How Do You Search?I was reading this piece at the Financial Times (registration might be required) about the Microsoft/Yahoo alliance. Toward the bottom the Yahoo folks explained how turning their search technology over to Microsoft would yield benefits for both companies:
For example, a search for Yankees slugger Alex Rodriguez might return the standard Microsoft results but also up-to-date batting statistics from Yahoo’s leading sports site and tabloid stories from Yahoo News partners.
Personally, I would find this annoying. But then I think I do less random searching and far more targeted searching than the people this kind of thing is aimed for. I’m less likely to search for a celebrity because I want to see what’s up with them lately, I usually hunt for specific information. So if my search for George Clooney turns up a whole bunch of random stuff — the latest tabloid headline about him, reviews of his newest movie, and stats for how many women he’s slept with — I’m going to be annoyed at that search page.
This is why I think Google dominates more than anything else. Yes, the adwords ads and paid search results can be annoying (and also hilarious), but otherwise the search pages are just results, which is what I want. I don’t want a web of inter-related information.
I wonder if I’m alone?
Comparing the Google approach to the one Yahoo will offer, which do you prefer? Is one more helpful in your everyday searching than the other?
Tags: Google, linkedin, search engines, Yahoo. Microsoft
This entry was posted
on Friday, July 31st, 2009 at 11:26 am and is filed under In General.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
6 Responses to “How Do You Search?”
Definitely the Google approach would be better for me, and for my partner. Then again, I am perpetually astonished at how few people seem to comprehend the concept of searching, so maybe there’s a demographic out there that slept through those elementary school classes in “how to use a library” who would find the MS/Yahoo approach useful.
If anything, I’d like google to be more customizable in it’s returns, not more broad. I like the option of news and video returns you get with a standard search, but I also want the option to turn that off.
“I like the option of news and video returns you get with a standard search, but I also want the option to turn that off.”
YES!! Especially with sites that are trying to sell me X when I am trying to find out information ABOUT X. It’s nice that google has a “shopping” link, but 90% of the time, I want a “not-shopping” link.
I think a lot of my preference depends on what I am searching for. If my query were just “Alex Rodriguez”, then it appears I am just looking for any and all random information concerning him. There isn’t much else in that kind of query to target my needs, so receiving latest news articles, etc, might be helpful in fully understanding everything there is to know about him (though Wikipedia might be a better starting point for definition style queries!).
However, I rarely make general queries such as that. I am usually seeking a very specific information nugget, in which case I prefer Google. But I would like it even better if the advanced search options allowed me to utilize some core NLP tools (like lexchains, or direct synonymy for specific word senses, at the least!). The more NLP tools that get added to searching, though, the slower searching tends to become. And most folk demand that above all things, searching be swift.
Ah well. Search will never be perfect.
I think the reason people like Google is that it’s blazing fast, simple, and accurate. At least that is why I prefer them. People who are poor searchers may indeed prefer the Bing approach as generally the most popular searches are the broadest.
I can’t tell you how many people search for “Web site” or even Google the term “google.” I automatically dislike any technology that assumes its users are unsaavy, but I’m a nerd and realize not everyone is like me.
Glaurung_quena: Heh. But some of us graduated before the Internet, and our poor brains are filled with now-useless skills like how to use the Reader’s Guide to Periodic Literature. If there are testing sites that let you stretch your Google-fu, it’s a shame that they aren’t better known.
I’m not getting this MS-Yahoo team-up, though. To coin a phrase, those who do not understand Google search technology are doomed to reimplement it — poorly. Even the standard Google search for A-Rod returns links to mlb.com and a generous supply of news stories, and http://tinyurl.com/ml2xbt shows that you can also get information on the results page if you like typing more than surfing.
But DWIM-heavy search engines can be useful if they really know their subject. I wrote a story here about Wolfram|Alpha handily beating my usual combo of Google/Wikipedia when I needed a math formula.