the fastest initial indexing time among all
3.62 products, and memory usage was relatively low in idle time. It does not support
Security Accuracy any media file index-
3.00 3.20
ing (image, audio or
Efficiency video) or web/web

4.40 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 ap-
plication 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 toolbar.msn.com

Usability MSN Toolbar Suite is similar to Google Desktop, and has almost the identical
4.40
functionality and navigation scheme. Moreover, it includes a Popup Blocker and
Readiness 3.63 “Auto Form Fill” features which are already available with the Google Toolbar.
2.00
MSN performed well in terms of search accuracy. Word accuracy was very good
3.45 in our test. “Shortcut keyword” is a unique feature, which lets users associate
Security Accuracy a keyword with specific
2.86 4.20
files. With this association,
Efficiency users can type a keyword

3.60 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

Google Desktop 1.0 desktop.google.com

Usability Google seamlessly integrates desktop search into its popular web search en-
4.40
gine. The browser-based desktop search tool is easy to use and will be familiar
Readiness 3.50 to anyone who has used Google. A floating bar is a unique feature and allows
2.00
users to type keywords from anywhere on the screen. Google Desktop API is
3.26 another promising feature, allowing software developers to develop add-ins to
Security Accuracy enhance the tool’s func-
3.13 3.20
tionality. OpenOffice and
Efficiency ICQ index add-ins are

3.33 already available. Unfortu-
nately, 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 sp.ask.com/docs/desktop

Usability Ask Jeeves’ usability is remarkably simple and well refined. It searches all types
4.25
of documents simultaneously, and users can look through each type of results
Readiness 2.57 via tabbed panes. It has a nice preview pane, which even plays Windows Media
2.00
Player. The application is very small and efficient. Users are given index control
3.16 when they can choose either fast or gradual indexing. However, Ask Jeeves’ big-
Security Accuracy gest challenge is to
3.14 3.20
improve versatility.
Efficiency Currently, the sup-

3.80 ported 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

Enfish Professional 6.1 www.enfish.com

Usability Enfish is a commercial software product. We tested the Professional version,
3.40
which costs $199.95. Enfish is a lot different from the other 11 tools in terms of
Readiness 3.38 usability. It gives users full customization of views. It provides calendar, contacts
3.00
and weather views in addition to search/preview views. It almost simulates a
3.10 Microsoft Outlook
Security Accuracy environment. Users
3.00 2.40
can create multiple
Efficiency index files and associ-

3.40 ate them with differ-
ent 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 high-
lighted “support@amazon.com,” which made us wonder why.
Enfish Professional 6.1
ISYS Desktop 6.0 www.isys-search.com

Usability ISYS is a versatile tool. It supports multi-language indexing, FTP indexing, SQL
1.75
indexing (requiring XML output), and supports many e-mail clients including
Readiness 3.75 Compuserve, Eudora and VIM. It is also good at enhancing search accuracy.
4.00
It includes a spell checker, synonym rings, fuzzy logic search (which correct
3.05 misspells in indexed documents) and intelligent date/number format (e.g. find
Security Accuracy “1/1/05” from “Jan. 1, 2005”). In contrast to those valuable features, however, us-
3.00 2.80
ability is significantly poor. The application creates multiple Windows menus and
Efficiency confuses users. Custom query

3.00 syntaxes create another steep
learning curve for users who
do not want to memorize them. Toolbar icons don’t have text descrip-
tions, 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

dtSearch Desktop 6.5 www.dtsearch.com

Usability dtSearch Desktop is outstanding in terms of word accuracy features. It provides
2.50
phonic and fuzzy search, boolean and wildcard keywords, multi language and
Readiness 3.25 encoding support, noise word list, which excludes common words such as “is” or
3.00
“a,” and case/accent sensitive indexing. The most regrettable aspect, however,
3.02 is that it does not deliver
Security Accuracy those features very well
2.88 3.50
to the end user because
Efficiency of poor usability. There is

3.00 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 char-
acters. 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

Usability diskMETA is also a commercial product. We tested the most advanced version,
2.50
“Professional,” which costs $97.50. The application is one of the simplest, but
Readiness 2.43 comes with very limited functionality. diskMETA does not support any web history
2.00
or e-mail search. Filtering and sorting are also limited, and there is no preview
2.63 pane. However, it does have remarkable word accuracy features. It includes a
Security Accuracy dictionary feature that can identify a word, like “criterion” from a keyword “crite-
2.86 2.60
ria.” Surprisingly, most
Efficiency desktop search tools

3.40 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

Decision Tools | Desktop Search 10
Blinkx 3.0 www.blinkx.com

Usability Blinkx 3.0 has a Metal theme, which makes it look somewhat similar to the Ma-
3.00
cintosh user interface. The tool’s versatility is somewhat limited, but it does have
Readiness 3.75 some unique features. “Blinkx Visualizer” produces a tree view of search results,
2.00
and users can see the
2.63 tree growing. “Smart-
Security Accuracy folder” crawls the web
2.63 2.60
to find relevant informa-
Efficiency tion to the documents

1.80 in the folder. Unfortu-
nately, 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 con-
sequence, 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

Usability HotBot is a toolbar-based desktop search tool and displays output in the brows-
2.00
er’s left pane, where Favorite and History links are often displayed. The tool
Readiness 3.00 is very compact and has some unique features. It supports RSS indexing and
2.00
allows users to associate keywords to custom web sites (e.g. “eb <keyword>”
2.34 for eBay search). Unfortunately, we couldn’t complete indexing on this tool for
Security Accuracy unknown reasons. The soft-
2.86 2.20
ware seems to have been
Efficiency rushed for the beta release.

2.00 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 syntax-
es 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

Appendix A - Comparison Table
BW=Browser base, DB=Deskbar, FB=Floating bar, SA=Standalone Application, TB=Toolbar
Criteria / Desktop Search Tools Ask Jeeves Blinkx Copernic diskMETA dtSearch Enfish Google HotBot ISYS MSN Likasoft Yahoo!
1. Usability 4.25 3.00 4.80 2.50 2.50 3.40 4.40 2.00 1.75 4.40 4.75 4.00
1.1. Application Types SA SA, TB SA, DB SA SA SA BW, DB, FB BW, TB, DB SA BW, TB, DB SA SA, TB
1.2. Features
1.3. Simplicity
1.4. Navigations
1.5. Aesthetic
1.6. Others in Usability
2. Versatility 2.57 3.75 4.14 2.43 3.25 3.38 3.50 3.00 3.75 3.63 3.38 3.88
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 3.20 2.60 4.50 2.60 3.50 2.40 3.20 2.20 2.80 4.20 3.20 3.20
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 3.80 1.80 4.20 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.33 2.00 3.00 3.60 4.40 3.60
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 3.14 2.63 3.00 2.86 2.88 3.00 3.13 2.86 3.00 2.86 3.00 3.29
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 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
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
Overall Ratings 6 10 1 10 9 7 5 12 8 4 3 2

Appendix B
Test Environment
We performed benchmark evaluations for all the desktop search tools on the same machine. To prevent any index con-
flicts, 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 con-
tents 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, Illustra-
tor, 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?

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 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?

4.3 Initial Index Time 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 Does the vendor provide enterprise desktop search solutions?

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 ad-
vantage 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-busi-
ness 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

Desktop Search

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Desktop Search

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

April 20, 2005

Likasoft Archivarius 3000 came in a surprisingly close third in our evaluation.

Table of Contents Benchmark Notes

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta 4.11

Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta 3.66

Likasoft Archivarius 3000 3.14 3.62

MSN Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta 3.45

Google Desktop 1.0 3.26

Ask Jeeves 1.0 Beta 3.16

Enfish Professional 6.1 3.10

ISYS Desktop 6.0 3.05

dtSearch Desktop 6.5 3.02

diskMETA Pro 1.0.1 2.63

Blinkx 3.0 2.63

HotBot Desktop Beta 2.34

5. Security 6. Enterprise Readiness

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Archivarius 4.75 Yahoo! 3.88

Google 4.40 Blinkx 3.75

MSN 4.40 ISYS 3.75

Ask Jeeves 4.25

MSN 4.20 Copernic 4.20

dtSearch 3.50 Ask Jeeves 3.80

5. Security 6. Enterprise Readiness

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

Usability Spider Charts

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Copernic Desktop Search 1.5 Beta www.copernic.com

Efficiency vides detailed index controls.

Yahoo! Desktop Search 1.1 Beta desktop.yahoo.com

Efficiency media files. Contents of

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Likasoft Archivarius 3000 3.14 www.likasoft.com

Efficiency video) or web/web

MSN Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta toolbar.msn.com

Efficiency users can type a keyword

MSN Toolbar Suite 2.0 Beta

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Google Desktop 1.0 desktop.google.com

Efficiency ICQ index add-ins are

Google Desktop 1.0

Ask Jeeves Desktop Search 1.7 Beta sp.ask.com/docs/desktop

Efficiency Currently, the sup-

Ask Jeeves Desktop Search 1.7 Beta

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

Enfish Professional 6.1 www.enfish.com

Efficiency index files and associ-

Enfish Professional 6.1

ISYS Desktop 6.0 www.isys-search.com

Efficiency confuses users. Custom query

ISYS Desktop 6.0

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium

dtSearch Desktop 6.5 www.dtsearch.com

Efficiency of poor usability. There is

dtSearch Desktop 6.5

diskMETA Pro 1.0.1 www.diskmeta.com

Efficiency desktop search tools

diskMETA Pro 1.0.1

www.uwebc.org © 2005. UW E-Business Consortium