The search technology marketplace is getting much more specialized, with important implications for you the customer.

There are at least two different ways that software can specialize: Functionally and Vertically. Functional specialization -- sometimes referred to as "horizontal" specialization -- entails targeting a particular, well-known business use-case, such as e-discovery, that spans multiple different industries. Verticalization happens when a product gets tailored for a specific market "vertical" or industry segment, such as Manufacturing. (Verticalization typically implies functional specialization of some kind as well, but different industries beget different types of functional needs.)

In the opposite direction, some vendors try to create omnibus platforms, making a product or product family more broadly capable, and therefore theoretically applicable to many different verticals and business scenarios. This can be an effective strategy, but at some level is the opposite of specialization. An example of this in the WCM world is Ektron's Web CMS, which started out essentially as a rich-text editor and has broadened, functionally, in a manner that would make the designers of the Swiss Army knife proud. Many other WCM and ECM tools have followed a similar path.

The search marketplace has been quite different. Our latest Search & Information Access Research has found such specialization more the rule than the exception. In fact, it is a major -- maybe the major -- industry trend right now.

For example, when a vendor such as Recommind continues to tailor its products in ways that favor addressing enterprise e-discovery use-cases and the legal marketplace, that's an example of of both functional and vertical specialization.

Other examples of functional and vertical specialization in search are legion.

• Endeca continues to pursue categorization, clustering, and other techniques particularly relevant to the online-retail market (and the intelligence community, as well).
• Surfray is striving to differentiate itself as the "SharePoint search solution."
• Adobe Omniture's SiteSearch has concentrated heavily on an analytics-rich approach to search that appeals to marketers.
• Sinequa, with its emphasis on linguistic analysis, continues to tout its prowess as a multi-repository "knowledge access tool," applicable for KM use-cases and the law enforcement sector.
• Coveo and ISYS, meanwhile, continue to strengthen their capabilities in multi-client (palm/lap/desktop) enterprise search. Coveo, in addition, continues to beef up its BI capabilities; it now offers a search solution tailored for call-centers.

For more examples, consult our newly updated Search & Information Access Research.

Of course, the trend towards specialization search is not universal. Mega-vendor Autonomy offers a dizzying array of diverse search and access tools. Even then, Autonomy increasingly emphasizes "meaning-based computing." I'm not sure what that term means, but we've seen demos for functional use cases like e-commerce.

Overall, we view specialization as a positive trend. It means search vendors (and presumably their customers) understand that search is not really a one-solution-fits-all problem. Search is as much a knowledge-discovery problem as it is a problem of "looking things up." It's about finding things you didn't necessarily know existed. And the tactics for doing that are as varied as the information world itself. There is no one right way to find something, so it stands to reason there is no one general-purpose system that can do it all. Getting the right search solution in place means first and foremost understanding your needs. And that's something we can help you with -- through our research and consultation. Don't hesitate to call on us when the time comes.