This link has been bookmarked by 71 people . It was first bookmarked on 02 Jan 2007, by Terry Jones.
-
25 May 13
-
18 Jun 11
-
03 Apr 08
-
There are two classical business cases for a new company: a better way or a cheaper way.
-
- Better Technology - the results are of better quality/relevancy
- Better UI - the results are presented in a better way
- Vertical/Semantic Search - a combination of better technology and better UI
-
1) natural language processing/AI techniques and 2)
-
People powered search
-
Note that their toying at SearchMesh.com can already hurt some current vertical search engine providers
-
Given that Google already has specialized search for Blogs and Music, it seems like it is going to be just a matter of time before Google ventures into other categories
-
From that point of view, another promising contender (mentioned by Emre) is personalized search
-
-
07 Mar 08
-
18 Nov 07
-
09 Nov 07
-
26 Jun 07
-
24 Jun 07
-
19 Jun 07
-
30 Mar 07
-
# 9
"Better Technology"I am curious why you think those are better technologies. Different they certainly are, but better? Each tries to accomplish its own different goal apparently. And as they evolve over time, that's free R and D for Google.
Google has incredible algorithms. Take for example the "Did you mean?" feature : this thing can accomplish a lot in many unrelated areas. Also, one of the strengths of Google algorithms is the fact they are tweaked daily, apparently (weights). I don't think any of the "challengers" listed above have the budget to afford that.
Posted by: Stephane Rodriguez | January 2, 2007 11:32 AM
-
It is to be noted that inertia and habit carries a lot of weight
-
-
03 Mar 07
Stefan Kuepperse look at Clustering solutions, that essentially attempt to do what vertical search engines do - b
google search web2.0 searchengine future reference usability web del.icio.us
-
15 Jan 07
-
09 Jan 07
-
07 Jan 07
Arne van ElkOverzicht van ontwikkelingen op zoekmachine-gebied, vooral de nieuwe web 2.0 zoekbedrijfjes.
-
05 Jan 07
-
mark oehlertWritten by Alex Iskold and edited by Richard MacManus In an article in the January 1st 2007 issue of NYTimes, reporter Miguel Helft writes about the race in ...
-
04 Jan 07
-
03 Jan 07
wally mahar# Better Technology - the results are of better quality/relevancy
# Better UI - the results are presented in a better way
# Vertical/Semantic Search - a combination of better technology and better UI -
-
-
02 Jan 07
-
Based on what we have seen so far, it is difficult to see how these companies can beat Google. Firstly, being able to enter the query using natural language is already allowed by Google, so this is not a competitive difference. It must then be the actual results that are vastly better. Now that is really difficult to imagine. Somewhat better maybe, but vastly different? Unlikely.
-
require time, flawless execution, big marketing dollars and, of course, a better technology
-
what better technology means. In my mind it is the one that delivers relevant results faster.
-
personalized search. With this technology, search results are going to be organized not by PageRank but by your personal interests
-
None of these technologies has barrier to entries for Google, so if any of them gets enough market share Google is simply going to roll out an upgrade.
-
The main reason is that it is straightforward to replicate them.
-
While it is clear that solutions like del.icio.us are superior to static web directories, it seems that the search algorithm is going to be difficult to beat by power of people. The speed and completeness of the Google algorithm is going to be particularly out of reach when it comes to people powered solutions.
-
There are a lot of players going after Blogs, Classifieds, Electronics, Health, Jobs and Travel engines - because of both popularity and monetization opportunities.
-
-
FirstN@me L@stN@meWritten by Alex Iskold and edited by Richard MacManus In an article in the January 1st 2007 issue of NYTimes, reporter Miguel Helft writes about the race in ...
-
Ratcatcher"Various approaches will have different degrees of success in seizing bits of the market, but to make a serious dent will require time, flawless execution, big marketing dollars and, of course, a better technolog"
Page Comments
much talked about lately. Last year Read/WriteWeb had a number of big posts on this
topic, including Emre's Search 2.0 and
my post about vertical
search. We have also profiled many search players, including Retrevo, Hakia, Quintura, Pluggd, Microsoft
Live Search, Snap and ChaCha.
Sincce we have been following the battle closely, we are excited to see the coverage in
New York Times - which signals that the search space has heated up enough to be worthy of
attention by a tech-savvy mainstream audience.
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.