Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Offers A Peek At New Search Engine
ObsessiveMathsFreak writes "The Inquirer is reporting that Microsoft is offering a preview of its new search technology. The search engine preview has a minimalist interface, similar to Google. Microsoft claims over one billion web pages searched, but admits the fact that searching is a little slow. This technology hasn't yet been incorporated into MSN Search, though the site claims it eventually will be. In related news, the Financial Times is reporting that Microsoft are to improve the regular MSN Search site by removing paid advertisements from regular internet searches, a move that will cost them 'tens of millions of dollars.' Are the Search Engine Wars finally upon us?"
Okay, random test. Search for "fisherman":
Sorry, no results were found containing "fishermen"
1 billion entries? Please.
Google:
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,350,000 for fishermen [definition]. (0.33 seconds)
Nice work so far MS...
So far, google has given me no reason to distrust them. Microsoft on the other hand... No thanks. I gave up on MS years ago. I'm sure I am not the only ./'er who feels that way.
Looking at it, it's not minimalist in the same sense google is. Google has a lot of content that is extremely well organized without a lot of extra crud. Google's content is well formatted and easy to read. Simply taking out your ads and superfluous fonts and graphics doesn't make put in the same ranks as google.
relys on aspx ?
I think you are a bit confused. aspx means asp.net and thats purly serversided. You can't *rely heavily* on this, its a choice of system.
And a damn good one right now if i might add this. People who used it will agree with me there. ( asp was crap )
Try a search for 'email' or 'calendar' and guess who always comes up first? Not exactly impartial results, are they?
Why?
One is entirely server side and is transparent to the client other then the extension in the address bar. The other is a widely supported technology that's well supported on almost every platform with a recent web browser.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
MSN's website is the most popular internet site for US users, with nearly 100 million unique visits each month
im slightly off topic here, but i cant help but wonder if the web browser included with the most widely used desktop os in the world DIDNT use msn.com as the default home page, would anyone have any reason to go there?
Gyrate Dot Org - "Where high-tech meets low-life"
While I'm normally pretty pro-MS (I actually like their products - I'm not kidding) MS stands very little chance here.
They're fighting a marketshare war, and searches are pretty much a commodity - unless they've got something very specialup their sleeves, their searches are the same as anyone else's.
And let's face it, Google won the mindshare a long time ago. Just like everyone knows what Windows is, everyone knows what Google is, even non-techs. Hell, it's damn near a generic term for searching by now.
Feedback:
and
If you expected a specific website in the search results but it wasn't there, enter the web address (URL) here:
Google's version of such a thing (like yahoo's) is just a comment box that gives you the feeling that nobody really ever reads. This looks like something a script could handle/automate and actually do something about.
Of course it would have to be intelligent enough to wait for a significant about of 'feedback' from a variety of IPs to avoid companies trying to harm the rank of their competitors.
It's also got the French Military Victories thing too, though without an "I'm feeling lucky" button, it doesn't take you right to the page, just displays it as #1 in the search.
Strange how the rankings on these two are similiar to Google's right off the bat, eh?
--
http://www.aikiweb.com - AikiWeb Aikido Information
...why?
Why prevent a spider from crawling your page?
Just because it's associated with Microsoft?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
my thoughts exactly...who are you hurting there? not really microsoft...you're just hurting yourself...why *wouldn't* you want to be indexed in their search engine?
"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
The First Search Engine War was fought years ago, and has been long over. But a blank check was given and all kinds of approaches and interfaces emerged. The winner was Google, though other technologies are still groveling for the spotlight. They won with a good interface, good results, without too much junk.
A Second Search Engine War might help to refine things even further. Microsoft seems to be starting from Google's UI model (everyone loves a winner) and working from there. That's great. There's not really a whole lot of ways for the users to lose here. Things might get even better!
Get off my lawn.
I wonder if I search for "knee jerk", do I find Slashdot?
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Why would you do something like this? There are going to be people that use Microsoft's search engine. Your site will not be indexed by Microsoft's search engine. Consequently, these people will not find your site.
I wonder if all of the people complaining about there not being enough relevant results are the same ones blocking this spider from indexing their relevant content...
Nothing more than that really.
Its pretty slow, the results are inconsistent, cant even cope with a slashdotting. One things for sure this will be a real test of Microsofts server platform; So far I aint impressed.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
I don't understand all these posts comparing google's huge number of results for a certain search, while the Microsoft one returns a small number. Searching is not about returning a vast quantity of links. Who goes past page 3 anyway? Most people never even go past page 1, so really 10 results is the most that are usually needed.
If you're going to compare the two, the criteria should be, which returned the most meaningful results - maybe only 1 results is needed. A vast number of results is not always helpful.
TODO: come up with a clever sig
Whenever I read about the way MS improves their stuff when there is actual competition, I wonder what Windows would have been like now if there had been any actual real competition for marketshare in OSes in the last decade or so.
You'd be really surprised just how many people there are in the world who, when it comes to computers, don't ever bother changing their default page, etc. Microsoft has done quite well up to this point by playing to the lowest common denominator (which is what you get anytime you're pushing "ease of use" over actual features/technology). I'm sure that if IE 7 ships with this thing set to the default search page, they'll get their share of hits. Besides, are you really that upset that Microsoft is going to waste time and money? If you really wanted to subvert them, you should encourage them to throw as much behind this as possible, just to watch it all fail miserably.
Okay, having just gone to the search engine site and entering in simple words, I get one of three results:
They claim to have indexed billions of pages... billions of pages of what exactly?!?
To participate in a war, you need reliable weapons to stand a chance. Teoma, Yahoo, Google, etc... they all have viable search technologies. MSN's search engine at their beta site is comparable to a blunderbuss. Highly inaccurate, prone to misfirings, and just as predictable in results.
Some people say "linux" gets results and some people don't. When I ran a search just now, it didn't get any results. Then I got an error page.
I tried searching for my website with "polygon comics" which is indexed in every search engine. None on their beta engine.
I tried "palo alto car show", which is likewise indexed by every search engine out there. Also no results from the MSN beta search engine.
From the impressions posted by other people who have been trying the system, it sounds like when the MSN beta search system is working, it ranks based on domains, favouring cyber-squatters and basically giving you info which may not even be relevant to your search.
RELEVANCE is what is important in a search system. That is more than just matching keywords. If MSN hopes to launch their own search which doesn't depend on other peoples' more reliable search technologies, they will need to work a hell of alot harder than what they've put up on their beta site.
As a long time user of search engines, I think MSN beta is a piece of ****(replace with a four letter explative of your choosing).
Winged Power Photography
I don't think that it's too much to assume that if a public test of a technology is being offered that said technology should be able, even if only partially, to satisfy the testers requirements. It's not like this is an in-house alpha product that may have an incomplete interface or an unseeded database -- this is a public beta test aimed at user acceptance testing. Given that search results are sparse at best, I'd say their UAT is not going very well.
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
I refuse to use this piece of software, period. Redmond are pulling their usual stunt of releasing crap just for the publicity, so all their shills can say, "Golly wow, Microsoft's gonna have a much better search engine real soon now."
I'm so sick of this strategy I could puke. The best way to mess with their heads is to totally ignore them. So many good companies have been killed by these people, why help them at all, even by helping them debug their system, or driving up their click rate.
Just wait: the next news release will boast about "how many millions" of search requests they've "already serviced" and how quickly they'll grow to surpass Google, etc. etc. etc. -- all so they have more Pablum to feed to the clueless army of MSCE IT slaves looking in every corner for justifications for keeping Microsoft around.
Sure, "rabbit" is a common term, but does that mean, that real users will actually search for it? Maybe the algorithm relies on more information, such as "rabbit breeding", or whatever. It's like searching for "computers", a virtually useless search. Creating a algorithm that works on common input, instead of ANY input, to improve results, might not be such a dumb thing. But who knows.
It's also likely, that the search returns so many hits, but they're all values so low, that no one stands out. Much like how the new MySQL searching works.
It's of course also possible that the algorithm is crap.