Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Buying Inktomi
soldack writes "Byte And Switch has a story about Yahoo buying Inktomi. I imagine they will stop using Google. What does this mean for both Google and Yahoo? How much of Google's traffic came from Yahoo? How much is going to come from AOL using Google?" markpapadakis adds a link to CNET's story on same.
I swear, Slashdot's searching system really need to be replaced. If I search for "Free State Project", I get articles on "Free software" "software states", but nothing related to "Free State".
Yucky!
How large is Inktomi, and how well does it index the pages?
Which is approximately as news-worthy.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
I don't think google will notice this that much.
Does Yahoo still control a majority of users? I would have expected that MSN would have the greatest portal penetration simply by being the default home-page under windows, and most people I know have been using Google for their searching for a couple of years now (And I mean non-technical users)...Is Yahoo even that relevant any more?
I haven't used anything but Google in a while...even got Searchling (search MacUpdate...or Google for it) to have Google search in my OS X menu bar.
If Yahoo stops using Google, I just won't have any reason to go there anymore. Google is the de facto standard now.
Google searches slashdot!
Altavista made it big with babelfish (it's quite possibly the only translator I use). Google made it big with speed, pdf to html (plus pdf searches), cached pages, etc etc.
Seems to me yahoo is more of a "portal" loosely than a search engine anymore, but I can't remember the last time I heard anyone say "I found [insert whatever] on inktomi" at least not in the last 6 years.
My take, google will be fine, I can't begin to name the number of computers I see with google.com as their homepage (more than slashdot).
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
Impact on google traffic? Que?
Is anybody still using Yahoo then? In internet time Yahoo is almost a dinosaur, Google is the warm blooded animal that has almost overtaken the whole world.
An advice to Yahoo: do something!! Don't just sit there being a website with pretty links, that doesn't cut it anymore these days...
That's the sound of Yahoo! shooting itself in the foot.
People will soon discover that their Yahoo! results aren't as good as they once were, and some of them will figure out it's because they're not powered by Google anymore. After that, bye bye Yahoo.com, hello Google.com.
that yahoo used to use Inktomi before they bought google.
Photos.
Pressing alt+f2 and typing "gg:"in soviet russia"" searches you!
I can't remember the last time I heard anyone say "I found [insert whatever] on inktomi" at least not in the last 6 years.
Have you heard "found $foo on hotbot"? Until recently, when HotBot switched to a choice of four different engines, HotBot used Inktomi as its search engine. HotBot still offers Inktomi as its default search engine.
I can't begin to name the number of computers I see with google.com as their homepage (more than slashdot).
EarthLink Network gives its subscribers start.earthlink.net by default, which has a nice Google searchbox right in the middle of the page.
Will I retire or break 10K?
does anyone else think yahoo made this move because google has become a bit more of a portal of late, i.e. google news? there is no doubt google has the superior search technology, but i think yahoo is a little upset that google seems to be trying to be more than 'just search'.
it'll be interesting to see if any overt enmity develops between these two stanford-born businesses....
smd4985
They sold it to Verity back in November.
I think this ends up being just about as pointless as the relaunch of HotBot... which was pretty pointless. ;)
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
Inktomi gave up their general full-Web search years ago, in favor of selling embedded search services / software to Web site owners. If you look at their site, they also promote their expertise in the second-ickiest of Internet businesses: search engine placement. Yahoo has probably decided that the Inktomi search software is the best available for outright purchase, especially with their ad-placement programs in place.
Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
But lately, they have gotten desprate (with the fall out of the Internet advertising market). Annoying Flash ads and Popus are all over Yahoo. They even added banners to Yahoo IM (and some of them are HUGE).
Long live banner free Google!
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
Google's pagerank algorithm suite is unmatched for searches "in the wild". It uses links between pages to work out search relevance. However, that algorithm is totally inappropriate for providing search within Yahoo's own categorised database; Inktomi's engine is precisely suited for such a task. Yahoo has been using Google and Inktomi's search tech for external and internal searches, respectively, for a while now. I see no reason for Yahoo's buyout to change this. I imagine Yahoo would buy Google too, if it could.
Inktomi's current customers
Yahoo would be well-served building a cross-reference ranking from Google + Inktomi's results. Most of my searches are quite pointed anyway though, so I'm not sure how this could be improved.
Go try the Hotbot or MSN searches yerself. This may well be the future rankings on Yahoo results.
As a trial, I searched for "Oklahoma Dry Spell" and although there was one coinciding match in the top 2, the rest were completely different. It seems Inktomi is a bit more relaxed for inclusions. (14,888 vs Yahoo's 12,800).
For one of the myriad of search engine reviews comparing (roughly) Inktomi and Yahoo/Google, see this page
mug
google actually does things right.. its main page is simple, it doesn't barage you with banners, links and webmail services, its simplistic and useful.
most portals use people to gather information on a daily basis, google does it without them (ie: google news)
i'm sure its safe to say you could walk away from google for a month and it'd still be as useful
Verity recently bought out Inktomi's search related goods:
/ 20021218.html
http://www.verity.com/company/press/releases/2002
This might mean that Yahoo is just buying the rest? Discuss.
... when Google is going to start offering Instant Messenger services and web-based email. I love Google for anything search related, and wouldn't mind staying with Google for the other online services I require. On the day Google offers email and IM services, I will quit using Yahoo completely.
Until then, yes, I do "Yahoo".
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
-Marilyn Manson
I use google not because it gives better results but because i really like the adfree slick interface. Google is user oriented and hasnt fallen into factored searches yet. I think Yahoo needs to get back to basics again and focus on users needs. There are much left to do in search engines left and advertising is not what people using them are after.
HTTP/1.1 400
even that I can't earnestly recommend anymore. I simply don't trust them anymore. I'd much rather use a smalltime one that isn't targeted by spammers, preferrably something outside the US, esp. something based in Hong Kong. Less worries about changes of service to comply with government regulations.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
When it comes down to it, the company's who "Get it" will be the ones that succeed. No one wants their search engine to be throwing 3.6 pop-ups per second at them. Google will (hopefully) prosper because it does things the "right" way.
I guess there have been companies that "get it" that failed... but that's usually due to some other dumb business practice.
...people drop Yahoo.
Life is good
Google doesn't bring much to Yahoo. Yahoo's search is primarily sold via Overture, with the Google content basically taking up the slack when paid content isn't available.
Do a search on Yahoo. Everything in "Sponsor Matches" at the top is Overture, everything in "Web Matches" is Google. Note who is at the top of every page.
With this in mind, just about any search engine would be good enough to fill Google's shoes, within the context of Yahoo's search page.
I still use Yahoo when I need to search an index for the best site for a subject, rather than come up with a bazillion keyword matches on Google.
That is what Yahoo does best, and does better than anything. It is what they have done from the beginning.
I thought Yahoo used Inktomi. I must say, though, I never use Yahoo to search, even though they do use Google, because the features aren't as good as going straight to Google. I only use Yahoo for a free email box I don't mind being loading with spam and to check news.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
If you're a Windows user, try Proxomitron. It's a free filter that can block banner ads, Flash ads, sounds, pop-ups and many other really annoying things.
I'm shocked these days when I use a terminal that doesn't have Proxomitron filtering because then I realize just how crappy a place the web has become. I pity anyone who consumes the web raw.
Parent note is disinformative.
What was sold was the enterprise search software tool, not the general search engine database.
While one of Google's main strong point is the lack of ads, I doubt it would be as popular as it is if it did not return such high quality results.
Secondly, as I understand it, Inktomi actually has 2 primary search engines. One is geared towards business use and the other towards consumers (which they got from a recent company they acquired). According to reports Yahoo is basically interested in the business search engine and not the consumer one.
Lastly, I don't see how Yahoo does not focus on users needs. I believe they offer a great suite of online applications, many of them being free. I would disagree if you believe that just because they engage in online advertising that they are not focusing on users.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
"Inktomi? What's that???"
5 years from now people will be saying "Yahoo!? What's that???"
Google's strength has come from sticking to one thing and doing it well. Google does searches and does them better than anyone else. It's that sort of focus and simplicity that other companies lack. If Google started offering portal-like services such as email and chat I would definitely use them (because I know that the quality would be great); however, I rather hope that Google doesn't fall to the temptation of branching out and thus risks its strength.
Who said Freedom was Fair?
"The transaction reflects an aggregate purchase price of approximately $235 million..."
Where the hell did Yahoo come up with $235 million in cash?
Yahoo needs Google more than Google needs Yahoo. Google is one of the few sites on the internet that could go subscription only and still do very well long term. If Yahoo goes subscription for all of its services, people will just move on to another portal. Sure I love that Google is free, but considering how useful Google is I would certainly pay say $19 or more a year for its services. In fact I couldn't imagine an Internet without Google, I'm too reliant on it to go without it. I've tried some of the newer search engines, but really none of them are even close to being as accurate as Google. I'd rather go back to surfing the web with Mosaic than give up Google.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
yer all a bunch of fags
Recently Inktomi bowed out of the cache server business. They cited a number of reasons including considerably reduced revenues from cache software business... but I can't help but wonder if this really was the case of if Inktomi's core competency wasn't search engines. I hope that Yahoo considers reviving the Inktomi cache server systems.
The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. -- Calvin & Hobbes
So, did anyone get rich off of this? I can't tell--it says they got bought for a pretty good sum, but then it said "The transaction reflects an aggregate purchase price of approximately $235 million, adjusted for Inktomi's expected cash balance net of debt, as of December 31, 2002."
:)
I know a guy at Inktomi. I just want to know if he gets to buy dinner next time or not.
Yahoo is responsible for the word "medireview". Their policy of mangling users' email behind their backs makes me recommend strongly against them. Just search google for "reviewuate -yahoo" to see the kind of damage they have done.
AOL teamed up with Inktomi in early 2000 to go head-to-head vs. Akamai in the content distribution business. So this might be a bit more than just search engine stuff.
My
Limekiller
I went to the Inktomi site, asked it to search it's own site for McFarland, Alberg, 37, which should find 1 or 2 pages at the Alberg 37 (sailboat web site), or nothing if it was a real Inktomi 'internal' search.
It gave me back ten totally irrelevant, unconnected hits.
Not so hot, EH ?
A more likely reason is probably economical. Google *IS* top dog of the search engine world, and as such it may have been asking for more money than Yahoo was prepared to pay. Remember, Yahoo's main draw is not its web-wide search engine, but its highly moderated Web directory.
As such, it may make sense for them to make a one-off purchase of inktomi, and save themselves the cost of continual lisencing of Google's results.
Ñ'
Inktomi sells inclusion in their results to paying customers. Many results that you normally click on in MSN or other Inktomi distribution partners cost money to the advertiser (about 10 cents each click and up).
To be fair to Inktomi, while they charge for inclusion, your site is still ranked for relevance, so there is no guarantee that your paid links will filter to the top of a search. This is all a Cost-per-Click (CPC) model, or a one time fee for inclusion over a set period of time.
How does this affect Google?
Remember that Google makes their money from search distribution and their sponsored listings. In the short term, it hurts Google a little bit, because they won't be getting paid from Yahoo for that distribution, if Yahoo decides not to use Google in the future. In the long term it does not matter much, because Google's long term revenue model/strategy is the Sponsored Listings (which are being shown at AOL and a variety of their partners ), which Yahoo was not displaying at all. So even if Yahoo were sending 1 billion searches over to Google, none of those are monetized at all.
How will this affect Yahoo?
Over the long term, Yahoo will make more money from this deal, than by using Google's results, because many of the clickthrough's in their standard search (again.. if they use Inktomi instead of Google for that), will provide some CPC revenue for them. They basically want to monetize the standard search results, and the Inktomi acquisition will help them to do that.
Newsfollow.com
Search engines are being bought up left and right, and the price keeps going up.
Teoma bought by Ask Jeeves ($4M).
Wisenut bought by Looksmart ($9M).
Inktomi bought by Yahoo ($235M).
Ask Jeeves realized its search technology didn't work, and bought Teoma. Looksmart, now a "search placement" provider, realized no one would look at its commercial listings if they didn't give users some non-commercial search content as well. Yahoo seems to have come to the same conclusion, after farming out to google, etc. If they want to make revenue, they seem to have realized that they have to invest in some original technology.
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
..Google ownz j00000000000!
No technical person that I know uses anything but Google. No non-technical person that I know uses anything but Google after I introduce them to it.
This could change slightly if Google were to turn into a pay service, but like you, I'd pay $19+ a year for it.
Google, Image Google, News Google.. The up and coming Froogle.. Combine those with the fact that I always get gratifying search results near instantly, and I'd buy that for a hell of a lot more for a dollar.
I don't see Google fading out of the 'search engine scene' for many a good year yet.
(Search engine scene. I can't believe I just said that. "Man, I miss the old scene, d00d. Never knowing what engine you'd find relevant information on!")
wow, for once I made a good investment decision. I bought 500 shares of Inktomi for .35/each just over a month ago. that rocks.
Google says they have only summarized about 5% of the entire internet in their google search engine. Yahoo, I imagine, will be able to capitalize on spidering the internet to summarize some of the "other" websites google either failed or selectivly decided not to scan. All this means is two parallel searches from google.com and yahoo.com *should* reveal different results now. On a second thought, did I remember hearing about google.com beginning a new out-reach program, in SETI-like execution, for computers with installed googleware to help google by using the idle CPU and idle internet connection to spider through parts of the internet google doesn't have the resources to accomplish? I don't know where I heard that, maybe here on slashdot.org. I think even if a company had NO resources, they would be able to convince people to install internet_spiderware to contribute to a search engine. They already exist in a different methodology; they are called gnutella and kazzaa. Come to think about it, this sits well with that new music-lyric identification software on slashdot just a little ways away; imagine looking for a song with a specific occurence of lyrics, and gnutella searches through all its user's music for that string! Then whenever the occasion comes as either a funeral, divorce, or what-have-you, we can all search through music that may meet the theme of the event. That would realy help out beginning and professional disk jockies and especially since a feat can be accomplished using opensource software. I smell 1)innovation, 2)implementation, and 3)profit!
But I'm sure you already Gnu that.
psxndc
The emacs religion: to be saved, control excess.
Well, in my case Yahoo's Google results give me about 11% of my traffic, with MSN (i.e. Inktomi at 5%).
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Am I the only one for whom search engine wars feel charmingly retro? How 90's!
I came up with an approach for combining categories and link ranking over a year ago. Unfortunately I gave the idea to Looksmart's management, who gave me a severance check a month or two later.
There are a number of ways in which "known good" listings can be combined with crawled sites using link ranking. One is simply to give the listed sites a high static ranking, putting them before any crawled sites in the search results. If the crawled sites are being supplied on a pay-per-search basis (such as when Google or Inktomi are supplying the "backfill" on a CPM basis), this approach can save a good deal of money, and it's simple enough for management to understand.
Another is to give the listed sites an artificially high pagerank, and allow it to percolate out to linked pages, thereby boosting not only listed homepages, but deeper links in the same site, and nearby linked pages as well. This method leverages the labor of human-ranking pages, yielding a large number of related pages which are probably also on-topic and of decent quality. Kleinberg proposed something similar when he designed the HITS algorithm, as a method of automatically populating web directory categories.
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
I use phoenix and Mozilla. They support multiple homepages. I open my browser, and google and slashdot come up on different tabs. very convenient for me. Horrah for Mozilla and friends. oh yeah. Fuck Yahoo.
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
One lasting contribution Inktomi made
was validating Networks of Workstations
in a commercial context. Remember, at the
time they started, the chief competition
was (DEC-era) AltaVista, which used
the search engine as an example application
for multi-way SMP boxes. Today, you don't
see >2-way SMP used in massive deployments
of applications that are easy to parallelize,
but back when Inktomi started NoW's were novel.
Hey, if Google's mission really is to collect all of the information on earth, how soon will it be before Ashcroft's Total Information Awareness ploy causes him to declare eminent domain and seize Google for national interests?
"Google has vowed not to do evil, but evildoers will do evil by exploiting Google. We must stop the evildoers by destroying their evil tool."
Feature creep is only bad when necessary focus on the existing product and its features is lost. The current Google Search product development is essentially stagnant, and rightly so. Other than the occassional maintenance and search algorithm tweaking, I don't really want Google's Search to change much.
Who cares of Google adds a few more tabs that I don't have to click on (but usually do). New features that you don't use aren't "bloat" when they're inconspicuous and harmless.
Their addition of AdWords and the Web Developer API shows that they're committed to adding new search-related technology, they're supporting the existing infrastructure, and the search GUI remains uncluttered. What more could we ask for?
The notion that "evil is growing" is no more applicable to Google than Fruit of the Loom.
You can't tell me that people would use a search engine which is more complicated to use than typing in a URL.
People use Google because it's *fast*. Stopping to type in a username & password, or ANY OTHER form of verification would be a big turn off. Cookies wouldn't solve the problem because people want to be able to search from *any* WWW terminal.
You will not be able to charge for Web searching until paying for information on the Web is as easy and transparent as using the Web itself.
-- Askari: Give JavaScript the bird.
Compare prices on "To be or not to be"...
Discount prices on "To be or not to be"...
Compare DVD prices--To be or not to be....
ooh, that's more relevant alright. But what about the next 10 links? Garbage imo. Neither Google nor Yahoo do a god job of foregrounding Shakespeare's Hamlet. The problem is the phrase in such wide use, it hardly retains anything like its orginal meaning. And that's probably behind the reason Google returned the hit for www.be.com: somebody was using the phrase to hawk books about beos. I'd guess somebody attached the phrase to a link to be.com, or the phrase was somewhere on the redirect page the last time it was indexed. Whatever. Google used to have serious problems with exact quotes, but lately it rocks. Even with glitches it beats Altavista. Only teoma with its search refinements is better at focusing on Hamlet.