Forum Moderators: goodroi
They will stop accepting answers by the end of the year, however, the existing questions and answers will remain.
How many more services are still in beta?
Gotta keep inflating that stock price somehow.
well, they tried. There's no shame in trying and not everything works out as planned.
The only recent Yahoo win isn't it? ;)
>How many more services are still in beta?
Gotta keep inflating that stock price somehow.
Since when is it dishonorable to test or launch new products? Companies like General Mills, 3M, and Microsoft do it all the time. Some new products succeed; some don't. (And it isn't a biggie when they don't, unless the product is New Coke or Edsel and the corporation has flushed untold millions of product-development and advertising dollars down the drain.)
Since when is it dishonorable to test or launch new products? Companies like General Mills, 3M, and Microsoft do it all the time. Some new products succeed; some don't. (And it isn't a biggie when they don't, unless the product is New Coke or Edsel and the corporation has flushed untold millions of product-development and advertising dollars down the drain.)
Who said anything about it being dishonorable? Someone is being a little defensive here. The Google faithful are still strong and vocal...although not as strong as they once were. (I used to be one, but am now in the middle.)
I am wondering why they have stopped this service. I thought it was great. Shouldn't something like this be able to run itself and not take much of an investment? I guess I do not understand the model as well as I thought. Can someone explain to me why it takes more resources than I am thinking it does?
Who said anything about it being dishonorable?
You must have missed the quote in my post about "gotta keep inflating the stock price somehow."
And what's with the snide remark about the "Google faithful"? One doesn't have to be "faithful" to Google (or 3M, or General Mills, or Twentieth Century Fox, or National Widgetco) to grasp the simple fact that companies launching new products seldom bat a thousand.
The answers were searchable. The income was to come from ads, including selling some areas to sponsors. For example, if the area was on webmastering, it might be sponsored by Dreamweaver or Adwords.
NYT paid $13 million for the software which was only slightly more sophisticated than this board you are on now. The network was shut down eventually. But, later, NYT purchased About.com, which offers the expert-answers much like Google answers. About.com (which started out as the MiningCompany.com) is turning into the Times more impressive online units, income-wise. But, only after millions have been lost.
On the other hand, Google finance is just a chunk of code that can sit on a server, with little or no human intervention. If someone decided to build it up with some of their 20% time, it might improve. I doubt they will ever cut a beta that takes such little effort.
Gmail beta obviously takes a good sized crew, and is constantly getting new features. It isn't a 20% project. The difference is that Google is probably getting very nice cash flow from it, if not actual profit.
To some degree, many of the little betas, in aggregate, can help create this portal stickiness. But Answers has been around long enough though where such benefits were likely measurable. It then just came down to a basic business decision + adding up the utility it brings to the loyal user base. Both of these numbers were probably shockingly low.
one of the biggest critcisms of google is that it doesn't have the portal effect, like yahoo...
Or Excite?
Portals are sooooooo 1990s. :-)
With the best contextual monetizing and the best search Google has been able to follow the money *and* improve their core compentencies. When (if?!) Yahoo or MSN can effectively compete with better monetizing of their traffic things should get very interesting. I think Google is (smartly) trying to keep focus on the big money rather than the little things.
If you want to get wrecked, go to wikipedia's list of google products and take a shot every time you read the words "beta", "labs", or "unknown"
You just made my day...I am going home to test this now. Will update
On the other hand, Google finance is just a chunk of code that can sit on a server, with little or no human intervention.
Good point. Google prizes "scalable" solutions, and Google Answers certainly doesn't fit under that heading.
I think Google Answers was a noble concept ("Hey, let's make it easy for people with expertise to make some money doing the kind of research that reference librarians do"), but it never had the potential to be anything but a tiny niche product for Google.
Yahoo! Answers will decimate Google Answers...dont' think that's even in question (at least it isn't for me).^^
=P
Yahoo Answers history and discussion on WebmasterWorld (Yahoo Answers will crush Google Answers) [webmasterworld.com]
Answers is one thing, but been trying to spread the word about Knowledge search (the original inspiration for Yahoo Answers) for years AND as it is THE way to go here in korea (and would potentially be in the US as well...eventually, imo) but certainly would crush Google answers.
If you want to check out some more of the history of the system, the TRUE roots of Answers (there are more if you search for em)....
Alternate SERPS and beyond (incl. Knowledge search) [webmasterworld.com]
Knowledge Search [webmasterworld.com]
Yahoo Answers aka Knowledge Search (Korea) [webmasterworld.com]
Also, I will say it again...
Answers is something that should be watched.
...not only as the Google Answers killer, but as even as something that could challenge WEB SEARCH itself in terms of popularity or default usage (assuming "sematic web" or something doesn't come out first). Yup, I said it.
<< runs for cover.
It happened here in Korea...and its not showing signs of letting up there.
This bit from the other thread sums it up...
This was so good, it basically killed web search in Korea.
Once the incentive system is fully realized and critical mass is reached... Knowledge Search just gets better and better. and much much faster and generally better results than "regular" web search. period.
- so sayeth GrendelKhan{TSU}
[edited by: GrendelKhan_TSU at 10:08 am (utc) on Nov. 30, 2006]
Google answers simply got killed by yahoo answers. Period.
Anything Google can do, Yahoo can do better.
or, that should read...
Anything Yahoo do, Google can't do so good.
Sometimes I get to Google Answers (this is how I learned about this service). Sometimes it is some expert exchange site or forum topic. Funny enough, I noticed I often find answers on a ask-expert-style web site. I recognize design and know I need scroll down over ads block to see answer thread (there are usually numerous topics). But I have absolutely no idea what is the name of the site or its url (or, may be there are multiple sites using the same engine?). And here is the point: why should I use Google (or ACME Corp) Answers, why should I wait for some expert to search the Internet for me to prepare an answer, when I can get solution within a few minutes using global search?
Google just found itself in a content creation business and the cost of that content appeared to be much higher than expected.
