| 4:23 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Exciting :) Its rather slow for me right now though. Thanks for the link as everyone should tour the new search (: Very very clean cut layouts.
| 4:51 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yes, it is a bit slow for me as well. Slashdot effect? ;) My favorite feature has to be Yahoo's Search Shortcuts. Its similar to Microsoft's implementation of its QuickSearch [22.214.171.124] feature for IE. I've using the add-on for years and glad to see Yahoo! has a command line interface for major parts of their site.
| 4:54 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think it could be more interesting if they made a new SE like they had, but with a new name wahoo.com and still with the directory urls in the search.
| 4:57 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
There is a "Help for webmasters" link on the top of cached pages, I wonder what that is .. not working for me at the moment
| 5:03 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I read an article this morning that said the new search was going to display Overture ads on the right hand side in shaded boxes just as Google does (which was reported here at WebmasterWorld awhile back).
I haven't seen that yet in any of the searches I did on [search.yahoo.com...]
Anybody seeing this yet?
| 5:57 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>I've using the add-on for years
Try Opera. One key short cuts for any of your favorite engines.
"g keyword" <- searches google.
"t kw" teoma,
"a kw" AllTheWeb...
| 6:01 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks, I'll stick with IE for now though. Just a preference. :)
| 6:20 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I took the tour, but I didn't find anything that would take me away from Google. Everything was either the same or unnecessary. I guess it'll be nice for those who already like Yahoo better.
<ETA - okay, now this I found to be cool "(testing!)
Read Messages This Forum: Older: Yahoo Launching New Search Engine >
Read Messages Global: Newer: Browser Caching of Images in External CSS">
| 6:23 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
But I'm confused on first glance this looks like G's features with Y's add ons + a toolbar (come on Fast!). Is this just G's results or are we talking thumbs down to G and Y goes ahead >G?
Sorry too new to to get my head around what is happening!
nearly Rich :(
| 6:48 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I like the new minimal look and the shortcuts could be quite useful
| 11:10 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yet another toolbar:
| 11:19 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>I didn't find anything that would take me away from Google
I guess the idea is rather to make Yahoo users stay at Yahoo for websearch.
What gets users to Yahoo is the mail, the news services, the entertainment services etc. If Yahoo manages to keep those user at their site for websearch, and not letting them go to google, they would probably have reached their immediate goals.
| 11:25 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My take on the new Yahoo is simply this:
If Google was not taking too much business for Yahoo's comfort, the change may not be necessary.
Google is still King in my book (and in my server logs).
| 11:43 pm on Apr 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Looks like they're trying to improve their offering to the millions that search at Yahoo, and it doesn't look like a bad effort to me.
| 12:09 am on Apr 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The search doesn't work for me, I get a page not found error in IE and a connection refused error in netscape. I also noticed this happening sometime when I click on links in movies.yahoo.com and this also happens when I visit linkshare's website, Any ideas why this would happen?
| 4:03 am on Apr 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
There were 22 copies and reprints of the reuters story. I don't think we need to list all the urls ;-)
That is another angle to this story. The pr they got out of this thing today is amazing.
| 7:18 am on Apr 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
lol @ result description on [search.yahoo.com ]
They describe in detail the different sections of the result page, highlighting the benefits to the user. They put big, red arrows pointing out all the good stuff. Yet they completely forgot to say anything about the Sponsor Results, even though it takes up about 1/3 of the middle of the example page.
That seems like blatant manipulation to me: You read the description and think "Mmm, result page, good." Then, by extension, you accept the sponsor results as high quality as well.
Or you think like me: "Hm, they have pointed out all the good stuff. So since they are not pointing out the sponsor results, that must be bad. Lets whine about it at webmasterword."
I'm not saying that Sponsor Results are bad in it self, but I do think Y! should have admitted having them :)
| 10:21 pm on Apr 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
When do you guys think they will switch over to the new search completely?