| 2:54 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Not this thread :) This one pops up every 6 months or so on average. Have to see it to believe it.
| 3:15 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Susan Dumais, a veteran Microsoft search expert, has built a tool to help determine relevance called Personalized Search. |
Why do they keep setting the bar so high for themselves? Microsoft says they'll gain market share by radically changing the way users search and improving the results. Then they tout soon-to-be-released features that other engines already have.
| 3:51 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
You can't deliver a personal set of results if the documents aren't found in your index. Every time I look at a major site (google, yahoo, ebay, amazon) and compare the indexing numbers between Yahoo, MSN, and Google...either Yahoo & Google's search engines are way under reporting the numbers...OR, MSN's index is tiny.
From what I've seen with clients & other monitoring it seems like the MSN index is the smallest by far. You can't personalize what isn't there ;)
| 4:09 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Personalized search sounds like a nightmare. Kind of like that address bar that wants to finish typing things for you. I hate it. Sounds like something designed for AOL
| 4:19 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
They have been saying the same thing for years, and their SERPs are getting worse if you ask me. Up until about a year or so ago, I was still able to find relevant results in MSN, but now a lot of searches turn up spam. Getting sites ranked in MSN is so easy that even minor SEO can get a site ranked and dilute the SERPs.
They'll unseat Google, just like the Zune unseated the iPod. Any day now.
| 5:01 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|It is all part of an arms race for search supremacy |
It is? Well, you carry on racing while Google carries on filing profits - we'll see you at the finish. Or maybe not.
|“If in 10 years we are still using a rectangular box and a list of results, I should be fired.” |
Oh I just love Microsoft employees :)
| 5:30 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Microsoft will get a lot better, don't doubt it. They can easily spend the next 5-10 years working on this stuff and not worry about the financial aspect of it as they will continue to have billions pour in from Windows.
MS DOES create some really nice stuff, SQL Server, Visual Studio, Direct X, etc. They will eventually figure out this internet thing too I'm sure.. (but they have a looong way to go!)
| 5:49 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
A few years ago, around the time of Microsoft's major entry in the database business, Bill Gates said:
"You have to know when to hold back. If the takeoff curve in something is very gradual, then the early guys who pay extra money and take extra risk aren't protected." [Mr. Software, Fred Moody, The New York Times, August 25 1991]
Is the takeoff curve in search very gradual?
Is Google today protected?
According to Google's Zeitgeist, in June 2004 people used the following operating systems to access www.google.com
Windows XP 51%
Windows 2000 18%
Windows 98 16%
Windows ME 3%
Windows NT 2%
Windows 95 1%
Today, Microsoft controls the client.
When will Microsoft control search? Will Microsoft provide a better reason to use www.live.com instead of www.google.com?
| 6:09 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Powered by marketing.
| 9:33 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|If in 10 years we are still using a rectangular box and a list of results... |
After reading that quote I thought perhaps Microsoft had snuck a new search method into their software so I went to the article, highlighted "Ms. Cheng, a Microsoft researcher" in the text, right-clicked and there in the contextual menu, an option to search for "Ms. Cheng, a Microsoft researcher"-- in Google.
| 10:17 pm on Mar 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Why not they build multi-engine search, give it fancy name and market it as something innovative. Multi-search are more spam proof as different engines have different algo vulnerabilities. And on the other hand, really good sites tend to eventually rise to top on all engines no matter what.
Or, buy Ask - they have improved, only obviously lack spider/indexing resources which MS can provide, they waste them on msnbot anyway.
| 2:09 am on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Powered by a donkey mill.
| 6:30 am on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Perhaps they can find a way to integrate PayPal to bolster their success. Use PayPal for PPC payments?
| 12:54 pm on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Buy yahoo! then work from there.. you'll have a better chance of beating google.
| 12:59 pm on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I will always love Google! (love their plain design too you go to their page and all you see is a giant search bar; however if you go to yahoo, their page is cluttered with millions of other things (it's annoying!). Google makes it easy; oh and I almost always find everything I'm looking for on Google.)
| 6:58 pm on Mar 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Using the default search box on IE has been giving me this for the last 2 days - can't see it helping them go forward...............
"This service is currently unavailable"
"Our team is working to restore service as quickly as possible.
Please try your request again later."
| 6:46 pm on Mar 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
we have various listings on many live-search's no 1 pages and still receive almost zero traffic from them. Their bots crawl like mad and consume huge bandwidth.
In fact search results are almost the same like with Google what points at the fact, that each of the popular keywords relate only to a fairly limited amount of relevant and valuable sites.
Pitty, that none of them is able to present the very best sites ... CONSTANTLY.
| 11:26 pm on Mar 11, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Unlimited funds does not equal success, even after 5-10 years without a consistent idea of how to approach listing websites, which is dismal at best.
What is interesting is that serious ground would be made if MSN were to listen more to webmasters at this forum who spend more time on the search than they do and have asked for some features and additions which are sure to imporve the quality of SERP's including deeper indexing and spidering.
| 9:19 am on Mar 13, 2007 (gmt 0)|
ask.com is doing the by far best and most economic crawling. They follow robots.txt and no index meta tags perfectly. ask.com sends even more traffic than live search.