Google's new toys

Google labs just released for your pleasure, some new toys to play with. The first is Google's Viewer, just type a few words to see a fully working preview of the web site. Another new idea: Google's Webquotes, View search results with quotes about them from other sites, and the last one is Google's Froogle, which aims to be the world's largest catalog.

Comments

that's pretty neat..

[doubleyewdee]

It seems like google is never content to rest on its laurels. Unlike some of the goneby search engines of the past it seems to be interested in doing more than pimping out its popularity to commercial interests at the cost of its quality. Hopefully they'll continue on this track for a long time to come. None of this stuff is revolutionary, but it does seem to be at least nifty. And that's all google needs at this point.

Re:that's pretty neat..

[juhaz]

Useful extra functionality sure as hells is everything but detrimental. If you don't like 'em, don't use em. But don't whine, they are not even linked on the main page. You wouldn't even KNOW about them if you don't specifically look for them in the beta pages, or see them in slashdot.

Nobody is adding bells and whistles to your basic hammer, but the company that manufactures hammers, also does some other tools. You can buy them if you like, if you don't, well, no harm done. Stop whining.

Google may well be one of the things best kept simple. Point is, Google, the search engine is as simple as it has always been.

Re:that's pretty neat..

[mobets]

It already does this. Click on the preferences link. The last option is exactly what you ask for. Make sure you are accepting cookies from google and click save.

Re:that's pretty neat..

[egreB]

Well, since we're on to knitpicking..

The physics involved in the action of hammering a nail into something (e.g. wood), is quite complex. But you've got a nice and fairly easy interface to it with your hammer, thus you don't need to know much physics.

Re:that's pretty neat..

[Steveftoth]

You are the reason that computers are so hard to use.

Google's interface is so easy that it HURTS. Yes it hurts. and that's the way that it should stay.

Once you go down the dark dark path of adding 'a button here' 'a button there' you will never return from that. Google has boiled down all the complexity all the redundant controls down to a simple text box and 2 buttons. There are advanced controls for those people who use it enough to want to do that. It only takes a couple of seconds to change your prefs, and if you are on a public computer, why can't you hold down the shift key (or right click).

Prelim results

[gowen]

I've been playing with these since they appeared on The Register a few days ago. I can't say I'm massively impressed. The slideshow is lovely eye candy, but, sadly, the top bit of each web page it shows is all too often just a banner ad and a navbar, which isn't always a lot of use. Froogle is US-centric, and no good for me, but it is the best name I've seen in a long time.

Re:Prelim results

[Ed Avis]

Heh, perhaps the Google slideshow will encourage sites to put useful information at the top of pages rather than junk.

In case the site is slashdotted...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://192.17... oh wait!

(someone had to do it :)

Re:In case the site is slashdotted...

[nolife]

To clarify the phrase..

Slashdotted

Yet another interesting Google function.

Google contest ideas?

[Christopher Doopov]

Are these new features based on ideas from the Google contest, which took place some time ago? If so, what are the other ideas, which are not yet implemented, but which may be used in the future?

Re:Google contest ideas?

[crapulent]

No, I don't think this has anything to do with the Google programming contest. The winner and honorable mentions are listed on this page, and they have nothing really to do with the Google labs features announced recently. You can also read slashdot's coverage of the announcement as well as the announcement of the winners if you're interested.

Re:Google contest ideas?

[mhesseltine]

About the mapping of searches to geographic data. There was a recent NYT article that went inside Google Labs, and in the lab, they have just that sort of thing. There's a 3-d world representation, and searches through an IP are mapped to the location of that IP. Search volume creates a color-changing peak that rises from the location. Larger volume creates a higher peak. It ends up looking like certain major cities are on fire.

I'd dredge up the /. article on it, but the /. search sucks.

Other interesting articles

[nich37ways]

Ars technica also has review up of froogle along with a funny review of google's plan for world domination

--

nich

What about the other ones?

[John_Renne]

Off course all these playground-features are nice but when will anything become standard. Other beta-stuff like Google Glossary and Google Sets looked very nice but both are still in beta. Google will remain my favourite search-engine but they in my opinion they could be a bit faster in offering new services.

Re:What about the other ones?

[platypus]

I could imagine "beta" testing means beta testing attractiveness to customers. I.e. if one of the "beta" sides gets a lot of hits, google decide to put it out of beta.

Google will remain my favourite search-engine but they in my opinion they could be a bit faster in offering new services.

You are joking, right? If not, who is better in that game than google? Two or three years ago, nearly each of the ideas which google has already implemented in their "labs" could have gained a shitload of venture capital in order to implement it.
Google not fast? I think not.

Re:What about the other ones?

[PurpleFloyd]

Other beta-stuff like Google Glossary and Google Sets looked very nice but both are still in beta.

This is much more likely to be rolled out, as it is a goldmine for advertising. While the Glossary and Sets programs are nice, there's no real way to sell adwords on them. Froogle adwords, on the other hand, could likely command a premium price and thus it would make good business sense to roll out Froogle as soon as possible.

Re:What about the other ones?

[Galvatron]

No, I think beta testing means exactly what it implies, the software is not release quality yet. At the moment, they probably don't feel like the sorting algorithm they use is "fair," and so they're still finetuning it. Clearly, this can be a lengthy process, which is why they let people use it while they're still working on it. All they're saying by "beta" is that it's not good enough to stake their reputation on, so if you use it, be aware that they think it's not up to the same standard as the rest of their work yet.

The universal knowledge repository

[katalyst]

Google has access to so much information. A study of human behavior and interests can be made by just parking yourself at the Google HQ, where apparantly, they have lotsa screens which keep displaying the kinda stuff people are looking for. Beats trainspotting ;)
Another google toy : it's fun to use. The Google Mirror. It's a blast, you actually gotta enter your query the other way around, coz it's a MIRROR silly !!

Re:Froogle is great

[doubleyewdee]

Yeah, I just gave it a shot looking for a very particular piece of jewelry and I found it within about three minutes. I was really impressed. Even better, Froogle is in beta! If it already works this will as a beta product I can only imagine how great it will be when it has been rolled out.

I wonder if, given that Froogle could become quite popular, this will make it easier for small independent web-vendors to compete against giants like Amazon. One of the things I do like about Amazon is that it's pretty easy to find what I'm looking for, and they have lots of stuff (shady business/patent practices aside). However, if Froogle makes it this easy for me to find stuff from multiple small vendors then I might just stick with that.

Re:The mandatory pr0n reference

[leoboiko]

It would be even better if they made an equivalent viewer for images.google.com.

Googlisms

[SPeW]

Hey have any of you checked out this site , not directly related to google.com but it does use their search results to return some pretty intereting stuff. check it out ... some funny stuff comes up for slashdot and Bill Gates

Good, Better, Best!

[coloth]

The Viewer I'd rate "good", because it shows a path to potential interface improvements in the future, but not something I'd use today.

The WebQuotes is "better" because it leverages the architecture that Google is based on, and lets you see some of the reasons why that link is near the top.

But the Froogle service is clearly the "best". It has the potential to centralize the Internet's consumer marketplaces, enhancing competition and value. My only concern is that the big retailers will put up walls to Froogle's spiders. However, if Froogle becomes popular, they may be forced to join the party, or lose access to a growing meta-internet market.

Ladies and gentlemen, Google is reminding us that we live in exciting times.

Britney's Guide to Semiconductor Physics

[rednaxel]

When I tried search for webquotes about Britney Spears, the following site appeared:

Britney's Guide to Semiconductor Physics

From the site:

"It is a little known fact, that Ms Spears is an expert in semiconductor physics. Not content with just singing and acting, in the following pages, she will guide you in the fundamentals of the vital laser components that have made it possible to hear her super music in a digital format."

P.S. Checkout the author's page as well...

I wish I had a sig.

The viewer doesn't work perfectly with CSS

[pointwood]

Just look at at site that uses CSS instead of tables. The site is perfectly readable, but the design is gone.

Where's the revenue model?

[DABANSHEE]

IE when does the credit card/Adult verification/ActiveX home dialer funded porn-Google (poogle?) turn up?

Google not a portal? Yeah, right.

[BornInASmallTown]

When Google News came out, I realized something: Google is trying to be a portal without being a portal, and by doing this, they are going to own the web.

Google has long said that they have no desire to enter the portal market to compete with the likes of Yahoo!. ("No, our customers are portals like Yahoo! and AOL. We're not a portal...we are just trying to be the best search engine.") While it is true that they are the best search engine, they are using characteristics of search to become a stealth portal.

Consider the following tools available from google and their counterparts on Yahoo!:

• Search engine (cf. google.yahoo.com)
  
• Directory (cf. www.yahoo.com)
  
• People search (cf. people.yahoo.com)
  
• Address search (cf. maps.yahoo.com)
  
• Froogle directory (cf. shopping.yahoo.com)
  
• News (cf. news.yahoo.com)
  
• Stock quotes (cf. quote.yahoo.com)
  

There are more analogs between the two sites. But here's the thing: Google offers a value proposition over sites like Yahoo: Much more content and much lower overhead. Why? Because Google, as a "search engine" is simply here to Help People Find What They're Looking For. They will point us to other sites after we see our search results---it's just that our search results happen to look like tradiitonal portal pages. (In other words, news.google.com is a drop in replacement for CNN.com, only google's site is better because it contains fewer ads, less clutter, and much, much, more news.)

I think it is an interesting concept. One other poster said they thought Froogle could put Amazon out of business. In the near term--no. Longer term--yes. And this is because Google's value proposition to the user is better: I would bet money that when Froogle becomes a "release" and not just a "beta", that it has the ability to classify similar products from multiple vendors and search for the one that's the cheapest. If I can find the same books and electronics on Google that I can on Amazon, why would I go to Amazon?

Google is going to preach the "non portal" doctrine forever, however over the next 3-5 years, we will see the Google "portal" owning the web, at the expense of the Yahoo's, Amazon's, Ebay's, and CNN's of the world. This means that ad revenue on other sites will become ad revenue for Google.

Maybe this is a conspiracy theory, but I have to say that I like the way Google works, I like their site, and I'd like to see them succeed in this...they've certainly made my web searching more useful, and I'd like to see them do the same for the other tools I use in traditional portals.