Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Search 2.0 vs. Traditional Search

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the for-all-that-2.0-stuff-you-lost dept.

ReadWriteWeb writes "Ebrahim Ezzy reviews 5 new third-generation search technologies — and how they compare to the big guns of Google, Yahoo and MSN. These so-called "search 2.0" companies are combining the scalability of existing internet search engines with new and improved relevancy models; they bring into the equation user preferences, collaboration, collective intelligence, a rich user experience, and many other specialized capabilities. The new search engines profiled are Swicki, Rollyo, Clusty, Wink and Lexxe." Note, as the article points out, that the author has developed yet another search engine, called Qube.

21 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Not so stunning results for the "next generation" by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Well, I tried out the "Search 2.0" Lexxe, the one that "does what TSE's already do, but more efficiently."

    I asked it a simple question. And it responded. Here is the efficient answer that must surely have Google quaking in its boots:

    Lexxe (alpha version) has just encountered a system or internal connection problem, due to too many users using it now.
    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  2. Interesting choice of names by Burb · · Score: 5, Funny

    My confident prediction for search 3.0 engines will be TinkyWinky, Dipsi, Lala and Po.

    --

    1. Re:Interesting choice of names by Burb · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, that fault is rectified in Keyboard 2.0. (codenamed coffee-be-gone).

      --

  3. I say! by isecore · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, I'm off to eat Food 2.0 now and after that I'm going to Take A Dump 2.0

    Am I the only one who's getting tired of this trend of tagging on 2.0 to everything? It's stupid. Searching is still essentially the same way as before, it's not like a magic robot comes out of the screen or anything.

    --
    I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
    1. Re:I say! by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think you misspelt your verbs:
      TummyFillr 2.0 beta
      ToiletFillr 2.0 beta

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:I say! by blindd0t · · Score: 3, Funny

      Agreed... Where the hell is Porn 2.0?!

    3. Re:I say! by jZnat · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought the increasing amount of amateur porn was pr0n 2.0, and that started before Web 2.0. Porn; ahead of the game as always.

      I know! I could create a Porn 2.0 website called fuckhr! Or fuckr. You post your own home-made amateur porn movies, and you tag them with tags like "hardcore", "bj", "cumshot", and "anal"! Then anyone could just search for specific tags and find some good (hopefully) amateur porn to fit their specific fetishes.

      Y'know, this almost seems like a good idea...

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    4. Re:I say! by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Funny

      Some idiot tagged it all as "prawn".

    5. Re:I say! by fornaxsw · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I'm off to eat Food 2.0 now and after that I'm going to Take A Dump 2.0

      Am I the only one who's getting tired of this trend of tagging on 2.0 to everything? It's stupid. Searching is still essentially the same way as before, it's not like a magic robot comes out of the screen or anything

      iAgree

  4. Its all good by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

    As long as "Lesbian Porn" return plenty of varied and releveant hits

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:Its all good by cerberusss · · Score: 4, Funny
      As long as "Lesbian Porn" return plenty of varied and releveant hits
      Those Web 2.0 thingies are very smart. So you enter the query and they immediately ask: "Do you want to include your sister's name in the search?"
      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  5. You know... by phlegmofdiscontent · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just don't see any of these names becoming verbs.

  6. Lexxe is actually pretty good! by okwiater · · Score: 2, Funny

    It answered my question accurately and succinctly: http://www.lexxe.com/main.cfm?sstring=what+is+the+ best+search+engine?&clickcluster=fmclk&sstringtemp =fmstr

  7. Ah, "collective intelligence" by LiftOp · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...Because none of us is as dumb as all of us. (http://despair.com/)

  8. In Search Of... by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Funny

    Third-generation search technologies are designed to combine the scalability of existing internet search engines with new and improved relevancy models; they bring into the equation user preferences, collaboration, collective intelligence, a rich user experience, and many other specialized capabilities that make information more productive.

    Yes, but can they tell me where in the hell I left my car keys??

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  9. Loading... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Lexxe (alpha version) has just encountered a system or internal connection problem, due to too many users using it now.

    Please try again a few minutes later. Thanks."

    I don't get it, how did that answer your question? :(

  10. Pretty interresting by smeuuh · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just tried Lexxe
    Q : Who is the president of united states ?
    A : Armed forces

  11. Re:From the makers of Web 2.0... by Ant+P. · · Score: 2, Funny

    Last time I checked, Google was at 2.1 already.

  12. Bingo! by ABoerma · · Score: 3, Funny
    • First-generation search ranked sites based on page content - examples are early yahoo.com and Alta Vista.
    • Second-generation relies on link analysis for ranking - so they take the structure of the Web into account.
    • Third-generation search technologies are designed to combine the scalability of existing internet search engines with new and improved relevancy models; they bring into the equation user preferences, collaboration, collective intelligence, a rich user experience, and many other specialized capabilities that make information more productive.
    Bingo!
  13. Re:Not so stunning results for the "next generatio by thrillseeker · · Score: 2, Funny

    I found it!

  14. Re:Not so stunning results for the "next generatio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Well...

    When searching for "google" here is what I got...

      Your search "google" cannot find any matched documents. Please check your spelling or ask another way. Thank you.

    http://www.lexxe.com/main.cfm?sstring=google&click cluster=fmclk&sstringtemp=fmstr