| 10:16 am on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Is this post a late April's fool?
I'm going to bite anyway. I want to make a simple search, all I need is a single text box entry field and that's all Google gives me
If I want to get distracted by the latest entertainment news whilst I search then I'll use yahoo
| 11:33 am on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Hey John ..read my post again..
I said Google Search WORKS.. thats a big hit because of precisely what you (and I )said..you dont want to be distracted etc..
But that design does not work..does not translate well over to areas where one would expect soemthing more for the senses..
Look at this Google Sports .. [news.google.com...]
Now Yahoo Sports .. [sports.yahoo.com...]
In those areas the google geeks need to get out of the way and let people in that understand mainstream tastes..Google needs to hire more mainstreamers ..flasier designers, Real Sports people , Real entertainment people etc.. For those areas
Again .. DOS vs Graphical interface DOS loses in these applications.. Sports , Entertainment and to soem dgree news
DOS(google search) wins when needing just basic fast search
[edited by: dauction at 11:57 am (utc) on April 4, 2008]
| 11:57 am on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Well from looking at the yahoo site and the new BBC site, black is the new black.
As for G vs Yahoo one is more like a magazine/portal (yahoo) the other, google, is a list of news sources. Apples oranges?
| 11:59 am on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|As for G vs Yahoo one is more like a magazine/portal (yahoo) the other, google, is a list of news sources. Apples oranges? |
Thats the problem though.. Google is trying to be an apple in a an Orange world ! ;)
| 12:39 pm on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
The thing is, most people want Apples. They've only been buying Oranges for so long because nobody gave them the Apples they'd been hoping to find. It doesn't matter what your news sector - the priority is clear, fast and uncluttered.
| 12:45 pm on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I love Google News. It's design is simple and straight forward and picks up stories I would never normally hear about.
Just before I did a search on Pattaya and was shocked at some of the stories I found. Such news never normally makes it into mainstream media. The same is true of many searches.
Plus what is great, is you can read so many takes on the same story. Makes great reading.
So I find G's news is excellent.
Personally I only use yahoo for unimportant email accounts.
| 3:53 pm on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Ok geeks ;) lets get off the "news" for a moment..(I know it's text and text is sooooo cool )
Sports , Entertainment stuff.. Yahoo kicks Google tail..
and the reason is googles idea of design is crap...
it's blah bland and uninspiring ..
I use Google all day long for search ..I love google ..Until I want to follow any entertainment stories , Nascar stuff ..basketball , Baseball .. football.. (real football not that prancing around in your undwear on field and never scoring thing in europe ;) oh crap ..did I just start a fire? ;) )
I know it's difficult for geeks ot understand but mainstream WANTS dressing on their stories.. they want color and pretty designs ...they want to enter a room and be impressed and entertained .. dance for us dammit dont just sit their ..
In that context Google is light years away from connecting with the massess
| 9:50 pm on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Look at this Google Sports ... |
i could see a need for a directory of the major world sports...
| 10:02 pm on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|"Fantasy Basketball"?! |
Exactly what I think.
Besides, once again google news is fast to load ; yahoo sports takes ages...
| 10:08 pm on Apr 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Here's the "Weight" comparison...
HTML 1 182,269 82.6%
CSS 0 0 0.0%
Scripts 0 0 0.0%
XML 0 0 0.0%
Images 19 38,436 17.4%
CSS Images 0 0 0.0%
Multimedia 0 0 0.0%
Other 0 0 0.0%
Total 20 220,705 100%
HTML 2 119,142 32.5%
CSS 0 0 0.0%
Scripts 4 2,474 .7%
XML 0 0 0.0%
Images 39 213,410 58.1%
CSS Images 2 16,455 4.5%
Multimedia 1 15,531 4.2%
Other 1 0 0.0%
Total 49 367,012 100%
I'd actually prefer the Yahoo! page over the Google page if I were a Sport's Fan, much more visually appealing and what I would expect. Not the "Olive Drab" of Google. But hey, that is Google's trademarked look and feel. Apparently it works. :)
| 1:14 am on Jul 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Dunno, I like Google better. It's easy and straightforward. I do agree there should be topics to go more into depth though.
| 6:12 pm on Jul 25, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I don't think the average user is looking for graphical excess on a news-aggregator site. In any case, I'm not a geek, and I like Google News just fine.
| 9:36 am on Oct 17, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Umm , I dunno ; I liked Google sports page better. Is it just me?
| 10:05 am on Oct 17, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo pays a lot of attention to UI. They have to. There's a lot going on at Yahoo.
Check out how useful Yahoo Image Search is because of the choices they give you via their UI
|Wallpaper - Large - Medium - Small ¦ Color - Black & White |
That rocks. I frequently change wallpapers to amuse my kid and the choices they list there are helpful.
Browse their UI blog at [yuiblog.com...] to see everything they're doing in that area. It's really cool stuff, including all their free AJAX codes. That's a great resource for webmasters.
[edited by: martinibuster at 10:08 am (utc) on Oct. 17, 2008]
| 10:07 am on Oct 17, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Agree with you, it is like comparing apples and oranges.
Anyway, I prefer the Google touch, much faster and I know I can get specific info/news by doing deep searches.
Only use Yahoo Sport Live from time to time.
But hey, I am a geek !
By the way, why do you need to go to Yahoo/Google Sport to get news on football, baseball, ice-hockey ? This is not sport to me... Sissy stuff :) What else, roller-skate-whatever-ball, dodgeball, www ? Going for real thing like soccer or rugby