Slashdot Mirror


AllTheWeb Claims Bigger Index Than Google

An anonymous readers writes: "Hoping to attract more mass appeal for an online search engine with a cult following, Norwegian search engine AlltheWeb on Monday declared that it indexes more Internet information than longtime pacesetter Google. Boston.com has the story." Of course, pages indexed is not the only measure of a search engine and probably isn't even the most important.

291 comments

  1. AllTheWeb by Bob+McCown · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is the same AllTheWeb that has been buying banner ads that launch their website into pop-ups again and again...no thanks....

  2. ALL YOUR WEB PAGES ARE BELONG TO US! by Neck_of_the_Woods · · Score: 4, Funny


    Great, you have a huge index. I know a haystack that has more than one needle, but the stack is about the size of Texas.

    --
    Neck_of_the_Woods
    #/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
    1. Re:ALL YOUR WEB PAGES ARE BELONG TO US! by shd99004 · · Score: 1

      It's still more pages to search, and even if it's difficult to find them (if it is?), I still think that "difficult" is better than "impossible".

      --
      Will work for bandwidth
    2. Re:ALL YOUR WEB PAGES ARE BELONG TO US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FAST responds with TOO many false-positive for any key-search. This is worse than nothing if you are searching multiple, independent keywords.

    3. Re:ALL YOUR WEB PAGES ARE BELONG TO US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i tried it out a bit. they sometimes have more search results than google. (sometimes google had more though.) too bad they just can't merge. =P

    4. Re:ALL YOUR WEB PAGES ARE BELONG TO US! by maynard-lag · · Score: 1

      Is it really a better index, if they have more default IIS homepages indexed?

      --
      Have you hugged your Karma Whore today?
    5. Re:ALL YOUR WEB PAGES ARE BELONG TO US! by Moonshadow · · Score: 3, Funny

      Once again proving, it's not the size of your index, it's how you use it!

      *ahem*

  3. Simplicity not quantity. by MarvinMouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, I think this might finally answer the question I have been wondering about my love of google for a long time.

    Do I love google because it's so simple and easy to use with very quick download times and simple graphic interfaces, and good search algorithms that more often then not give me the sites that I am looking for in one page.

    or Do I love google because it has a ton of useful sites logged in its database including all copies, half sites, under construction sites, etc.?

    I am willing to say that's it's likely the first one, and I think that it might be that for most other people.

    But either way, it'll be neat to see what AllTheWeb.com does well.

    --
    ~ kjrose
    1. Re:Simplicity not quantity. by SerpentMage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. I did a search for "real estate Alsace" in the database and it found all of the ones that google did.

      The only problem was it found many real estate sites within the US, and other places. And these places have absolutely nothing to with the Alsace

      What I also love with google is that it will translate my english searches into the appropriate language search. So Real Estate becomes "immoblier", which brings up another ton of results.

      It is the little touches that keeps me coming back to google.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
  4. I have the biggest index! by entrager · · Score: 0, Troll

    I have almost 3,000,000,000 pages indexed. And my search is the most advanced in the world, simply enter some text and the advanced technology will find matching file names!

  5. Hmm... by eaeolian · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ya think *somebody* might be compensating for something here?

    1. Re:Hmm... by pokeyburro · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sure, their frontpage looks great and all, but look at the location!

      --
      Lately democracy seems to be based on the skybox, the Happy Meal box, the X-box, and the idiot box.
  6. Less webpages by oever · · Score: 5, Funny

    The ultimate test: how many webpages about me:

    Google: 185
    AllTheWeb: 57

    I'll stick with google. It indexes more interesting stuff. ;^)

    --
    DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
    1. Re:Less webpages by dlur · · Score: 1

      Even more important, when searching for the infamous "goatse" you find the results are in favor of Google also!

      Google: Results 1 - 10 of about 9,860. Search took 0.05 seconds

      AllTheWeb: Displaying results 1-10 of 7,347 web pages found

      Not only does Google display the more relevant gay pRon results, it also displays more of them. I think AllTheWeb lies!

      --
      Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
    2. Re:Less webpages by tenman · · Score: 3, Funny

      I like the Image Search better than google's.

    3. Re:Less webpages by tenman · · Score: 2

      does google even have an mp3 search area? I looked up mp3.google.com, and found nothing.

    4. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well for me:

      Google 36 Alltheweb 71

      funny, huh?

    5. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think you forgot to turn off the "filter out offensive content" feature.. alltheweb has that turned on by default.

    6. Re:Less webpages by scott1853 · · Score: 1

      More importantly, AllTheWeb indexes Slashdot better. 283 results for my username. Only 45 on Google after including omitted results.

    7. Re:Less webpages by oever · · Score: 1

      ROTFLOL

      Checked to make sure: no difference.
      But I haven't checked the difference for image searches...

      --
      DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
    8. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for me: 599 (google), 480 (alltheweb).

    9. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have done something wrong.

      AllTheWeb: Displaying results 1-10 of 31,553 web pages found

      Google: Searched the web for "anonymous coward". Results 1 - 50 of about 32,300. Search took 0.56 seconds.

    10. Re:Less webpages by Timmeh · · Score: 1
      You're joking right? The ultimate test is how many webpages about Cowboy Neal:

      Google: 7,530 results
      AllTheWeb: 3,624 results

      I'll stick with Google also, it indexes more interesting stuff. :^D

    11. Re:Less webpages by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      I get an even bigger difference if I use my full name

      Google 7,760. Search took 0.39 seconds
      AllTheWeb 1,761

      However if I search on only my surname (which is very rare) I get

      Google about 11,000. All the Web 11,374

      This basically corresponds to cases where I am cited by first initial only.

      This indicates to me that Google has much more accurate discrimination functions on cross matches.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    12. Re:Less webpages by KjetilK · · Score: 2
      A search for my name: :-)
      • Google: 2,750
      • Alltheweb: 1,023.

      AOL. Actually, I've been using alltheweb from time to time. It has happened that it has been able to dig up some really obscure things that Google hasn't found, but generally, I find that if there are at least twenty pages likely to come up with the search words, Google does a whole lot better job ranking them. That really counts a lot.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    13. Re:Less webpages by m.e.l.l.e.n.t.i.n.e · · Score: 1

      For me:
      Google - 5
      ATW - 64

      I still like google better, even though they apparently don't like me. Love is blind.

      --

      Producer: NEXT!!
      Ralph Wiggum: Chicken necks
    14. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous+Cowlover · · Score: 1

      It's Timmeh. Looks like those newly indexed pages aren't actually active, either that or one of their Dell poweredge servers needs a kick

    15. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rare my rear end.

      Draacke:
      Google: 7 pages
      AllTheWeb: 4 pages

      With an umlaut (Dräcke):
      Google: 30 pages
      AllTheWeb: 25 pages

    16. Re:Less webpages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      err.. how much would you trust a filter which lets those 7347 links through?

    17. Re:Less webpages by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      Rare my rear end.

      Rare as in there are only five living people who use the name and of them I am the only one with Internet access.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  7. Obvious Ads--bleah by dalassa · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunatly their ads are at the top of the page, followed by "top news" and then the links themselves.
    However the first two returns for Scientology are the Scientology homepage and Operation Clambake. I wonder how long it will be before AllTheWeb is threatened.

    Aside I'll need more proof that this thing is more accurate than google before I would consider switching.

    --
    Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.
    1. Re:Obvious Ads--bleah by Mwongozi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Google is currently listing Operation Clambake first.

    2. Re:Obvious Ads--bleah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You shouldn't've mentioned that here.

    3. Re:Obvious Ads--bleah by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      As far as I know Norwegians, they won't give a f*** to that threats... :))

    4. Re:Obvious Ads--bleah by fatphil · · Score: 1

      Have you forgotten about Jon Johanson (DeCSS dude) already?

      Sometimes they're not even given the choice of whether want to give a f*** or not.

      FatPhil

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    5. Re:Obvious Ads--bleah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, it lists scientology.org first when I click on your link. That's kinda reasonable, though, since Clambake is second anyway.

    6. Re:Obvious Ads--bleah by Mwongozi · · Score: 2

      Funny, it lists scientology.org first when I click on your link.

      It's changed since I wrote that comment. They must have seen it. I should have kept quiet. ;)

  8. 2 billion pages, sure by j1mmy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    But 99% of the web is worthless tripe that nobody will ever want to see.

    1. Re:2 billion pages, sure by phil+reed · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but each web surfer has a different 1% that they consider relevant. It's highly unlikely that I'm interested in your 1%.

      --

      ...phil
      "For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
    2. Re:2 billion pages, sure by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > It's highly unlikely that I'm interested in your 1%.
      You almost certainly are interested in a fair proportion of the OP's 1% - you both read slashdot...

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    3. Re:2 billion pages, sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So slashdot is a fair part of 1% of the whole Internet? Sure.

    4. Re:2 billion pages, sure by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > So slashdot is a fair part of 1% of the whole Internet? Sure.
      Clearly not. And I don't believe I said that. I wouldn't have thought anyone would be dumb enough to need it spelt out for them. I apologise profusly for overestimating your intelligence. (On the other hand, since that comment was posted as AC, I have to assume you can't spell your own name).

      Pick any two regular slashdot readers at random. I gaurentee they will have more in common than just reading /. - since there has to be something that motivates them to read /. There's probably a common interest in technology, or the net as an information distribution channel, etc. etc. Thus, the two readers "1%" of the web will overlap - at places other than /.

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
  9. Google still #1 by damu · · Score: 1

    Regardless of what this article claims, or what alltheweb says they do, Google has proven day in and day out to be the best and fastest search engine I have ever used. It is going to be a while until someone takes google's place, and I really do not see allthecobweb doing it.
    dam)(

    --


    Useless sig.
    1. Re:Google still #1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Alltheweb's technology is or atleast was better. Google uses 4000+ linux boxes where alltheweb uses(used) about 400 servers running freebsd. I could explain exactly how alltheweb's tech works, but I don't think my IP agreement would allow it :)

    2. Re:Google still #1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      alltheweb loads and processes my searches a lot slower than google. Maybe they should add some Linux systems?

  10. That's no big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My search engine indexes more pages than google too it runs a google search and looks at 2 web pages that are not listed any where else.

    Seriously though wouldn't relavent results be a better listing of a 'quality' search engine, very few peopl(if any) run searches where they expect the whole index to be returned

  11. yeah but.. by SeicheWarning · · Score: 4, Funny

    are they going to have any cutesy cartoons made out of their name for special occasions?

    1. Re:yeah but.. by duckpoopy · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you brought that up...
      Did anyone find the Dilbert series to be funny AT ALL? They could have at least tried.

      --
      word.
    2. Re:yeah but.. by Pyrosz · · Score: 1

      I thought they were leading up to something big and funny... guess I was wrong.

      --

      An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
    3. Re:yeah but.. by laserjet · · Score: 2

      That exactly what I thought. I thought, "hmm.. these aren't really that funny... but maybe they are really going to change their logo."

      then came he end of the week and I was majorly disapointed.

      --
      Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
    4. Re:yeah but.. by plover · · Score: 2
      Did anyone find the Dilbert series to be funny AT ALL?

      Nobody I know...

      Remember, the only reason Dilbert is funny is because we all get to see our pathetic, cubic lives reflected in his mirror. And when we see fun-house images of ourselves, we laugh. Scott Adams has a gift for bending the mirrors just the right way.

      But when he "tries" to be original, he kind of falls flat IMHO. Sure he sells books & stuff, but I think it's only on the Dilbert name.

      Of course, he brings money home by the truckload and I don't, so what the hell do I know?

      --
      John
    5. Re:yeah but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So does Bill Gates, and yet everyone seem to like criticizing him here (imagine that!) Not to say that either one of you is necessarily right...

  12. Never without Google by PKFC · · Score: 0

    Google is my god. If google doesn't have information, it either doesn't exist or shouldn't exist. I think AllTheWeb is just trying to push quantity over quality just like Microsoft with the XBox and Pentium 4's pipeline depth. *sighs*
    ---
    "All your vase are belong to us"

    1. Re:Never without Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow...thanks for those insightful anti-Microsoft and anti-Intel plugs. They added SO much value to your response.

  13. good not to have google monoculture by kisrael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, I was pretty happy with the results of a search on my name...happier than with Google in that once case, though that's but a single tiny datapoint.

    In any case, it would be terrific to have a viable alternative to Google...despite Google's almost unnerving ability to do *so* many things Right, it is good to have somewhere to turn just in case something went wrong there. Not having a monoculture (which is what we're almost on the verge of with Google) is generally a good thing.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
    1. Re:good not to have google monoculture by Psiren · · Score: 2

      Well, I was pretty happy with the results of a search on my name...happier than with Google in that once case, though that's but a single tiny datapoint.

      Funny, my name didn't even get a hit, whereas it's the first match on Google. But, like you say, it's a tiny datapoint. I'll stick with Google though.

    2. Re:good not to have google monoculture by stevey · · Score: 1

      Yay my name is top on both AlltheWeb, and Google - does that mean I'm a slut? ;)

      Fun stuff.. bored now

    3. Re:good not to have google monoculture by mr.nicholas · · Score: 1

      I just did a search on my name (also) and was quite suprised that in the opening 10 hits, only one of them actually contained my name :-/

      With all the posting I used to do on linux-kernel and related groups, I usually get around 2000 or so valid hits from Google.

      As far as this canned test went, Alltheweb lost.

    4. Re:good not to have google monoculture by *xpenguin* · · Score: 1

      I used to hold 32nd place on google for a search of my first name.

    5. Re:good not to have google monoculture by FlowerPotAdmin · · Score: 1
      In any case, it would be terrific to have a viable alternative to Google [my emphasis]

      But this search engine's your usual piece of crap. I just did a search for "alpha beta search" and got a site for a scholarship search. I'm sorry, but this is not my idea of relevant results.

      --
      -Justin
      That's enough posting for now lads, there're trolls afoot.
  14. American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The story says AlltheWeb.com is owned by a Norwegian company. Should people really support a socialist Scandinavian country? Any real American should only use capitalist homeland-based search engines, like Google or MSN Search. Like Bush says, "You're either with us or against us." Only a traitor would go against Bush's wisdom. What are you, AN AMERICAN TALIBAN?

    1. Re:American Tech Companies by Hassan79 · · Score: 1
      The story says AlltheWeb.com is owned by a Norwegian company.

      <sillyjoke>
      Yeah, and I think they'll forget their passwords.
      </sillyjoke>

      --

      Don't drink and su! antidisestablishmentariazationally
    2. Re:American Tech Companies by DrVxD · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > What are you, AN AMERICAN TALIBAN?
      No. I'm English - and you're a colonial who has a drinking song for a national anthem.

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    3. Re:American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Well Last time I checked, the Scandinavian countries were market economies and parliamentary democracies..

      Just cuz our chicks are hot and our health care is free doesn't mean you have to get your panties in a bunch and start throw the socialist label around!

      3 cheers for scando chicks!

    4. Re:American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this is really what you mean, if this is really your opinion, well than god bless all Americans, because I won't bother about any more bombs falling on your shitty skyscrapers, all of them build on your crappy nationalism! Damn, how about going to school again, maybe you'll learn something about history and the benefits of nationalism. Perhabs check your situation and listen to what people from other countries think about America at these times, then write again.

    5. Re:American Tech Companies by pboulang · · Score: 1

      You're obviously bringing up this point because you are jealous!

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

    6. Re:American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Hehe..obviously you know nothing about Norway. Go hide under the rock you came from.

    7. Re:American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The search engine is based in Sacramento at KPNQwest, they were in Waltham, MA at Exodus communications in the same building(and right around the corner) from slashdot. They also had a London and were planning on an Asian office.

    8. Re:American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you suggesting that having a drinking song for a national anthem is wrong or bad somehow? Come on, you English of all people should appreciate drinking.

    9. Re:American Tech Companies by grytpype · · Score: 1

      Have another warm beer and deepfried Mars bar.

      --

      - Have a picture

    10. Re:American Tech Companies by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > Have another warm beer
      I don't drink warm beer. But at least we HAVE beer, ulike the yanks (that's why we have drinking songs for them to nick as national anthems)
      > and deepfried Mars bar.
      That's Scotland, which is a different country.

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    11. Re:American Tech Companies by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      Of what? Colonials stealing old drinking songs? No way - it's old, hackneyed and used up. We've moved on.

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    12. Re:American Tech Companies by pboulang · · Score: 1

      ok, I stand corrected, sir! You obviously brought up the point because you've moved on!

      --

      This comment is guaranteed*

      *not guaranteed

    13. Re:American Tech Companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... "market economies" ... "our health care is free" ...

      Evidently your high schools are about on par with the US's.

  15. correction by tps12 · · Score: 0

    The correct grammar would be: "All your web page are belong to us." Third most frequent AYB error.

    I agree, though, Google's main strength has always been the relevence of the results, not the size of the pool from which it draws those results.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
  16. Nothing to write home about... by peterdaly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I just did some searches, and it appears to be ok for finding information. Whether it's logic is as good as google's is hard to tell. Little slower than google. It doesn't look to me like there is any reason to use it over google. How many sites worth visiting are not in google's index?

    This may be a case of a company picking a poor benchmark as their performance measurment. Google's draw is their great ranking logic, not index size.

    -Pete

    1. Re:Nothing to write home about... by FFNieko · · Score: 1

      Does your watch set itself?

      Yes, it does, actually :)

    2. Re:Nothing to write home about... by nojomofo · · Score: 1

      It's like the car commercials that you'll see, where a car manufacturer declares that it's car is cheaper than a BMW, larger than a Ferrari, gets better fuel efficiency than a Humvee, etc, and declares its product to be the best car out there as a result.

  17. Re:ep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They made it farther than the Frogs and the Mexicans. Go Africa!

  18. so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i bet my manhood is bigger than taco's, but that doesn't make me a better perl monkey

  19. Re:ALL YOUR BABES ARE BELONG TO BSD by anigwei · · Score: 0

    Looks like you're trying to load some images without actually going to the site. Well, thanks to an "Anonymous Coward" on slashdot.org, I had to put these measures in place. Good going, bud. Somebody is angry with this Anonymous Coward :P

  20. devotion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to use all the web before I realized you could "quote words" in google (atw offers an exact phrase match, and I often search on a phrase).

    Some of the comments in this story remind me of pepsi/coke or ford/chevy blind devotion. If I can't find something with google, I try atw.

  21. In other news ... by Christianfreak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Windows declares itself better than linux,
    Gnome declares itself better than KDE
    Emacs declares itself better than VI
    PHP declares itself better than Perl ...

    Let the flames fly :)

    1. Re:In other news ... by caveat · · Score: 0

      Emacs declares itself better than VI

      well of course it is, silly boy.
      emacs r0x0rs! vi sux0rs!
      sorry, had to say it...

      --

      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    2. Re:In other news ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      PHP declares itself better than Perl ...

      Unfair. PHP is a web-only gig (AFAIK), whereas Perl is more general-purpose.

    3. Re:In other news ... by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 1

      Windows declares itself better than linux,
      Gnome declares itself better than KDE
      Emacs declares itself better than VI
      PHP declares itself better than Perl


      Well, I can:

      #undef Windows
      #undef Gnome
      #undef Emacs
      #undef PHP


      Who's better now?

    4. Re:In other news ... by RevLizard · · Score: 1

      OH GOD!!!! With the exception of the Windows thing - I'm screwed.

    5. Re:In other news ... by Nept · · Score: 1

      well emacs is better

      --
      "Teachers leave us kids alone ..." - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
  22. How does this work? by Sludge · · Score: 4, Funny

    I did some searches, and I ended up with different results than google. Perhaps of note, the results I got with alltheweb are from 1998, whereas google's are from this year.

    1. Re:How does this work? by Peyna · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I've noticed google will have a fairly recent version of a page available when searching, even pages that you wouldn't expect to be updated all that often. (you would expect news sites to be crawled at least daily, but not some off website in the middle of nowehere).

      One thing I will give google a hand for is there ability/choice to not have to have large graphical ads anywhere. AllTheWeb has a banner ad at the top of each page, and another one that appears beside your search results. It is mildly annoying, and if it proves better, could be tolerable. Google's slim environment is very appealing though.

      I'll have to try AllTheWeb for a little bit first and see if it suits my needs before I can give a better evaluation than this.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:How does this work? by Coolfish · · Score: 3, Informative

      i did an even simpler test. I searched for "monkeys" - google returned interesting results all from different websites in the first 10 results. AllTheWeb returned 10 pages, SIX of which were all on the same domain, shacknews.com, and all of them had NOTHING to do with monkeys!

      This search engine can't even find monkeys, then forget about it.

  23. They ignore Google's cache by Andy_R · · Score: 2

    Google counts as a single page both their cache and the site in it's current form, so the number of web pages you can get to from a google search is significantly higher than the number of pages they have actualy 'indexed'.

    This is far more important to me as a user than some extra pages that alltheweb may have (presumably because they ignored a few 'nobots' tags? that Google's crawlers respected?)

    --
    A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
  24. Google advantages by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2
    I'll stick with Google for the following reasons:
    • Lighter interface
    • Adverts are less intrusive
    • Has a cache in case the site gets slashdotted or taken offline by the Scientoligists ;-)
    • I like the special occasion cartoons
    • It appears to be clued in to what people want
    • I am used to it and biased :-p
    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  25. Banner ads by cjpez · · Score: 2

    I'm too spoiled by Google, I think. I took one glance at the search results screen that had a few banner ads, and decided never to go there again. I understand they want to offset costs/make money off of the engine, but banner ads are ugly as sin. I'll stick with Google.

  26. and the P4... by caveat · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...runs at 2.53GHz, so it MUST be the best

    'nuff said

    --

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
  27. Thirtieth post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YEs!

  28. Google needs some competition... by Jacer · · Score: 1, Interesting

    but I'm sure google is faster, and it's results probably match better to what you were looking for, in anycase it'll be intresting to see

    --
    --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
  29. Pages indexed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...the search engine analog of MHz as a measure of CPU performance.

    1. Re:Pages indexed... by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > ...the search engine analog of MHz as a measure of CPU performance
      ...or lines of code as a measure of programmer productivity.

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
  30. Where's TEOMA? by Hheero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think i remember Teoma making the same claim, "we're better than Google.".
    They should be featured on one of those shows - Where Are They Now?

    1. Re:Where's TEOMA? by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Funny

      lol

      Slashdot.org not among 10 first matches when searching for "slashdot"...

      Needless to say, I never wasted more time by checking the next page...

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    2. Re:Where's TEOMA? by danny · · Score: 2
      Slashdot comes up #1 when I search on "slashdot"... In fact it comes up #1, #3, and #5!

      Danny.

      --
      I have written over 900 book reviews
    3. Re:Where's TEOMA? by satterth · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... when i searched "slashdot" direct links to the Slashdot homepage were 1st and 3rd. Hell, it even lists http://cmdrtaco.net/ way down in 9th position.

      They must have finally noticed slashdot.org after getting a billion hits refered from here.

      --
      Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
    4. Re:Where's TEOMA? by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

      Hey, at least it helpfully asks if you want to refine your search to "knitting books".

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
    5. Re:Where's TEOMA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teoma is now owned by Ask Jeeves and their technology has been integrated in Ask Jeeves' engine.

  31. Quantity must be accompanied by quality by sachachua · · Score: 1

    Face it, most of the World Wide Web is junk. Search for information and you're likely to come across unrelated personal homepages or data from unreliable sites. Similarly you might be overwhelmed with too much data - information overload.

    That's where good queries, source scoping, and ranking algorithms come in. In order to sift through the gazillion pages on the Net, we need a way to find out which pages are likely to interest us. Indexing more pages may help, but that's only one part of the answer.

    As for search engine comparisons... well, Google's been really, really nice. =) Googlebars. Innovations. Funky things going on in Google Labs. I don't think Google's going to be easily replaced as _the_ search engine. I'll try AllTheWeb - looks interesting - but Google's cool.

  32. Kuro5hin is dying!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    see here for details.

    1. Re:Kuro5hin is dying!!!! by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 2

      wow, that's the first "'insert name' is dying!!!" post I have ever seen that is legitimate. interesting.

  33. Enough with the Google worship, already. by HEbGb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    God forbid someone presents an objective comparison between Alltheweb and Google. Responses such as "Google is my God" and Timothy's little snip in the article do nothing for anyone really interested in using a useful search engine.

    I just used Alltheweb for some common searches I do, and you know what? It found a lot more useful hits than Google did. Yea, imagine that.

    But Alltheweb didn't seem to have a cache, which I thought was very useful in Google.

    So, come on, folks, give it a chance, and don't jump to conclusions without an objective analysis. The tendency to blindly worship things like google/linux/linus/transmeta is far too common on this site.

    1. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by jmu1 · · Score: 2
      The tendency to blindly worship things like google/linux/linus/transmeta is far too common on this site.

      Well, look at it this way... if you want to look at a fan site for something else, go there. Don't expect everyone to be completely objective. Fact of the matter is that most people who are subjective, are vocal about said topics. Folks that don't care, or don't want to inadvertently press anyone into anything generally don't peep.

    2. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by AstroPup · · Score: 1
      The tendency to blindly worship things like google/linux/linus/transmeta is far too common on this site

      The Slashdot masses will one day realize FreeBSD is the one truly worthy of blind worship.

    3. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by iomud · · Score: 2

      The tendency to blindly worship things like google/linux/linus/transmeta is far too common on this site.

      Yeah! *looks around* Fuck Transmeta!

    4. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > The Slashdot masses will one day realize FreeBSD is the one truly worthy of blind worship.

      The FreeBSD masses will one day realize that CowboyNeal is the one truly worthy of blind worship. (Or isn't this a /.poll?)

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    5. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by Gutboy_Barrelhouse · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Timothy's little snip offers at least as much as your post. He's just pointing out that pages indexed is (only) one measure of a search tool. That's a starting point - what are some others? Another poster mentioned up-to-dateness of the pages returned. That's good. Clean interface is another one. Features like a cache, which you mention, are another. Response time, configurability, documentation, what else?

      Other than that you just say that alltheweb gave more hits for you on a couple of searches. That's a pretty useless measure of search tool quality to anyone else.

      For my part I'm not sure what would make me switch from Google. I really value their interface, and none of the recent challengers are preferable to me in that regard. I switched TO Google because IMO it was a big leap in result quality over the earlier generation, but until we start using personalized intelligent agents, I'm hard pressed to imagine how a new engine could produce as big a leap. Basically, as search engine quality improves, for most people the sample of searches that they'd have to do in order for a comparison to produce clearly discriminable results also grows. Will very many Google users really sit down and do like 50 searches with both it and AllTheWeb, on the chance that ATW proves slightly better? I doubt it, and I'd hate to have to be in the planning room of a Google competitor, trying to think of the killer app that could get people to switch with just a few searches.

      Though I'd certainly switch if I could have the Librarian from Snow Crash.

    6. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by kvnmcsc · · Score: 1

      I've used Alltheweb for searching for 3 or 4 years now. I use Google too. And I like Google. The stuff Google returns is generally relevant, but if I can't find it on Google, or I want an exhaustive list, I use Alltheweb.

      <disclaimer>
      I use windows and linux, emacs and vi, java and perl, etc...
      </disclaimer>

      --
      - Tune in next time for.. a clever sig.
    7. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this "Interesting"? Well, here's my post:

      I like Google better.

      There, now mod me up as Interesting too.

    8. Re:Enough with the Google worship, already. by masterv · · Score: 1

      Other than that you just say that alltheweb gave more hits for you on a couple of searches. That's a pretty useless measure of search tool quality to anyone else.
      The parent post said it gave more useful hits. Whilst the "value" (usefulness) of the search results is very subjective, the resulting word-of-mouth about it is a good measure of search tool quality. It wouldn't have been that long ago when I first heard from someone, "try google.com, its a good search engine".

  34. Nothing special this way comes by psililisp · · Score: 2, Informative

    when a search for

    "php regular expression" AND "tutorial"

    on AllTheWeb gives me 131 results, with more than half being a reference to a PHP website manual (and even a dislaimer footer because it had the words "PHP" and "and" in it ???). Moreover, it took my "and" literally as a search criteria, though my advance searching techniques could probably use a bit of help ;)

    In comparison, Google gives me 73 links (without omitted results showing) with many results displaying ALL my keywords in bold and not ONE of them using "and" as a keyword.

    Dunno, I'm probably a bit biased anyway since "Google" types out so much easier for me (repetition i guess) than "alltheweb".

    pblt....

  35. Simple Interface by creative_name · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'll take Google's simple interface over the cluttered feel of AlltheWeb's any day. I don't know about AlltheWeb, but Google has so many cool tricks (phone number lookup, file search etc.) that it seems like I learn something new about Google almost every day. To AlltheWeb's credit, though, their search was fast, even comparable to Google's speed.

    For now, I'll stick with Google though.

    --
    Posting as directed.
  36. Higher for a reason... by coene · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because it indexes all of the domain names of the same site as different hosts.

    Google returns one accurate site for the company "DataHive", one domain name (not the proper one, but how would it know =)

    This site returns 3 different domains, and tries to present them as different pages, though they all have the same content.

    I can imagine its easy to claim more than google when you multiply the number of real hits.

    I must say though, the results I found were pretty good for a number of queries. Definetly a google competitor. It does not seem to find all of the newsgroup/mailing-list stuff that google returns, good or bad depending on what you are searching for.

    Its nice to have another competant option ;)

    1. Re:Higher for a reason... by Peyna · · Score: 2

      Just make sure to click the link in the upper right that says: "Offensive Content Reduction: On" before you want to search for some good porno. It does admit the filter probably is not the greatest, but it's nice to see it applied. Google offers a similar feature on their images search, but not for the content.

      I have a feeling this could be similar to the recent Hotmail changes, where a friend of mine with the last name Hancock was told he had to change his last name because it violated their rules. Same went for someone with the last name Hacker. When filtering like that you have to be very careful, because just because something is a naughty word in one context, doesn't mean it is in every context.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Higher for a reason... by arkanes · · Score: 2

      It's not linked on the main page, but you can filter content from the advanced search page.

    3. Re:Higher for a reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Furthermore, it's on by default

  37. Guess I like the cult aspect :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been using AllTheWeb ever since it started beating AltaVista (not to mention Yahoo), and NorthernLight got lost in its categories.

    Haven't regretted it ever since, especially with javascript and images turned off... :-)

  38. Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by eXtro · · Score: 3, Insightful
    When I saw Gladiator I was wondering how much of the story was actually historically accurate. I don't own an encyclopedia so I did a bit of research on the web. I looked up some of the main historical characters, Emperor Commodus, Marcus Aurelius and others, using google, altavista and others. What I found was that the spike of interest in the movie had completely swamped out any historical results. I had to wade through pages and pages of hits before I finally started getting to information that was useful in my context.


    Google is my favourite search engine, even now, its ads are unobtrusive and don't pollute the search results. They've been good net citizens and they've done substantial research into how to better search. There results are typically the best as well.


    In this case their search results were very broken however, at least for the purposes of my search. What I'd like to see is google, or an engine as effective as google, add in the ability to constrain your search to subject areas. In this instance I'd constrain my search to historical sites and would have received mostly uncorrupted hits. This is different than a web directory. Web directories don't classify sites based on there quality. Google does in a round about fashion, it lists sites with more people linking to it higher than sites with less links.


    I'm not sure how the details of this would work, self-nomination would not necessarily work. Porn companies would gladly pollute the keywords on the off chance that somebody looking for history would buy a membership to their site. Letting individuals vote a site into or out of a keyword might work, though you'd be in danger of concerted efforts to say vote out anti-Scientologist information and vote in pro-Scientologist information when both actually could be under a religious keyword.


    Anyway, linking to more sites isn't necessarily helpful in my opinion. What I'd prefer is the ability to narrow the focus of my searches.

    1. Re:Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by arkanes · · Score: 2

      Shoulda added "and NOT movie" or other negative search terms.

    2. Re:Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by shepd · · Score: 1

      Search smarter, not harder! :-)

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    3. Re:Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by delta407 · · Score: 1
      Bah! Google is capable of producing accurate, concise, and to-the-point results, if you give it an accurate, concise, and to-the-point query. A search for "gladiator historical accuracy", for instance, would fit the bill, don't you think? Look at the results. All of them relate to your search query.
      What I'd prefer is the ability to narrow the focus of my searches.

      Then focus your search query. Tell Google what you want and it will find it for you.
    4. Re:Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by eXtro · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but would that have worked when I thought of it? No, it was still a very current movie. Critical reviews of the hollywoodification of the history hadn't been written yet, or at least weren't published. I had to piece together my own overview of the historical accuracy (not that there's anything wrong with that, it was a good exercise in researching an area I'm not familiar with).

      The previous post on using +history -movie was closer to the bill, though I still think there's a place for winnowing by subject. History is fairly easy, but what if you're not sure of the terms for closely related subjects?

    5. Re:Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google searches its directory and displays results using Google ranking. A directory search for Marcus Aurelius produces what seem to be outstanding results, exactly on the order of what you wanted.

    6. Re:Targetted searching is needed, never mind size by arnwald · · Score: 1

      Try this in AllTheNews :

      "Emperor Commodus" "Marcus Aurelius" .edu

      The .edu filters out all the film related stuff.

      Cheers,
      T.

      --
      My other sig is Funny.
  39. I'm thinking of changing by vidnet · · Score: 1
    ..from google to alltheweb just because of google's Hacker language setting (which I find highly offensive)

    I emailed Google a while back about the possiblity of changing the label from 'Hacker' to 'H4x0r' (meaning script kiddie of course).. They said they had people calling themselves hackers (in the true sense) so they would concider it. Guess not. Bah.

  40. Re:ALL YOUR BABES ARE BELONG TO BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  41. The true test by Mr_Silver · · Score: 5, Funny
    Search for "sex":

    Google: 63,500,000
    AllTheWeb: 25,435,205

    I think I'll stick with Google :o)

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    1. Re:The true test by GothChip · · Score: 1

      AllTheWeb has an adult filter in place by default. This can be turned off, as with many other customisable options.

      Having turned it off I got 53,002,546 results for sex.
      --
      Simon

    2. Re:The true test by demigod · · Score: 1
      You didn't turn off "offensive content reduction". Follow the customize link on the main page. With that off, a search for sex gets

      AllTheWeb: 52,984,221

      You still get more sex with google :-)

      Just how much sex do you need? Iv'e been using alltheweb.com for several years now, and I like it.

      --
      "The last thing I want to do is deal with a bunch of people who want something."
      Major Major
    3. Re:The true test by pubjames · · Score: 2

      Well, I think there both rubbish.

      I searched for "Juliette Binoche tits" on the image search of both sites (with filtering turned off in both cases) and neither returned satisfactory results.

    4. Re:The true test by pubjames · · Score: 2

      there => they're

      Damn. Spotted it just after I'd clicked submit.

    5. Re:The true test by cybercuzco · · Score: 2

      So since google searches 2,073,418,204 webpagees, and you got 63,500,000, that means that 3.6% of the web is at least somewhat "sex" related, and this doesnt mean porn either, just instances of the word sex. So the internet is hardly the haven of pr0n fiends that it once was (slashdot notwithstanding)

      --

    6. Re:The true test by Evil+Attraction · · Score: 1

      If you turn off adult content filtering, you get more than 50,000,000 hits on AllTheWeb. It's still less than Google, but at least AllTheWeb returns more hits in the image part of the search engine. So - what do you prefer? Erotic fiction or the real stuff for your eyes? :-)

    7. Re:The true test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So - what do you prefer? Erotic fiction or the real stuff for your eyes?

      I think it's sad that "real stuff" means digital images to you.

    8. Re:The true test by Evil+Attraction · · Score: 1

      I actually wrote "real stuff for my eyes".

  42. Some Good, Lots Bad by limekiller4 · · Score: 1

    Plus: It groups matches with a site. So if, say, you get a hit on Salon on a search for 'DDR', you can click on 'more hits from' to get other matches on Salon. I've found this to not work very well on Google while it seems to work well on this site.

    Big, BIG minus: Doesn't cache. Which is a huge reason why I use Google.

    Conclusion: I probably won't even bookmark this site. It doesn't do much that just a little bit of digging wouldn't do anyway, and probably comes with a lot more cruft in the process.

    --
    My .02,
    Limekiller
  43. I like the mp3 search by butch812 · · Score: 0

    Jackson

    You can actually download the songs, really nice.
    I wonder if they will get in trouble from the MPAA?

  44. More pages = more crap by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 2

    More pages means more crap and shitty search results. Similar to programming, more lines of code doesn't mean better.

    --
    Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
    1. Re:More pages = more crap by mithras+the+prophet · · Score: 1

      Yeah, 640,000 web pages ought to be enough for anybody.

      --
      four nine eighteen twenty-7 thirty-nine forty-7 fiftyeight sixty-nine seventy-9 eighty-8 one-hundred-and-nine one-twenty
  45. Cached here by GothChip · · Score: 5, Funny

    For those who are unable to reach AllTheWeb here is the homepage through the usual Google cache.

    1. Re:Cached here by Captain+Pedantic · · Score: 0

      Personally, the only thing I find funny about that is that you forgot the link here

      --

      None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
    2. Re:Cached here by GothChip · · Score: 1

      That was actually a typo where I missed a = out of the tag.

      For some reason previewing html formatted text doesn't convert the links into hyper-text so I didn't notice till after I posted.

    3. Re:Cached here by GothChip · · Score: 1

      And the forms seem to cut out incomplete tags even when posting in plain text, which is a bit crap. So that last post didn't make much sense either.

      The typo was in the A HREF tag.

    4. Re:Cached here by jesser · · Score: 2

      And the forms seem to cut out incomplete tags even when posting in plain text, which is a bit crap.

      Slashdot's names for comment modes are confusing. "Plain Old Text" is really a "do what I mean" mode: line breaks become paragraphs, but HTML tags are interpreted as HTML tags. If you don't want any tags interpreted, you have to use "Extrans" mode. Kuro5hin's names for the modes make more sense.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
  46. Major, Major Flaw by limekiller4 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just tried to pull up one of my own pages with this engine. Got:

    "Redirection limit for this URL exceeded. Unable to load the requested page."

    Which, as near as I can tell, is their way of throttling commercial hits. Wonderful. Moving the mouse over the link doesn't reveal the address in the bottom bar, either, so the only way I can think of to obtain the address of the item it matches is by right-clicking and selecting 'copy link address', opening a new window and pasting it it (and having a browser that is capable of doing this), then editing the URL so only the target link text remains.

    You can't even right-lick and open in a new window to do this. If you try, you get "about:blank" which, afaik, means they're using javascript.

    These people sure go through a lot pains to render a result and then not let you anywhere near it. Saying they're bigger than Google is a bit like someone bragging about how their PDP-11 is bigger than my Athlon. Cripes.

    --
    My .02,
    Limekiller
    1. Re:Major, Major Flaw by GothChip · · Score: 1
      Moving the mouse over the link doesn't reveal the address in the bottom bar, either, so the only way I can think of to obtain the address of the item it matches is by right-clicking and selecting 'copy link address', opening a new window and pasting it it (and having a browser that is capable of doing this), then editing the URL so only the target link text remains.

      Or you can just cut and paste the address that is listed under description.

      You can't even right-lick and open in a new window to do this. If you try, you get "about:blank" which, afaik, means they're using javascript.

      Works fine using IE6. Use that all the time when researching on search engines.

    2. Re:Major, Major Flaw by foo+fighter · · Score: 2

      I'm guessing you are using Mozilla.

      The link does the same thing to me when using 1.1alpha on Win2k SP2+ (My primary browser and platform).

      Internet Explorer 6 follows the link with no problems.

      So I'd say it's a browser issue and not a web page issue.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    3. Re:Major, Major Flaw by yomahz · · Score: 2

      I'm guessing you are using Mozilla.

      The link does the same thing to me when using 1.1alpha on Win2k SP2+ (My primary browser and platform).

      Internet Explorer 6 follows the link with no problems.

      So I'd say it's a browser issue and not a web page issue.


      I got the same error he got when using mozilla so I looked at the source and it's not javascript coming from that page. I followed the link and got the same error so I decided to telnet to port 80 and check out the source on the page and this is what I got:

      telnet www.alltheweb.com 80
      Trying 66.77.74.20...
      Connected to www.alltheweb.com.
      Escape character is '^]'.
      GET /go/1/H/web/http/www.kaosinc.com/jen.shtml HTTP/1.0

      HTTP/1.1 302 Found
      Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:27:31 GMT
      Server: Apache/1.3.24 (Unix) PHP/4.2.0-atw
      X-Powered-By: PHP/4.2.0-atw
      Location: http://www.kaosinc.com/jen.shtml
      Connection: close
      Content-Type: text/html

      Your browser does not support HTTP redirects.

      click here to reach http://www.kaosinc.com/jen.shtml.
      Connection closed by foreign host.

      Looks fine to me.... the 302 (redirect) should be working fine. I wanted to try with IE but my laptop seems to be having somenetwork problems at the moment.

      Very, very strange...

      --
      "A mind is a terrible thing to taste."
    4. Re:Major, Major Flaw by wwalker · · Score: 0

      Hmm, are you refering to this URL: http://www.kaosinc.com/jen.shtml ?

      It doesn't load in Mozilla and goes into an infinite loop in IE. Nothing to do with AllTheWeb itself.

  47. warez ftp site is also .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    warez ftp site is also indexed, do ther remove
    it when ther be more popular?

  48. wasn't a snip by timothy · · Score: 1

    Actually, the comment I made applies to Google just as much as to any other search engine - pages indexed aren't the only thing.

    For now, Google is the best search engine I know, but before that, Hotbot was the best search engine I knew, and before that etc etc.

    I do admire Google for how well it works, but no worship. I'd love to find an engine that works even better. I think Kartoo (even if only a meta engine) has an interesting approach to the display of results.

    I get good results from alltheweb.

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    1. Re:wasn't a snip by HEbGb · · Score: 2

      Your comment sounded to me like it was specifically designed to diminish the importance AllTheWeb's claim, in favor of Google. Perhaps it was unintentional, but I doubt it.

      I don't know if you're a Google-worshiper, but you certainly ran to its defense when faced with a strong claim from a competing search engine.

    2. Re:wasn't a snip by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      Your comment sounded to me like it was specifically designed to diminish the importance AllTheWeb's claim, in favor of Google.

      I think you're right, except for the "in favor of Google" part. Timothy said, "pages indexed is not the only measure of a search engine and probably isn't even the most important." AllTheWeb claims that their page index is big, and Timothy is reality-checking that claim.

      I think Slashdot editors get too snippy too often in their story posts. But this isn't one of those occasions.

    3. Re:wasn't a snip by HEbGb · · Score: 2

      I don't agree; the article was clearly making a comparison between ATW and Google, to which Timothy responded by diminishing ATW's claim, clearly to the benefit of Google.

      If the article had been about Google indexing it's N-billionth page, do you think Timothy would have quipped something about it's irrelevance? I doubt it. More likely there'd be the usual drooling.

    4. Re:wasn't a snip by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      Okay, I get it. You've got a bug up your ass. I'll stop trying to have an objective conversation with you now.

  49. I have seen the Fast technology. by DigitalCH · · Score: 1

    I have seen the Fast technology briefing. They wanted to sell their product to our company. From the technology briefing and from their references reports I believe the do have a much better search engine than google. Both in terms of product as well as their site.

    1. Re:I have seen the Fast technology. by moogla · · Score: 2

      What was their pitch?

      I'm interested.

      --
      Black holes are where the Matrix raised SIGFPE
    2. Re:I have seen the Fast technology. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go for an independent review of both services as opposed to listening to the market-speak of either. I'm big on Google, but I have no illusions that their marketing department isn't spinning something.

    3. Re:I have seen the Fast technology. by garbuck · · Score: 1

      Gee, someone should build a sales prospect search engine that returns the hits ranked by suggestibility. You would definitely come out on top.

      You wouldn't be looking for a heavily traveled bridge in an urban area likely to be the target of a weapon of mass destruction, would you?

  50. my problem with google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    June 15, 2002 -- WASHINGTON - Regulations requiring airline passengers to remain seated until 30 minutes after takeoff from Reagan National Airport led to an embarrassing incident for a Georgia congressman.
    Unable to wait in a long bathroom line when passengers were finally allowed to move freely, Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.) contends he had no choice but to ask a flight attendant for a plastic cup and some privacy.

    "The bottom line is he desperately needed to go to the bathroom," Bishop's spokesman, Selby McCash, said yesterday.

    Bishop wasn't charged or detained after the Thursday night flight, but he agreed to explain the situation to security officials when the flight touched down at Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport, McCash said.

    At the flight attendant's direction, Bishop, who was seated in coach, relieved himself in a closed area between the cockpit and first class. When the bathroom door finally opened, he disposed of the cup and washed his hands, McCash said.

  51. Sounds familiar... by (trb001) · · Score: 0, Troll

    In related news, my penis is bigger than yours. However, user reviews say that yours performs slightly better.

    Choose wisely.

  52. whois the REAL .commIEs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT's easy to know. just read this report buy the Furor de FUDgeville Institute, on the horrors of becoming involved in sum FraUDuleNT payper liesensing, &/or stock markup bookFUDging scams.

  53. AllTheWeb _has_ one advantage by rainer_d · · Score: 3, Informative
    Even if you totally discard it as a Web-Search-Engine, the FTP-Search is still one of the best.
    It was hidden as ftpsearch.lycos.com for some time, but now it seems to have come "home".
    BTW: the last time their OS was visible through the firewall, it was FreeBSD...

    Anyone remember archie ?

    --
    Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    1. Re:AllTheWeb _has_ one advantage by filer · · Score: 1

      They have another advantage. Their news headline search is top notch.

      -f
    2. Re:AllTheWeb _has_ one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Anyone remember archie ?

      Not much, but I do remember ftpsearch.ntnu.no.

      Old web addresses are fun, I wonder if this one still works: altavista.digital.com.

    3. Re:AllTheWeb _has_ one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember Archie. Sadly missed.

      Anyone remember veronica?

    4. Re:AllTheWeb _has_ one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Not much, but I do remember ftpsearch.ntnu.no [ftpsearch.ntnu.no].

      That's not old. This is old:

      ftpsearch.unit.no

  54. it's funny because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's so not true! "Eventually Mallocs All Computer Storage" is patently inferior to "very indespensible."

  55. still very important by shd99004 · · Score: 2

    True, indexed pages on the internet is not the single most important thing for a search engine. But it is definitely up there in the top. Personally I would preffer more indexed pages before most other things one can measure a search engine, simply because then I know there's a greater chance to find what I'm looking for, even if maybe it will be a little more difficult.

    --
    Will work for bandwidth
  56. RTFM by Hellkitten · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is actually a help link. "php regular expression" + "tutorial" would have given you what you wanted. If you want to compare two tools you should at least use enough time to see if you have to use the two differently, and then see what is best at getting the job done.

    --
    - We are the slashdot. Resistance is futile. Prepare to be moderated -
  57. missing features. by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 1

    Here are some features that I would love to see a decent search engine supply. Altavista use to offer all of these but it's indexing is, well, you know how they've been lately.

    (i) Case sensitive searches. - Great for searching for acronyms that are also real words.

    (ii)stemming - this is my biggest grip. Say you remember a company who's name begins with "blue" but you can't remember the rest. With a search engine that supports stemming you can search for "blue* inc" or "blue* +whateverindustry". With my knowledge of information retrival limited to a single grad class, I'd say google can'ed stemming for search performance, but damn, it's a useful feature.

    (iii)proper language filtering - googles language filtering is somewhat broken. I have english as my language and still get even oriental language pages in my search results. I don't know how AV did this, but it worked much better.

    IMHO, other than that Google is a great search engine. "Google news" is a great resource.

    --
    Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
    1. Re:missing features. by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > googles language filtering is somewhat broken
      I think Google's filtering relies on web authours putting the appropriate tags in their pages. Since many web authours couldn't care less about proper HTML, as long as they sell whatever it is they're selling, they don't bother.
      Personally, I'd like to see search engines which automatically rejects anything which isn't Valid HTML

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
  58. How about the image search then? by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'll just say this:

    Google manage to get a graph of the slashdot effect among the first 20 hits, while AllTheWeb just manage to get Cliff showing a Think Unix book (in weirdo hawaiian clothes). :-)

    I don't know about you, but Google give me more relevant matches as usual. ;-)

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  59. does size matter? by squarefish · · Score: 1

    Until all the facts are in, I wouldn't suggest telling anyone you use the *engine* with the *largest* index. Just buy an SUV, it's more impressive and kills people!

    --
    Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
  60. Another win for USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scandinavia vs. USA in the computing field:

    OS:
    Linux vs FreeBSD - winner: FreeBSD
    Linux vs NetBSD - winner: NetBSD

    Search Engine:
    AllTheWeb vs Google - winner: Google

    Browser:
    Mozilla vs Opera - winner Mozilla
    IE vs Opera - winner IE

    Final Score: USA 5, Scandanavia 0

    1. Re:Another win for USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take it easy guys, Norway and Denmark
      are very close allies to the US, and
      fully supported the attack on Afghanistan.

      Martin

    2. Re:Another win for USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, but the US population i more than 10 times the
      one in the Scandinavian countries together.

  61. Easy way to see which Search Engine is better by alaffin · · Score: 1

    Search for "search engine" in both:

    AllTheWeb:
    First Hit: Search Engine Watch (www.searchenginewatch.com)
    First Search Engine: Search Engine Colossus (3) (www.searchenginecolossus.com)
    Hits Google at 22
    Hits AllTheWeb at >50

    Google:
    First Hit: Google
    First Search Engine: Google (1)
    Hits Google at 1
    Hits AllTheWeb at 16

  62. simplicity twinkle twinkle by kyoko21 · · Score: 1

    I just tried to search for "simplicity twinkle twinkle" and alltheweb didn't even return anything useful. Google in fact returned LOTS of useful links, including a link to an old friend of mine who went to VT and then later on dropped out due to too much partying and girls :-)

    Go google!

  63. Old pages, not grouped by site - less useful by mttlg · · Score: 2
    My completely unscientific and extremely quick and biased test resulted in a failing grade for this search engine. A search for mttlg (English only) brought up lots of stuff, most of it correctly, but it completely missed mttlg.net and its previous incarnations (they aren't even indexed). It did turn up plenty of /. posts, some of which link to mttlg.net, as well as some pages from a free web hosting service that I used to use but can't do anything with anymore (the service is essentially dead, but you can't tell this until you log in and try to use it...).

    Worse than the outdated and useless search results is the way they are presented - there is no grouping by site to put similar pages under one entry. Of the 167 results, almost all of them are from two distinct sites, but you have to wade through all of them to find any different ones. With a more common search string, it will be almost impossible to find what you are looking for, and it is still difficult with a narrow focus search. Google ain't going down that easy...

  64. Spelling by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 0

    I don't think anyone will topple Google's crown until they implement a decent spell checker. With Google I've always been able to find what I'm looking for, even if I don't know how to spell it.

  65. Alltheweb's been Slashdotted ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Find google's cache here.

  66. It's not worship when... by YaRness · · Score: 2

    ...the object of claimed affection really IS as good as everyone says.

    And, Google forbid, should google start to suck, or something else start to be better, then I think most of us would find another search engine to "worship", like I (and I assume many others) did when Yahoo went down the toilet.

    For me, the one mention of pop-ups and heavy graphic ads is more than enough to make it not worth my while to check out (and yes, I know, at home, I can filter out all the banner ad and pop-up garbage, but here at work I don't have the luxury of arbitrarily installing proxies and browsers to do that sort of thing. besides, web sites that use pop-ups piss me off).

  67. Everybody agrees!! by birdpen · · Score: 1

    Good to see that everybody is agreeing on Google. Having a big collection means nothing, but having a quality collection is what everybody wants. Google combines similar pages (but still gives an option if you are bored enough and wants to visit all those pages). Searches are more directed and useful atleast in my case as compared to alltheweb. Go Google!!

  68. Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    K5 is nothing but a leftist cirle-jerk anyway.

    It is a bigger pile of shit than Slashdot, and that's saying something.

  69. Well it's true by psypete · · Score: 1

    AllTheWeb has had a larger index for a long time now. They started small and just kept indexing and collectiong pages, and they don't throw away search results based on words like "the" and other common thingies. I used to use them back in the day, and keep going back every so often. Their FTP search seems to have degenerated into a few public FTPs so i kinda stopped going back. See, to me google is good for searching for certain kinds of searches like "youll-never-find-what-you-want-in-all-the-fake-re sults" , and AllTheWeb is good for things like "youll-find-more-links-that-arent-content-or-media -censored". I'm not saying Google limits your searching... But have you ever wondered what pages it doesn't let you see?

  70. My index... by Kingpin · · Score: 2


    ..is bigger than your index.

    Computer scientists - pfft...

    --
    Unable to read configuration file '/bigassraid/htdig//conf/14229.conf'
    Geocrawler error message.
  71. Content Filtering by Pyrosz · · Score: 1

    AllTheWeb doesnt do a very good job of filtering pron type material from an image search... try the following (but dont do this at work!):

    Go to Googles image search and type "fist" (no quotes) as your search item, you see a nice list of images that have a fist in them. Now try the same on AllTheWeb, you get a nice little surprise on the first page of image results. Note that each has filtering on as default.

    --

    An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
    1. Re:Content Filtering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      On google, automatic content filtering only seems to apply to images... thanks for the heads up, the default on text seems to be off.

      I used to use alltheweb as my regular search engine until they implemented content filtering on text by default, it was such a pain in the ass to turn it off every time I hit the site.

  72. News? by Publicus · · Score: 2

    Today the New York Times claimed that it had published "All the News That's Fit to Print."

    One question remains unanswered: Will they be able to do it again tomorrow?

    Note to moderators: This is sarcasm. It isn't off-topic. I'm implying that some marketing ploy by alltheweb.com isn't exactly newsworthy. Thank you.

    --

    My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

  73. Depends what you are searching for by nick255 · · Score: 2

    If you are looking for something really specific (eg. the DNS entry of your machine to see which webpages you look at publish log files), then alltheweb in my experience will find a number of pages which google misses.

    For general searching google still rocks.

  74. The old saying holds true: by nemesisj · · Score: 3, Funny



    It's not how big it is, it's how you use it.

    Google is still way more useful in my opinion.

  75. It may have more, but.... by mwhahaha · · Score: 1

    It seems that all the web includes multiple listings of the same directory on my site. I run a php enabled webserver so it tries a bunch of directories with ?M=D or ?A=S and then procedes to list them. Click here for an example of this. It also lists every single sub directory in all 5 or 6 subdomains that I host. Google is much better at not going into sub directories and just giving the main site. Google is by far a better choice when looking for main pages and not having to filter through all the /whatever/ directories.

  76. Real Life Example by hysterion · · Score: 2

    Alltheweb's claims are not unfounded, and I find it always worth checking when google fails.

    Here is one of several real life cases where it found software for me that google didn't.

    (It still does, and google still doesn't.)

  77. hmm passes the pr0n test by asv108 · · Score: 2, Redundant
    Pr0n search with alltheweb.com, 48,518 results found.

    Google Pr0n Search finds 46,200 results.

    Searching for pr0n via alltheweb.com leads to 2318 more potential pieces of pr0n to be seen.

  78. No single search engine by uncoveror · · Score: 1

    For obscure info, no single search engine is enough. A search engine summarizer like copernic is a good idea. Dogpile is pretty good, too.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  79. Uhmm well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i found the results okay, im not sating better than google, but i compaired the results for the search "http://www.nerdzland.com" to had to do a little gibery to make google search for that string but alltheweb found more results, other than it found all those imagines page "60-83" with nerdzland dot com slash imagines etc...

    so yes it might have more than google but if it counts a site with 3 imagines as 4results we are doomed :)

  80. we have omitted some entries... by hashhead · · Score: 1
    I just tried it out, I really didn't see much of a qualitative difference between the two engines, at least for the few sample searches I tried - AllTheWeb just seemed to give me more results b/c it didn't "compress" mulitple entries from the same site, mailing list, etc.

    Google by contrast tells me:

    In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the XX already displayed

    Which I actually find quite useful insofar as there's less repetitive crap to wade thru to find the result(s) you were looking for...

    Having said that, I do agree that competition is a good thing, much as I swear by Google right now...

  81. Vote Google by salmo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The reason I'm for Google has little to do with technology. It has everything to do with advertisements and capitalism.

    I'd rather support a company that uses subtle advertisements like Google does than a company that uses in your face banner ads, etc. (Then again I'm posting on Slashdot!) Also I make a point to check out the ads evey now and then on Google and visit the company's site. I may be getting hosting from an advertiser on Google soon.

    If people who advertise on Google make more money than they do with banner ads, pop-ups, etc. then we'll see the idea spread. I don't like in-my-face ads, so I do what I can to tell companies that. It's called being a responsible consumer.

    Plus more valid hits come up when I search for myself on Google ;-).

    1. Re:Vote Google by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 1

      If people who advertise on Google make more money than they do with banner ads, pop-ups, etc. then we'll see the idea spread. I don't like in-my-face ads, so I do what I can to tell companies that. It's called being a responsible consumer.

      This argument was already talked about extensively in the past. I don't have the direct references, but you have to understand how Google is funded and why it is radically different from every other "good-at-first-ad-shit-later" search engine.

      In a nutshell, Google had an infusion of venture capital. They are still living off that capital today. No wonder they can keep themselves humble, simple, fast with features I like with non-intrusive ads. Also their "pigeon-based" search algorithm is very fast:)

      But, do you really think Google found a way to keep itself profitable with small ads when *every* major site is using Flash, sounds, 4x4 ads, flying flash ads, etc? And the fact that most sites are turning into subscription-based news sites like Slashdot, IGN, Gamespot, and others?

      It sounds kind of silly how can Google survive the market conditions these days. But the matter of fact is, they are rich AND they are hiring. No shit.

  82. I can't believe it has come to this! by Salden · · Score: 1

    Index Envy, sheesh!

  83. Timothy = lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Of course, pages indexed is not the only measure of a search engine and probably isn't even the most important. "

    That was pretty lame Timothy, especially seeing as Google advertises that about themselves and tHeY gOt BeaT aT tHeiR OwN GAMe----bwahahahah.

  84. I don't see what's the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what if they say they're better than google? I just see it as competition in a very lacking area. How many of us have become extremely dependant on google to search for things? What if some day ( forbid) google sells out, starts charging for their service, loads up on popups and banner ads, or do a shitload of other things that many other search sites have fallen victim to in the pursuit of The Mighty Buck? If there are no other sites like google, we will end up having to bend over and take it up the ass from corporate monkeys in order to have such a service. With alltheweb around (and other similar sites that escape me at the moment), we don't have to worry about that happening.

  85. Hrm... by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Comes up with more hits for my name then google.

    I can't belive how many people have my "Subtle mind control? why do all the HTML buttons say 'submit'" quote on their sites.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Hrm... by jesser · · Score: 2

      I can't belive how many people have my "Subtle mind control? why do all the HTML buttons say 'submit'" quote on their sites.

      Have you seen this? Submit

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
  86. Not entirely fair by palmech13 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Sure AllTheWeb may have more links, but when I did a search on my name, I found several hits on pages that haven't existed for many moons. Every search engine has this problem, but Google has long since flushed those pages. And in the time between the page vanishing and Google noticing, they've got it cached. :)

    Of course, as has been mentioned a few times above, competition is a Good Thing (TM).

    - Ardenstone

  87. When you click? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    I don't think there's anything wrong with opening a new window when you click an add, it's not the same thing as a popup, and most of the time it's the choice of the website admin, not the advertizer.

    Also, lots of people prefer opening new sites in new windows. Myself included.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:When you click? by Bob+McCown · · Score: 1

      No no no, not when I click, but just surf to a page, no intervention on MY part.

    2. Re:When you click? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 2
      Also, lots of people prefer opening new sites in new windows. Myself included.

      But alot of us don't. Which is why you should let the user choose. Or even better, do what Google does and give you an option to have the windows open in a new window (if you get sick of right clicking each link).

  88. THE by FFNieko · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Norwegian search engine AlltheWeb on Monday declared that it indexes more Internet information than longtime pacesetter Google.

    Then how come the word with the most search results (FYI: the) on Google, returns less results on alltheweb?

    1. Re:THE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just less, but 60% less.

  89. Main Pages Found by highlander123 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Google always seems to give me what I want, faster than anything else. Either this is because of it's search algorythms, or that it has only the indexes linked... example : I search for engsoc (looking for Canadian Univerisity Engineering Societies) and I find all the "main" entry pages with google, and I find a littering of "inside" pages with obscure titles with this new one. I'll stick with google-- and my chances of using the "i feel lucky" button are high, since the first or second link.

  90. slashvertisement? by bilbobuggins · · Score: 2
    'Clive, we need some way to get a lot of heavy computer users to our new spiffy search engine...'

    'I've got it Herbert! Let's make some inflammatory claim about Google that has nothing to do with the actual quality of either sites results and sit back and watch the hits roll in!'

    yeah, so it's an obvious troll, but i guarantee you it's true.

  91. bigger index doesn't always help by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    I searched both Google and AllTheWeb for the name of my company. (For privacy reasons, I'm not going to tell you the name.) We are a small company, and probably few pages on the web link to our site, but Google pulled up our home page as its first search result. AllTheWeb failed to list it in its first page of links.

    It's not hard to find our site, either. Our company's name is "foo bars"* and our URL is "foobars.com." Google nailed it, while AllTheWeb bombed.

    Doing a more complex search with lots of words from our home page did, finally, get AllTheWeb to cough up our site. So I know it's in there.

    So in my opinion it has little to do with how big their index is. It has to do with how good they are at finding what I'm looking for. For me, Google almost always finds what I'm looking for. I've even started using the "I Feel Lucky" button to skip the search results altogether and just take me straight to the first listed site.

    *Incidentally, I've always wanted to open a pub called the Foo Bar, but I don't think many people would get it.

  92. Human, all too human. by kubrick · · Score: 1

    I'd generalise that to:

    The tendency to blindly worship things... is far too common.

    --
    deus does not exist but if he does
  93. pop-up ad windows eliminated with Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This Mozilla preference seems to eliminate pop-up advertisement windows without affecting the creation of new windows by user demand:

    Edit -> Preferences

    Advanced -> Scrupts & Windows

    Uncheck "Open unrequested windows."

  94. It's not the size of the index.... by FooGoo · · Score: 1

    but how you use it. Atleast thats what my wife keeps telling me.

    --
    People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
  95. It may be bigger...... by HowlinMad · · Score: 0

    but is it as fast as google? I no clue, but Google is fast as hell!!

  96. Pop up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea, just visited them. As I left .. A "targeted" pop up appears.

    Not to mention a fixation on nano-point fonts.

    Bah. I'll stick with Google.

  97. comments on AllTheWeb by OpenMind(tm) · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This did return more results for some search terms than google. Not many of the extras seemed all that useful, though. The signal to noise ratio seems a bit lower.

    The ordering of pages seems less helpful. In many cases, the page I'm looking for is farther down the page.

    The sponsored links and advertising are way more noticeable, and get in the way of the search results, although they're probably easy enough to ignore.

    Google seems to be better at rating by search term proximity, under the useful assumption that if the search terms occur close to each other, it is less likely to be a random hit. One irritation with AllTheWeb is that for many results, it doesn't show you the context of the search terms in the summary.

    Obviously AllTheWeb lacks the excellent USENET archive. The video and MP3 search festures might be pretty useful, I haven't had a chance to try them.

    I realize I'm coming across as entirely pro-Google, but these are the only observations I have right now. I'll give AllTheWeb a chance, and let internet darwinism settle the issue.

  98. alltheweb claims by BadTuna · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do a search for slashdot GOOGLE = 2,250,000 AllTheWeb = 1,649,088 What's up with that ?

    --
    Your sig here!
  99. so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bigger is not necessarily better.

  100. It's your webserver! by yomahz · · Score: 2
    It doesn't seem to be a problem with alltheweb.com, your webserver seems to be stuck in some sort of 302 loop. It keeps redirecting to itself.


    telnet www.kaosinc.com 80
    Trying 192.203.175.245...
    Connected to www.kaosinc.com.
    Escape character is '^]'.
    GET /index.shtml HTTP/1.0

    HTTP/1.1 302 Found
    Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:51:47 GMT
    Server: Apache/1.3.23 (Unix) Debian GNU/Linux PHP/4.1.2 ApacheJServ/1.1.2
    Location: http://www.kaosinc.com/index.shtml
    Connection: close
    Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

    302 Found

    Found
    The document has moved here.


    Connection closed by foreign host.

    --
    "A mind is a terrible thing to taste."
  101. Umm....so what? by Hegemony · · Score: 1

    I use Google; it finds anything I need anytime. Why would I change?

  102. Google's news 'site'is even better though by xneilj · · Score: 1
    --
    rm -rf / is the evil of all root
  103. Your web server is broken by jesser · · Score: 3, Informative

    Redirection limit for this URL exceeded. Unable to load the requested page.

    That is a Mozilla error message (source) and does not come from alltheweb. Your web server is broken. http://www.kaosinc.com/jen.shtml redirects to http://www.kaosinc.com/index.shtml, which then redirects to itself. This happens regardless of where I find the link to http://www.kaosinc.com/jen.shtml, or what browser I use to load it. IE appears to just sit there, Opera bounces between various stages of trying to connect, and Netscape 4 gives up after a few redirects and displays a raw 302-found page ("The document has moved _here_") without redirecting.

    Moving the mouse over the link doesn't reveal the address in the bottom bar, either, so the only way I can think of to obtain the address of the item it matches is by right-clicking and selecting 'copy link address', opening a new window and pasting it it (and having a browser that is capable of doing this), then editing the URL so only the target link text remains.

    An easier way to see the URL of the link is to hold the mouse down over the link, and then move off of the link before you lift the mouse button. But I still get the infinite-redirect error message if I type your URL directly.

    You can't even right-lick and open in a new window to do this. If you try, you get "about:blank" which, afaik, means they're using javascript.

    If I right-click on a link from the alltheweb search results and select "open link in new window", I see http://www.alltheweb.com/go/1/H/web/http/www.kaosi nc.com/jen.shtml in the location bar and get the same error message. What version of Mozilla are you using?

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
    1. Re:Your web server is broken by limekiller4 · · Score: 1

      Man, do I feel stupid.

      And here I was all impressed when I saw my post got modded +5. Guess that just goes to show that mod points don't equal squat. =)

      Whoever sees this, please mod it down into oblivion as my pennance for being so stupid.

      Oh yeah. I'm using Mozilla 0.9.9. I could edit the link, but that seemed rather backwards. Your explanation makes perfect sense though.

      --
      My .02,
      Limekiller
  104. dang it feels good to be a gangsta by rocket97 · · Score: 0

    Can you install Linux on this?

    --
    "The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
  105. Apparently math skills are lacking in Scand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently the math skills are even worse than the woeful math skills in the USA.

    The "score" multiple in your parent post is much greater than ten. In fact, it is infinity. That blows you population theory out the window.

    5/0 is infinity.

  106. Quantity vs. Porsche by aardwulf · · Score: 1

    Who cares if you index more? Google rules. They have the best results. GM sells more cars than Porsche, but there isn't a GM that I would take over any Porsche any day...

    1. Re:Quantity vs. Porsche by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      And there isn't a Porsche that I'd take over my Mitsubishi any day. (Two reasons: First, I've owned a Porsche before, secondly - the Mitsubishi's more practical, handles better and is faster)

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
  107. Re:Something else to consider... by symbolic · · Score: 2


    Being a Norwegian company, would they be under the same mandate to hand over all 'suspect' search queries for abuse by the US's new CIAFBINSASSSASD (known in PRSpeak as the Information Awareness Office)?

  108. So... by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    What does VI do with all computer storage?

  109. Our old friend ftpsearch.ntnu.no reincarnated by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 2

    Years ago, I used to use ftpsearch to find warez left in public incoming dirs by warez couriers.

    Glad to see it's back, after a sojourn as a non working component of Lycos.

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  110. Catchy name by bperkins · · Score: 2

    The reason why AllTheWeb will surpass google is that it has a much catchier name.

    As a bonus, alltheweb (when properly separtaed with spaces) is proper English.

  111. my reason to prefer alltheweb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    is that it allows me to download its search result pages from within a PHP script. I wrote it to get a concordance (list of real usage cases) for any phrase from within Emacs, and it works flawlessly with alltheweb (and greatly facilitates writing in English for a non-native speaker like me). I tried to hook up to Google in the same way, but it refused to share its wisdom with my script, apparently because the user_agent field was not that of a "real" browser. I find this rather stupid - what are they afraid of, robots stealing their bandwidth? Any robot can easily fake its user_agent, I was just a bit too lazy for this hack. And besides, alltheweb works just fine for me.

  112. Re:Something else to consider... by glitch! · · Score: 2

    Being a Norwegian company, would they be under the same mandate to hand over all 'suspect' search queries for abuse by the US's new CIAFBINSASSSASD (known in PRSpeak as the Information Awareness Office)?

    I would hope not, but perhaps there might be a profit angle involved.

    More seriously, do you have any knowlege that this "mandate" exists? Is it public law? Executive order? Secret executive order? A directive from "high levels"? Or is this more of an "intelligent concern" of yours? There's nothing wrong with that - everyone with half a brain should be concerned about these possibilities.

    --
    A dingo ate my sig...
  113. The best search engine is.... by newerbob · · Score: 1
    YahooT

    This is a very unusual site, with crude animated gif graphics and a bizarre interface.

    But, you can ask it ANY QUESTION in ENGLISH and get an answer (by email) in a few minutes.

    I once asked it how it works, and it told me it was a giant parallel neural network consisting of 100s of Linux boxes distributed around the country.

    It has some weird training mode where you have to answer a question it asks. I don't know what that's all about either, but I comply.

    --

    --
    Ask the Ya-Hoot Oracle Anything!
  114. size matters? by kootch · · Score: 2

    come on, we all know that *cough* it isn't the size that matters, but how well you use it to um, achieve results.

    :)

  115. Let's hear it for FTP Search by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree completely. I can't say enough how about cool FTP Search is. It's got lots of options, it's laid out in a logical manner, indexes tons of sites...

    I remember when it was really hidden away; before Lycos adopted them (and really fucked it up, it didn't work right half the time), it was ftpsearch.unit.no and before that ftpsearch.ntnu.no. Now that's it's at ATW it's back to its former glory.

    Two features in particular that really make it kick ass:

    1) You can navigate their cache of the FTP directory listings

    This is really useful. It saves a lot of time by letting you explore the site through their quick site. The only time you have to connect to the actual FTP site is to get the file. (Think Google cache for FTP sites)

    2) Regular expression searches

    Any power user knows how useful regexes are. Also very cool is the ability to do matches, which return unique file names. Example: I'm looking for an old program called borphee. I do a regular expression match: ^borphee.*.tar.gz. I get back borphee.0.01.tar.gz borphee.0.02.tar.gz borphee.0.05.tar.gz. Now I know 0.05 is the latest and I can click it to file mirrors. If I find 0.05 is broken, I can easily go back and search for older versions.

  116. Libraries... by cgoyle · · Score: 1

    When I walk into a library I normally don't want ALL the books on system design, just the best ones!

  117. Image Search Produces Porn... and I mean, LOTS! by j2gEEk · · Score: 1

    FYI-

    I tried doing an image search for images of "servers" or "server". All was cool until about 100 images in, then it was pretty much all gay porn.

    So much for alltheweb...

    Jake

  118. A small test by Loki · · Score: 2, Informative

    Let's look at the numbers shall we?

    Fnord: Google: 104000 AllTheWeb: 46439
    Cheese: Google: 3690000 AllTheWeb: 7718252
    Linux: Google: 48000000 AllTheWeb: 26670311
    Windows: Google: 44600000 AllTheWeb: 66545303
    Extropian: Google: 4460 AllTheWeb: 3999
    Kumquat: Google: 32600 AllTheWeb: 42889
    Question Authority and the authorities will question you.: Google: 90 AllTheWe b: 74
    Hot man meat: Google: 229 AllTheWeb: 1661
    Hot pussy: Google: 104000 AllTheWeb: 770057

    "undefined reference to" error: Google: 31700 AllTheWeb: 8548
    "Antimatter-Catalyzed MicroFission / Fusion": Google: 6 AllTheWeb: 1

    Surprisingly alltheweb does return more hits in some areas, most notably for che ese, windows, and pr0n. With the cheese test, AllTheWeb helpfully cluttered my s creen with a banner for food products. Google, thankfully, is still bannerless, and returns more linux hits, fnords, and Voltaire quotes. Alltheweb also stalled several times and I had to resubmit a search. Conclusion: If you're a linux gee k or you want to know about fnords, futuristic philosophies, compilation errors, or advanced space propulsion concepts, google is better. If you're a horny wind ows user and want to find gay or straight pr0n, and if you for some reason like kumquats and want to learn more about cheese, use alltheweb.

    Seriously, I'll probably stick with google, better numbers or no. The only thing AllTheWeb has going for it is the ftp search. The original is owned by lycos no w and broken.

  119. The REAL Measure of a Search Engine... by joshjs · · Score: 2

    ...is how often they include cute, relevant, wacky different variations on their logo.

    Right?

  120. AllTheWeb misses a two-count Google find by mpp · · Score: 1


    I just happened to search for "Combined Yang-Wu" at Google yesterday (which returned two documents) and I tried it at AllTheWeb, which didn't find it.

    --

    Dilute! Dilute! OK!
  121. AllTheWeb == EVIL for dynamic websites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm the webmaster of a regularly visited news website, dealing primarily with Japanese Animation. Our site is PHP driven, and thus is dynamic.

    (but I'll stay anonymous, 'cuz i'm cute!)

    In March of this year, while reviewing our bandwidth useage, we noticed that this "fastsearch.net" site was apparently mirroring our website.

    The only problem is that fastsearch.net mirrored *EVERYTHING*, from graphics to sound and video clips.

    Our website is about 100 megabytes large, and over the course of 2-3 days, fastsearch.net leeched about 150megs of data. We simply figured some of the bandwidth was duplicated, for whatever reason (possibly mirroring via our IP address instead of our DNS entry) The next nearest leech was the AOL proxy, at 100mb.

    However, we noticed this trend continued into April. In fact, instead of once-a-month leeches like Google, they began leeching every weekend. They used up 550mb of bandwidth from April 1st to April 30th, with several notable peaks. Additionally, they didn't use our IP address, or one of our known subdomain mirrors of the site -- it was entirely our www box that was being reamed for bandwidth.

    From May 1st to May 3rd, we had another 78mb of bandwidth get sucked out of our pipes. At that point, we decided, to put it in our deny_hosts for the site. While ATW has some 2000 documents of ours in its cache, it is no longer welcome to leech our site.

    Now, why do I mention FastSearch.net, if it's actually AllTheWeb? Well, go to FastSearch.Net and see for yourself -- fs POWERS AllTheWeb. Check out some of their information about the engine. It's kinda scary..

    Google has *NEVER* used more than 75mb in a single month, for which we are thankful.

    At any rate: Banzai Google!
    ... or maybe bonzai Google?

  122. Google creating a new information economy? by rwa2 · · Score: 2

    Hey, check out one of the new Google beta programs, answers.google.com Even you can now earn fame and fortune, and yes, even internet cash be searching google's archives for answers to people's questions...

  123. mp3 video tests indicate alltheweb wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just did a bunch of searches on different subjects and found alltheweb is much better than google. Funny how narrow minded geeks accept the standard(google) as the best? Did anyone mention that alltheweb has news, pictures, mp3, video, and FTP(downloads) as other catagories of downloads.
    Example:
    alltheweb.com
    http://www.alltheweb.co m/search?cat=vid&cs=utf-8&q =spiderman

    google
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UT F8&oe=UTF8 &q=spiderman+video

    Alltheweb gives much better references, and more informative hits (filetype, size, duration)
    google sucks. Onward and upward with alltheweb.

  124. Clambake by KjetilK · · Score: 2

    I wonder how long it will be before AllTheWeb is threatened.

    Could be interesting, since AllTheWeb is based in Norway, the same country where Operation Clambake is. They might say "DMCA, what?"

    But then, they might not, since the index itself is probably in the US, and besides, our Big Sister Sunde thinks DMCA is Norwegian law anyway, so she'll be banging on the doors once she gets $cientology on the phone.

    --
    Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  125. So... by cicatrix1 · · Score: 1

    It seems the general consensus here is size doesn't matter. Imagine that coming from a bunch of geeks. . .

    --

    I know more than you drink.
  126. Heh. by pixelix · · Score: 1

    "Never mind the quality, just feel the width."

    --
    -- js.
  127. Washingon Post article by scubacuda · · Score: 2

    here.

  128. There is life outside USA!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know it might seem hard to understand for some people, that there is internet outside usa and that there are persons who are not american neither live in america that use computers connected to the internet!! But they exist!! Yes, that's absolutely TRUE!! Can you belive it???

    Regards from europe.

    1. Re:There is life outside USA!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Though the company is based in Norway, all of the servers are in California and the best works for the company were Americans. That makes your statment moot.

  129. image searches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I prefer google's because its advanced options let you search by size, along with all the other advanced options that google has (e.g. search only in .edu, exclude .com...). Additionally, atw doesn't load images from its own servers, so in order to use it I have to change my prefs--trivial, but it involves reloading a page. Advantage, Google.

  130. Mod up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to love that FTP search when it was on lycos, and then I thought it disappeared. Thanks!

  131. Re: YOUR GOOGLE WEB PAGES BELONG TO US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just did a search in AlltheWeb with keyword "google search engine" and got 1,849,197 pages PLUS the latest news that AlltheWeb has more indexed pages than Google ... according to the _Hindustan Times_. I don't know. Just doesn't give me a warm and cozy.

  132. Bah! by garbuck · · Score: 1
    Let's suppose you didn't know how many nanoseconds long a shake is. You might try the following: If you click on the above links, you will find that all of the search engines except AllTheWeb give you the correct answer (10) in the first few hits. Actually, the answer appears in the hit abstracts, so you don't even have to fetch the hits, unless you want the fascinating background info.
  133. Simple Decision... by ffatTony · · Score: 2
    google.com = 10 character alltheweb.com = 13 characters

    I'll stick with google, those 3 extra characters are too much for me. Seriously though, alltheweb seems pretty good, I tried their mp3 search and it was ok, not really comparable to the myriad p2p clients, but still a nice feature.

  134. Re:Something else to consider... by symbolic · · Score: 2

    All I've read suggests that the IAO effort is geared toward building a massive data infrastructure that will allow fast access to all manner of information related to a specific target (which could be anyone that fits into a specific profile, for one reason or another). So, it's not a mandate per se, but the mere fact that our browsing habits, including search queries, could be part of it, is, and should be unsettling for every American citizen. The problem is that the government will have more and more access to information with less and less control or acountability.

  135. they are about equal... by seelet · · Score: 1

    Google and Alltheweb found 6 results to my sister's web pages and rockapella (Carmon Sandiego group)entries on the net, if they both have all of these not only have they managed to index large portions of the internet, but they manage to index the most pointless stuff too.

  136. Total Documents? by lostchicken · · Score: 2

    AllTheWeb has summed all their formats to get 2.1 billion.

    If you add Google's 700mil USENET articles, 300mil images, etc, Google has >3,000,000,000 documents to search. That kills ATW.

    --
    -twb
  137. I dunno. by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    To me, Alltheweb really does have a superious sense of style, its more estheticly pleasing. And even with the banners it's still really fast

    I'm probably going to start using both regularly.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  138. Biggest index... of old data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My first test : Search on the name of the company I work for (an ISP)

    Results - AlltheWeb:
    First hit links to a sub-page of a domain that we bought out several years ago. This particular page had the new business name in not more than 1 line saying that they had been aquired. On top of that, this page has been gone for *at least a year* and now pops up with our 404 page. None of the rest of the links on the first results page directly relate to us.

    Results - Google:
    First link is the current domain with our main home page. Next 7 links are various sub-pages of that domain including our products and pricing page, support page, what's new page, local movies listing page, etc..

    That pretty much decides it for me.

  139. Mod parent up! by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up!

  140. It seems better by arnwald · · Score: 1

    The first test I do is typing my name,
    it doesnt find ancient UseNet posts,
    but it does find my latest OSS projects.
    (Whereas Google does NOT ! )

    Thumbs up for them.

    --
    My other sig is Funny.
  141. Index size... right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't matter how big it is, it's how you use it that counts.

    1. Re:Index size... right? by wessman · · Score: 1

      Stated perfectly! I tried AllTheWeb and didn't like the results reporting. Google is far superior in reporter the results you want in the fashion you want (and need!).

  142. Query syntax and restrictions by alexo · · Score: 1

    While I mostly use Google nowadays, I sometimes find their query syntax restricting.

    1. No complex boolean expressions
    2. No proximity operators
    3. No wildcards or stemming

    It would be possible to work around these restrictions, but there I stumble into the big one:

    4. Queries are limited to 10 words or less.

    These restrictions are even more problematic when I search Google's Usenet archives because often only a couple of posts will contain the information that I need.

    I miss the more powerful query syntax of DejaNews. While Google is nominally faster, that speed is irrelevant when I have to reformulate my query 4 times to zoom in on a specific post.

  143. Well it seems like Dell.com is pleased with Fast! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fast Search & Transfer ASA (FAST)Alltheweb is pleased to announce
    that Dell Computer Corporation (Nasdaq:DELL) has selected
    FAST Data Search to power the search at Dell.com, the
    online presence of Dell and one of the world`s largest e- commerce sites.
    FAST is receiving revenue from Dell in the form of software
    license, maintenance, and professional service fees.