| 3:57 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
JeremyL >> I thought the ftc was getting SE's to move away from tricking users?
I don't think the long arm of the FTC reaches to Norway.
| 4:01 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
hakre -- The link I was referring to is the very first one off of their home page:
I do agree that they add plenty sites that don't pay (I've been in their database for years and do very well with queries). My point is simply to become a serious competitor to Google (if that's the goal?), the emphasis must be on total indexing and laser targeted results. When they can convince the public that is what they'll get from ATW, then they are on their way to the big time. And I do hope that happens, as we need more top level competition, not less...
| 4:05 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
JeremyL, I was just going to post about the Overture results.
I was wondering how Overture was going to deal with this. It seemed pretty obvious that Overture would make their results more like the other results. It had to hurt Overture when all the search engines started labeling them more clearly. I'm sure this was on their minds when they bought ATWAV . It will be really interesting to see the changes coming at AV.
| 4:06 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
reno: they already compete with google. try an image search on atw and on google - even if i like google more, for image search i prefer atw.
what i really hate about google and atw is that these sites are not able to handle cookies stored in memory only with ie. all the settings crap does not work if you have stored cookies disabled. they try to force you to have a cookie on your harddisk. this is really lame and ugly.
| 4:29 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I like it! Fast is now the hands of some people that are very good at marketing. By the looks of things they mean business and the year isn't even half over.
We are in for a good ride. :)
| 5:36 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I definitely concur hakre that ATW successfully competes with Google from a technological point of view. But what I am talking about is that all important "public perception". Ask a thousand average web surfers (not computer professionals) the name of 3 search engines and you'll hear "Yahoo" (ok, I know they are technically not a se, but you'll still get that answer); AOL (same comment as above); and Google. I'd love to see ATW make that list, but breaking through is gonna be tough *unless* they can sell the idea that they are faster, smarter, and more relevant. Not an easy sell as long as the guys at Google continue doing a pretty fine job...
| 5:53 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
reno, thats really true. google is very popular since years and its still growing. yahoo uses google results, so i don't count on this point of view. and aol - the people i know start quitting aol if the start to use net.
maybe atw has to bring up some more cool features to jump over the google-hype-gap. ;)
| 6:24 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
All in all I prefer this look.
URL Investigator is very nice. I like their subdomain presenter as well.
Try nasa.gov for subdomains.
Again Alltheweb is just great for advanced searching!
Well FAST also did some heavy crawling yesterday.
| 6:49 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Ok, I give in. Where is the URL investigator?
| 6:50 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Just type in the full url in the search query box.
| 6:51 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
just type in the full url in the form and blammo! there it is.
| 6:51 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Ok, I give in. Where is the URL investigator? |
just enter a domain name into the search-box - el campo buscando - and press the button.
| 7:01 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
nice! thanx. It even provides a link to the Wayback Machine - so I know what my site looked like in 1999. <shudder>
| 7:07 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
By the way, the waybackmachine seems to have updated as well till december.
| 7:34 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
after the alexa thing this might even blow up concerns about waybackmachine and privacy. seems that blocking the ia-archiver will get even more popular now... ;)
| 8:03 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
ATW is a great engine, just needs promoting and Google will be dead in the water!
None of the Google imposed penalty nonsense with ATW, it finds the most relevant pages and dispays them accordingly, now in a Google style format.
Go ATW, show the World what a true search engine should produce for results and get back some of that market from the Google supported Mega sites.
Google's algo has practically nothing to do with relevance, it is all about "power" on the net, which favors the old and powerful sites that haven't been updated in yonks! ATW favors more relevance regardless of age....and as a result its SERP's are much better!
| 8:06 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The sincerest form of flattery... and, under those circumstance, they did a pretty good job. I actually preferred the appearance of the old site... The "I'm Feeling Lucky" skin took a bit of chutzpah, but maybe, when you're this derivative, it's better to have that kind of reference than not.
|Bad: New fonts suck and they took away my ability to change thier size SIGH! |
JeremyL - Try the font size adjustment in your browser, just like before fixed CSS sizes... ;) Yes, those paid results are pretty deceptive, aren't they. It's a good thing my monitor is beginning to fade, so I can see the word "sponsored." I'll bet it's just about invisible on a Mac.
What really hits me about the paid results is how, on a 600x800 screen, they exactly fill the browser window. Kind of insidious, I think. Probably one of the reasons for going to a larger default font.
Fast's big problem is still the uneven playing field. When not everybody's indexed, it's really hard to return good results. Also, I've got to think that PFI engines, even if they do update occasionally, have got to have algos that favor their paying customers to keep them subscribing... not on an individual basis, but at least serving the kind of sites that would pay for a lot of pages... and that this kind of skewing is perhaps what messes up ATW's results all the way around.
| 8:20 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>> Overture results look EXACTLY like the normal results except the really small print beside the listing. I thought the ftc was getting SE's to move away from tricking users? <<
Yes... and it's absolutely disgusting.
I guess it's to be expected from an outfit like Overture. As I mentioned when they bought the company, it's in their DNA to have no real interest in search return quality, just to monetize.
As a consequence, tricking their users is unlikely to concern them either, as long as they get the money. It's called deception.
This sort of deceipt goes a long way to describing the nature of a firm. If they'll do that to their users, what of their advertisers?
Think about it next time you are paying for their clicks.
| 8:40 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I like the tabs.. seriously. There's no images used in the tabs. In fact the whole page weighs in at about 7.8K. Someone's been reading Brett's 12 months...
| 8:41 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Do not like the new look but the URL Investigator tool is neat.
| 8:49 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Google's algo has practically nothing to do with relevance, it is all about "power" on the net, which favors the old and powerful sites that haven't been updated in yonks! ATW favors more relevance regardless of age....and as a result its SERP's are much better! |
Strongly disagree. I have seen some good results from FAST but recently they've goen the wrong way again. I'm seeing nothing but spammy results. It seems like meta tags (description) matter again, which is IMO not a good option. This is too easy for spammers.
And I really think that Google still produces the best results, and now again a lot ahead of the 2nd SE.
| 9:10 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I can't see any overture ads on alltheweb. Maybe because im connected from Malaysia? Searched for all the obvious queries like data recovery and casinos...
Or maybe i cant tell the difference on my laptop screen? All seem to have the same fonts etc and no "sponsored" tags.
Where do they appear? At the top (under news?), on the bottom?
| 9:12 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|ATW is a great engine, just needs promoting and Google will be dead in the water! |
I agree with that statement except that I don`t think Google will be in the water if ATW is heavily promoted by their new owners. ATW is ideed a great engine and deserve to be up there alongside Google. ;)
| 9:16 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>Where do they appear?<<
Search for, say, "hotels." Paid results at the top are Travelocity, Expedia, Orbitz... The tiny ID of "(sponsored)" in light grey appears just to the right of the titles in each of these.
At 600x800, with default font size, these three fill the browser window.
| 9:16 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Where do they appear? At the top (under news?), on the bottom? |
at the top of the search results (in the listing).
| 9:18 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Chiyo, OV is displayed for US users, as ES is for European users.
I guess you belong to the people who have to live without additional consumer information
| 9:21 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Certainly from a visual perspective, and placement of the search field, feels very G.
But, i like the look and the new tools will mean i can play for endless hours in investigating what ever i want too. Great Stuff, Searching should be fun.
| 10:21 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I like it, it seems alot quicker and hopefully they will try to market it as a useable SE to the general public.
Surely Lycos is dead as if you like the results, Alltheweb is now much more user friendly than Lycos!
| 11:04 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
yeah the sponsored links are extremely visually similar to the standard listings. You better look close or you might be going to a paid listing.
| 11:04 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
As much as I would hope for ATW to become a search destination in it's own right I just can't see Overture going that route.
OV has in their very first PR said ATW would continue to be used as R & D sandbox and as tool for the savvy searcher.
Exactly that argument about Lycos is the scenario OV would naturally try to avoid.
| 11:11 am on Mar 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
> OV has in their very first PR said ATW would continue to be used as R & D sandbox
This does not strike me as a point of different orientation for the future, more a continuation of what FAST is already doing, which is slowly but surely becoming G's main competitior, and now it has some backup (financial) to start to bite into G's marketshare.
Though i understand that many would disagree with this point, why not? is all i can say. Everybody knows that ATW algo is good enough > i.e. think 'advanced search'. Who does not use it.
| This 93 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 93 ( 1  3 4 ) > > |