Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Botswana Insurance Holdings limited deploys ESKADENIA

ESKADENIA Insurance Management Systems are designed to reduce operational cost, speed up work, maintain historical data and ensure a high level of security at Botswana Insurance Holdings Limited; The systems support real-time integration with the financial modules of ESKADENIA Business Manager, including the General Ledger, Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, and Cash Management Systems to maintain Botswana’s needed financial information and accounts updates.

The ESKADENIA Insurance Software package provide a collaborative environment for information management across Botswana Insurance Holdings’ departments and allows users to capture up-to-the-minute information whenever required.

The software package also, provides Botswana Insurance‘s users with advanced up-to-date reports and statistics to analyse operational performance and make proper management decisions.

Developed on Microsoft .Net Objected Oriented technology and using Oracle Database, the web-based systems, securely accessed from wherever an Internet service is available, which allows Botswana Insurance Holdings Limited employees to define insurance products, manage production, and run daily insurance transactions in an efficient and simple manner. Through the systems’ location-independent interface, the company can efficiently handle greater volumes of operations and smoothly manage work processes.

John Haenen, the CEO of BIHL Sure! commented that “ESKA Insures provided us with the best platform for our business, we were impressed by the collaborative way in which ESKADENIA Software handled the deployment of our system – on time, on budget, and faultlessly functional at first switch-on.”

“We are proud to be selected as their technology partner by the largest financial service Group in Botswana – BIHL Sure! and to consolidate our position in the African Insurance market. The systems were deployed in record time indicating our ability to provide advanced and stable products to customers and the market "said Nael Salah, Managing Director of ESKADENIA Software.

The EonNAS 1000 series has another significant feature inherited from the big iron storage solutions - Deduplication. Infortrend has implemented both file-level and block-level deduplication in these new NAS models, which has the potential to reduce storage requirements by up to 70% with typical SOHO or SMB data. That means you can possibly store 10TB of data on 3TB of disk space, without using bit-level file compression techniques. It all depends on how much of your data is repetitive, but if you think about email for instance, you can easily imagine the tremendous amount of duplication that's present in most organization's email traffic. The same thing happens when you want to maintain sequential backup files, let's say the last 10 days' worth. This is a common way of mitigating against data loss that isn't always immediately obvious. With multiple, full daily backups, you have the ability to unwind your data stream back to the exact day when the loss took place, rather than having to choose between yesterday's and last week's version of data. With deduplication, ten days of daily backups need only consume a little more than a single snapshot.

Deduplication is set up on each of the Share folders, individually. You don't have to apply it to the entire RAID Volume, or "Pool". During testing, I ended up configuring all of the shares with deduplication enabled, just so I could see the maximum possible benefit, in terms of space reduction. I copied the same set of RAR-compressed data into multiple folders, and was able to achieve a deduplication ratio of 95%, which is on the extreme high end of what is achievable. EonNAS claims that space reduction gains of up to 90% are possible with backup applications, 70% is the high end for virtualized environments, and 40% is realistic for storing common office applications, like documents, spreadsheets, and databases. Email is another animal, and gains there will probably be at least 70%. It all depends on how much block and file duplication is hiding inside your data. The use of block comparison in addition to file comparisons will increase opportunities for deduplication beyond what you might initially guess.

 I recently returned from a honeymoon in Bali. It was a lovely time, but only because we dodged a bullet days before we left. When I was booking our accommodations six months ago, I relied heavily on TripAdvisor to point us at good choices. We decided on a new place that was listed as the "No. 3 Hotel" in the area. It had recently opened, already had about 20 positive reviews and the price was right. We booked a room and moved on.

Cut to the night before our rehearsal dinner when I was printing out our itinerary and confirmation emails. When I double-checked the hotel's address on TripAdvisor (their Google results are often ahead of the first-party site), the hotel had dropped to No. 34 and was offering a 50 percent off special. Turned out the place was still under construction, the pool was tiny and the staff were still learning how to run things. I made a quick move, found another place and we ended up having a wonderful time.

We stopped by the original hotel in question, and, indeed, it was still under construction. And yes, the tiny pool was jammed right next to a small cafe that served as the breakfast nook. We walked back to our spacious villa, relieved.

So what happened? Seems that the early reviews were juiced, probably by owners and others with some skin in the game. Because the hotel was new, TripAdvisor's algorithm saw strong upward momentum and gave them a Top 10 spot (I'm guessing here -- I don't have access to their code). Then, just as quickly, when the bad reviews came in, the math dropped the hotel back where it belonged.

This is arguably a fair way to handle community reviews -- weight reviews over time and look for velocity. But the problem is that it encourages businesses to play the game and juice reviews. Meanwhile, those of us who stay at places and have a decent time probably aren't writing reviews. Instead, we're left with hyperbolic review headlines that declare the place the best thing since free shampoo. Ask yourself: how many times have you written reviews about places you've stayed or eaten at? I'd bet it's either "never" or "all the time." If I'm right, that means we're left with polar information.

No comments:

Post a Comment