TheMadScientist - 2:04 pm on Jan 7, 2013 (gmt 0) [edited by: TheMadScientist at 2:30 pm (utc) on Jan 7, 2013]
"They're smart" - That's debatable.
"they're committed" - committed to what?
"quality and accuracy" - are you kidding?
Oh, how I wish this thread were a joke...
Reading the whole thread before posting could be beneficial, because I'm almost positive some of the preceding questions have already been answered, so I'm not going to bother repeating much, but...
No, I'm not kidding, and if you [meaning anyone reading] really want to debate whether they're smart or the quality of their results, try out doing them ... All you [meaning anyone reading] have to do to beat them is get more than 1.3 Trillion searches in a year, have over $20 Billion in the bank and have +65% US market share ... It should be simple if Google's not run by smart people and/or their results aren't what end users [meaning, not you, but rather, nearly 7 of 10 searchers in the US and as high as 9 of 10 in some other countries] think of as quality.
Microsoft hasn't even been able to come up with an answer to beat Google, but maybe they're 'not smart' in some people's opinion either? Who knows, and call me crazy, but even just the fact Google's replaced so many search engines and has the market share they do seems to indicate, to me anyway, they're a bit more than 'just a bunch of dreamers' who have no clue what they're doing.
[edited by: TheMadScientist at 2:30 pm (utc) on Jan 7, 2013]