| 12:47 am on Jul 31, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Try mousing over the squares -- there's more to it than a just the picture. It's promoting their image search and live maps too.
| 12:55 am on Jul 31, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft changes up the photos, with your home town coming soon, and example queries pumping traffic that will get noticed. Interesting strategy.
| 3:31 am on Jul 31, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Bentler, that is an interesting idea and one that I would like to see. I imagine we would see a gold rush to capitalize on those keywords for Live.
I quite like the new look. Simple but attractive and a bit different than the others.
| 2:04 pm on Jul 31, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Hmmm.... I'm actually finding the results not all that bad. I was searching for game walkthough stuff and the first result was exactly what I wanted. I havn't seen that happen on Live in a long time.
I think changing up the picture every month would be a good idea. That you way people won't get tired of looking at the same photo.
| 2:40 am on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
To me MSN relies way too much on domain name and file names. That seems a 101 of web search, but will they ever be able to use more efficient algorithms?
| 8:32 am on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Slightly irrelevant.. but when clicking Windows Live (top left) it puts you in a long loading loop and then...
"The Windows Live Network is unavailable from this site for one of the following reasons:
* This site may be experiencing a problem
* The site may not be a member of the Windows Live Network"
| 2:27 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Nice, maybe I'll forget for a minute that their serps are so bad because I'm dreaming of boating on the Okavanga delta.
| 5:47 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
That is a welcome change and the Live results are not "that bad". I'm going to start using Live a "little" more. I too am getting a little bored with the "white" space. I'm liking the new 2.0 look of filling the void with pleasing background imagery.
| 10:36 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I've noticed that when searching live search for things un-related to promoting a site, the results are really not all the bad and in some cases just as good as Google and way better than Yahoo.
A lot of Webmasters who are trying to promote sites and can't get them to show will tell you the results suck just the same as when they can't get them to show in Google.
I'm trying to promote sites and some show up and others don't and I have to say at least in the areas I'm working with, the results really are not that bad.
I also started playing around with their image search I actually like it better than Google's image search.
They seem to be on the right track. Their biggest hurdle is going to get people to give up the Google fix and give live a try. The image is a nice start. After you use Live and go back to Google, that white space kind of smacks you in the face.
Google needs the competition to knock em down a peg anyway.
| 1:55 am on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)|
This is just lipstick on a pig - and MS knows it.
| 3:49 am on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|This is just lipstick on a pig - and MS knows it. |
Has anyone ever compared the top 30 results across the top three for the top ten search terms? If so, where can I find that? I'd like to see just how much "lipstick" MS have on its pig. And, I'd like to see how much "lipstick" the other pigs have. Sounds like a challenge... ;)
Those results should be recent, like within the past 7-14 days to be fair to all three.
| 9:19 pm on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)|
There is a two word term that on MSN 8 out of the first 20 results are from the same spammer. All 8 pages point back to a single page. I pointed this out to msndude about two years ago. They hand fixed these results and it lasted about a month.
I'm sure MSN is fine on "big" words. Try an ED name (something very popular...) See how many Live.com sites point to online pharms (thin affiliates) while Google points to information.
Live.com is played like a cheap fiddle. Their ways of detecting spam are flawed. They've spent a ton of money on the engine and they're still trying to buy search from Yahoo. It's just not working out and they know it. They can't even keep up with Yahoo and Google, let alone catch up.
| 6:05 pm on Aug 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Well, that didn't last long for me.
I like the look, had the page set as home page but 50% of the time when I would do a search, the search was unresponsive and just sat there.
Nothing bugs me more that an application that won't work.
The searches I was able to do all seemed good enough but I won't tolerate an search function that takes FOREVER to pull up a query if at all.
I've switched my home page back to the blinding white. Their search function works 99.9% of the time for me.