MSN Search Has Arrived

strikehosting writes "The new MSN Search, "the first-ever search engine built from the ground up by Microsoft", has been launched worldwide. It will be available in 25 markets and 10 languages. A few features though, like MSN Music and 'Search Near Me', are available only in the United States. Sporting a cleaner look and a simplified layout, MSN Search has a more prominent position on the home page. The features that are available here include tabs that allow consumers to target searches to the Web, news, images, music, desktop or Microsoft Encarta."

Comments

Better results than Google?

[Aurix]

For the few searches I've used MSN for, it seems to have better results than Google.

Anyone else noticing this?

Re:Better results than Google?

[LiquidCoooled]

Search in both "fonew"

MSN: * Were you looking for fone
Google: Did you mean: phone

so, it does have corrective facilities, but google works better.

Now, the ultimate, searching for "par hiltn"
MSN: * Were you looking for par hilton
Google: Did you mean: paris hilton

Mind you, google does have a special affinity with the woman, so we will let them off.

search results vs google

[Mickey Jameson]

msn search: "bill gates sucks" - 608 matches
google: "bill gates sucks" - 2,460 matches

Not really shocking, I guess.

Well...

[xbrownx]

The first result for "linux" is an actual page devoted to Linux this time.

That's progress, right?

Misleading link

[IamTheRealMike]

That's a very misleading story article (surprise surprise), the actual page is search.msn.com - not the MSN.COM portal linked to above. It's a lot cleaner and smaller.

Come on guys. I know we're all rooting for Google in this fight, but childish tricks like that are just not cricket.

Re:[tt]:Encarta

[BigDogCH]

I don't know about the clutter, but the searching works great! It found exactly what I was looking for! http://beta.search.msn.com/results.aspx?FORM=MSNH& srch_type=0&q=google

"free but biased Wikipedia?"

[FooAtWFU]

or free but biased Wikipedia?

Please note that Wikipedia's number one rule is called NPOV for "neutral point of view", before you go accusing it of widespread bias left and right. Not that it always lives up to the goal of being entirely bias-free, but I'd hardly call Encarta unbiased either, and it makes no claim that objectivity is an object.

And it's not like the two are mutually exclusive, either. If you have Encarta, you can still look up stuff on Wikipedia, compare and contrast their approaches, and learn more from the profit.

But Encarta probably is more suitable for children, because Wikipedia makes little effort to self-censor offensive material that you may not want your child to know about.