homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.161.190.9
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Microsoft / Bing Search Engine News
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: mack

Bing Search Engine News Forum

    
Looking into the Mind of Microsoft
Researching the researchers
Marcia




msg:1536501
 7:44 pm on May 26, 2004 (gmt 0)

Microsoft Search is just now in the research and developmental stages, so trying to project what's in store could be an exercise in futility. They have, however, intimated that their search will be introducing ground-breaking technology.

Two things we can know for sure is that Microsoft has deep pockets and a research team with some top drawer research people. And there are a few things that all research people have in common:

1. They read papers
2. They have meetings to discuss papers. Like:

Microsoft Research Cambridge, December 2003
Inverse Document Frequency Meeting [research.microsoft.com]

3. They write papers.

They''ve got quality people with interesting backgrounds - like Senior Researcher Susan Dumais [research.microsoft.com]. Some of her papers from before she came on board with MS are here:

Bellcore Latent Semantic Indexing Page [lsi.argreenhouse.com]

It occurs to me that even though we have no way to know what the final product will be when it makes its debut, if we can glimpse into what their research people are interested in, when Microsoft Search finally makes its grand entrance, which last I read is expected to be 2006, it won't be as much of a total surprise.

They've always liked their software and suites to be "integrated," including their browser. Amongst all they've got out there, this one is particularly interesting - especially the first paragraph in the Conclusion:

From Latent Semantics to Spatial Hypertext - An Integrated Approach
[research.microsoft.com...]

We have also demonstrated that searching and browsing can be accommodated within the same semantic space.

There seem to be some recurring themes, and the more I'm reading the more I'm looking forward to finally seeing what they've got for us.

Of course the first release will be buggy, but at least that won't be a surprise. We know from their history that SR-1 will fix at least some of them, at least until Microsoft Search Release 2 comes out. ;)

 

jmccormac




msg:1536502
 9:37 pm on May 26, 2004 (gmt 0)

1. They read papers
2. They have meetings to discuss papers.
3. They write papers.

Yeah they sound like bright academics. Right now some people with some Open Source search engines stand a lot higher in my estimation because the people are probably doing something that these academics are not - actually running search engines.

The search engine business is moving at such a pace that a lot of the problems that these people are working on have already been solved or bypassed. Currently the big emphasis seems to be on local searching. The local searching that Microsoft seems to be going for is an integration of the local PC file search with an external internet search engine. It smacks of a desparate response to internet search by trying to keep the searh tool localised and thus perpetuating Microsoft's grip on the consumer's bank account. By misinterpreting local search, Microsoft could be on the road to making the same kind of mistake Bill Gates made about the internet. The good news for Microsoft is that Google is making an equally clueless mess of localised search. :)

Regards...jmcc

thumpcyc




msg:1536503
 2:50 pm on May 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hey, don't be picking on Bill, he is my hero, he is a capitalist, and most that complain, are just jealous. I do not think that MSN is a mistake, or any sort of failure. The search arena is just another method of making money for Microsoft, that it is currently not making.

Smart Money might be to invest in MS, instead of G, when the additional profits start rolling into Billís Pocket.

Thumpcyc

Sanenet




msg:1536504
 2:55 pm on May 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

You might notice that it isn't just in search they're starting to push - from Passport to SQL server to office, there is a slow but steady MS push towards net integration.

Just how daft do you think Bill is? Stikes me that when they get round to unveiling MSN search they'll also be taking the wraps off a few other projects!

jmccormac




msg:1536505
 3:15 am on May 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hey, don't be picking on Bill, he is my hero, he is a capitalist, and most that complain, are just jealous. I do not think that MSN is a mistake, or any sort of failure. The search arena is just another method of making money for Microsoft, that it is currently not making.
He is a good capitalist but he is not as smart as he thinks he is. He was always more of a business head than a pure techie. Microsoft Network was a catastrophic failure because Gates and co just did not get the internet. It was only used to a closed world where the only operating system on the desktop was Microsoft's. But the net created new opportunities and it was also an open system. Before Gates turned Microsoft around, it was on track for a prolonged evolutionary deadend.

How Microsoft and Google are approaching localised searching is, in my opinion wrong. People rarely, if ever, search by postcodes - the human mind is not designed that way. What these academically minded bozos are doing is trying to impose a finite, computer science solution on a biological problem.

In a biblical frame of mind, you could argue that in the beginning there was the net. Apple and Microsoft broke away from this model with their desktop PC. But now things seem to be returning to the network model. The problem is that in the near future, the net will evolve into a more fluid and more mobile structure. The current localised search approaches only takes one half of that into consideration.

Microsoft rarely enters a new market. It seems to always wait a few years for the big battles to be fought out amongst the innovators. Then like the bottom feeder it is, it moves in on the market while the large players are too financially exhausted to fight back. There is nothing wrong with that strategy per se. In fact it is a very smart one and has allowed Microsoft to dominate the markets that it has chosen. However Google and Yahoo may still be able to crush Microsoft in the search arena.

Regards...jmcc

digitalv




msg:1536506
 4:11 am on May 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

Smart Money might be to invest in MS, instead of G, when the additional profits start rolling into Billís Pocket.

Or even better, buy some of both. My prediction is that when Microsoft first releases their search, MS stock will go up a little bit. Buy some BEFORE the announcement is made. If the search service gets a lot of positive media attention, Google stock will go DOWN a little bit, buy some while it's low. After the initial hype wears off Google will recover so you can sell for a profit, and MS is already higher than when you bought in so either hang on to it or sell it, your choice.

sidyadav




msg:1536507
 5:00 am on May 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

The MSN search is one huge project Microsoft is doing. And with all those intelligent and brainy people in it - it's gotta better than Google - I'm very positive it will be.

Sid

The Subtle Knife




msg:1536508
 4:48 pm on Jun 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hey, don't be picking on Bill, he is my hero, he is a capitalist, and most that complain, are just jealous. I do not think that MSN is a mistake, or any sort of failure. The search arena is just another method of making money for Microsoft, that it is currently not making.
He is a good capitalist but he is not as smart as he thinks he is.

Jesus Chrust, Bill Gates is pretty dumb, he has one simple trick.
Buy the latest stuff, and hire the cleverest people.
His trick just just to buy people/companies that do the innovating.

Simple. And it works too, who can resist the big paycheck from the BORG?

I recall very clearly, win95 before it came out, Apple had everything already there, he's bing copying apple ever since.

The net? I remember very clearly, microsoft had some crap site done by one employee in his spare time, when NetScape saw the opporunity and went for it.

So in my books Bill Gates got lucky, when IBM thought he was no threat, he knows he must buy the most innovative companies/people.

Why do you think he first move was to buy google?
Hotmail couldn't resist, no-one can.

Frankly, I think they were the first company to refuse!

Most would take the pay check and run, and retire.

isitreal




msg:1536509
 7:46 pm on Jun 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

jimccormac:
What these academically minded bozos are doing is trying to impose a finite, computer science solution on a biological problem.

Wow, that's extremely well put. If anyone remembers several years ago we were supposed to have voice based computing, that was a massive research project in MS, number one priority, you don't hear about it much nowadays though I'm sure they're still slogging away at it.

The problem? Trying to impose finite binary 'objective' solutions on fluid biological problems that are not object centered. Language (and especially the conceptual underpinnings of how language/world constructs actually work) is a really big problem, that computer scientists just barely understand on a fundamental level, which is obvious if you've ever read the kind of theoretical linguistic resources researchers base their concepts of communication and language on. I studied that type of theory extensively, and they are so far off the mark that it's not even funny, that's why computers can barely understand simple words.

If you don't understand how our minds construct reality, it's pretty difficult to emulate that process, and scientists don't understand this, all they understand is their peculiar logics, which work for adding numbers etc, but not for extracting meaning.

Whatever semantic type interpretation they come up with is going to be so simplistic that it will be a spammers dream, as bad as what the W3C is dreaming up for us next.

Marcia




msg:1536510
 12:01 am on Jun 15, 2004 (gmt 0)

Whatever semantic type interpretation they come up with is going to be so simplistic that it will be a spammers dream, as bad as what the W3C is dreaming up for us next.

What difference does it make whether or not it's a spammer's dream? As long as our spam beats the others' spam, who cares?

I'm glad I'm not as intelligent as you gentlemen. I like the simple life, I like to have some fun and maintain balance in the middle of it all. Life's too short not to!

Maybe I'd better shut my mouth and keep my opinion of Uncle Bill to myself, because I'm a fan and always have been. :)

isitreal




msg:1536511
 12:09 am on Jun 15, 2004 (gmt 0)

As long as our spam beats the others' spam, who cares?

Exactly, that's what makes this such a promising enterprise, MS is fairly predictable (read, non-creative) in their mindset, which is great if you're trying to figure them out in this arena, I don't think it's going to take the members here very long to figure this one out once it comes.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Microsoft / Bing Search Engine News
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved