Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Yahoo's Build Your Own Search Service

Posted by kdawson on from the meet-the-new-boss dept.

ruphus13 and other readers alerted us to Yahoo's BOSS, Build your Own Search Service. It gives access to Yahoo's entire databases for Web, image, and news search with no cap on queries per day and no restrictions on mixing Yahoo's search results with others or re-sorting them, and without Yahoo branding visible. From their blog announcement: "As anyone who follows the search industry knows, the barriers to successfully building a high quality, web-scale search engine are incredibly high. Doing so requires hundreds of millions of dollars of investment in engineering, sciences and core infrastructure — from crawling and indexing technology to relevancy and machine learning algorithms, to stuff as mundane as data centers, servers and power. Because competing successfully in web search requires an investment of this scale, new players have effectively been prohibited from delivering credible alternatives to Yahoo! and Google. We believe the BOSS platform will begin to change that."

26 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. BOSS? by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sounds a lot like FOSS. I bet the confusion is intentional, probably a MS/Y! conspiracy to attack Open Source.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:BOSS? by leenks · · Score: 3, Funny

      Real geeks use FLOSS. Duh ;-)

  2. Totally Boss! by introspekt.i · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the ultimate plan is to get students and academicians to make their search services for them. Once they're good enough for market, they can purchase the rights to said BOSS search services (or incomplete ones that look very promising...to part out and use in the code base). That's a good idea coming out of Yahoo! Finally some decent press for them.

    1. Re:Totally Boss! by menace3society · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It can do a lot of things, actually. One use, as you've noted, is to serve as what amounts to a source of free R&D.

      But there are a lot of other things that can come out of this, too:

      • People who want more advanced search features (like regex support) can write it themselves instead of pestering Yahoo.
      • Better support for foreign language search.
      • Since a lot of websites still roll their own site search functionality and do it badly, use Yahoo as a replacement.
      • More flexible 'Safe Search' access control.
      • etc...

      I think it's a great idea. It might open them up to some serious copyright challenges, but if it doesn't (or, preferably, if those challenges get tossed aside), it would be great to see all the search portals do something like this.

    2. Re:Totally Boss! by el+americano · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "People who want more advanced search features (like regex support) can write it themselves"

      I wish that were true, but this does not magically allow queries that their database does not support. What you get, according to TFA is re-rank, combine with other data, and remove Yahoo branding. It also allows news and image searches and unlimited queries. This is exactly like previous APIs, but with a few more freedoms.

      Somebody is buying into the hype.

      --
      Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
    3. Re:Totally Boss! by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It is far more than that. It is all about building localised search services. The larger local media distributors ie. local newspaper or television channels can effectively incorporate the global search facility and enhance it with their localised knowledge and content to more suit their local market. In turn of course Yahoo can then incorporate that localised search more effectively into their global search engine.

      This in affect gives Yahoo and the local media players and far more effective search platform and a real market threat to google as well as of course that other major players in the search engine business.

      This wider distribution of search engine services will also push search from the current marketing perceived foreground way into the back ground as simply a subsidiary service of any typical major web portal whilst simultaneously pushing local web portals into the foreground in local markets by them being able to offer globally effective search services on their site.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  3. So then... by Bullfish · · Score: 5, Funny

    MS can stop trying to buy Yahoo and do this for free!!

  4. Microsoft probably knew. by gcnaddict · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can't see Microsoft justifying a Yahoo purchase unless they knew about the BOSS platform in advance, which is probably why the sale fell through in the first place.

    Then again, I doubt BOSS alone would save Yahoo anyway.

    --
    Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Microsoft probably knew. by Daimanta · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And I thank Jerry Yang's ego very much for that.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    2. Re:Microsoft probably knew. by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The deal feel through because of Jerry Yang's ego. Taking the deal was the right thing to do for the shareholders and he didn't do it because he let his pride/ego get in the way.

      Or he did it because he knew it was the wrong thing for Yahoo! and the wrong thing for shareholders who are interested in the long view. But hey - this horse has been worked before.

    3. Re:Microsoft probably knew. by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Better for the shareholders" is a subjective term. To YOU, you think selling out and making the board a quick wad of cash was "Better for the shareholders". The thing is, Microsoft loves to buy and completely wreck successful companies. I think, from a business point of view, that selling out to Microsoft would mean the death march for Yahoo. You and I don't know what Yahoo has up their sleeve. They have been taking some new and interesting paths lately. It may be that it is "Better for the shareholders" to ride the new wave and see where it takes them.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    4. Re:Microsoft probably knew. by sobachatina · · Score: 3, Interesting

      the right thing to do for the shareholders

      That is an interesting choice of words. You are presenting this opinion as fact where I believe there is room for many other interpretations. There are a lot ways that taking the deal could have been the wrong thing to do.

      It was only guaranteed to be the "right thing" if you define the "right thing" as "maximizing short term stock price gains". There are many other ways that the "right thing" could be defined where that deal may or may not have been better. Things like "Maintaining reasonable profit growth for the next 50 years." or even "Providing a work environment that reduces employee attrition". I'm not saying that MS is necessarily bad at these things but a CEO could definitely make a case that the company would be better served by staying independent.

      I personally never invest in companies that have a history of making decisions where the "right thing" is defined as "maximizing short term stock price gains". When you do that you're not building anything you're just gambling.

  5. Inktomi for the masses by kriston · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It will be really interesting to learn how all the Inktomi technology works and how it well it was integrated with Yahoo.

    --

    Kriston

  6. A little hard to believe by decavolt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "...from delivering credible alternatives to Yahoo! and Google."

    I find it a little hard to believe that Yahoo, especially in their current state, actually wants to encourage even more competition against themselves. I think the real target here is more competition for Google, not for Yahoo, and Yahoo seems OK with giving away their own tech if it helps knock Google down a few notches.

    1. Re:A little hard to believe by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yet I think what is so funny is Yahoo is what made Google popular in the first place. When I go to Google, I have the A) Google logo B) A search box and C) A bit of navigation. When I go to Yahoo, I have ads, a large Yahoo logo, a page full of useless information, and Flash. Google uses no Flash which is helpful for a Linux user like me, which, although Flash works, it has a terrible CPU leak in the more recent versions.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:A little hard to believe by imaginaryelf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which goes to highlight where the companies come from, and what the companies do. Google does search. Yahoo does a lot of other things, of which search is just one component, albeit a major one.

      If you go to http://search.yahoo.com/ or http://ysearch.com/ then you get the same experience as going to google (classic).

    3. Re:A little hard to believe by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which goes to highlight where the companies come from, and what the companies do. Google does search. Yahoo does a lot of other things, of which search is just one component, albeit a major one.

      The same thing though could be said about Google, Google has maps, blogs, a social networking site, 2 video sites, and much more

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    4. Re:A little hard to believe by magarity · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's because you go to Yahoo's portal page. Yahoo's search page is every bit as clean as Google's, and always has been. Meanwhile, Google's portal page is every bit as busy as Yahoo's.

  7. Goog by Faux_Pseudo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Google already has this feature. I wonder what the differances are. For example how come google didn't get a slashdot story when it launched its version?

    --
    Ascii artist &
    1. Re:Goog by Quixote · · Score: 4, Informative
      This is more than Google's CSE.

      From Google's CSE docs:

      • Apply your website's look and feel to the search results page.
      • Provide search refinements within results pages to make it easier for searchers to find the information they're looking for.
      • Add sites to your search engine's index as you surf the web.
      • Invite friends and trusted users to co-edit and contribute to your search engine.
      • Make money from your Custom Search Engine by participating in Google's AdSense program.

      Yahoo's BOSS allows you to retrieve raw results from their index, and then munge them as you see fit. Google does not allow you to tinker much with the results (just add/exclude sites), except maybe the presentation.

  8. Inertia by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have been so used to goolgling for stuff, that I hardly see a point in switching my search engine. 1) Google comes up with relevant results for 99.99% of my needs. 2) Their search page and subsequent results page is very easy to use, has no flashly graphics, the sponsored ads are clearly marked and never really mingle with the actual searches. Not that I am saying yahoo's search is any less in quality, but the inertia for me has set in, and unless google does something stupid, like making the whole website flash/silverlight/java-applet based, Why should I switch ?

    --
    for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
  9. Really Great Strategy by saterdaies · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is one of the smartest moves I've seen Yahoo make. The key is that you are required to run Yahoo ads alongside the search results (when said ads become available).

    So, if I'm creating a search for my website, I can go the Google route, embed an iframe and look amateur or go with Yahoo and look professional and completely integrated.

    Not only that, but there are a lot of niche markets that big players can't go after that add up to a lot. As someone who programs for those type of sites, Yahoo's BOSS is really appealing. Yahoo ups their ad revenue, I get access to world-class internet search.

    It's all about increasing the number of ads served. The more people who choose BOSS, the more ads Yahoo serves and the more money Yahoo makes.

    1. Re:Really Great Strategy by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As I read the announcement, running Yahoo ads is not a requirement. Running Yahoo ads will be a future option to those who want to use the ads as a profit stream, but it's up to the site owner to decide.

      If you like, you could take your Yahoo search results ad-free and run Google ads next to them. That's why this announcement is so bold - there are basically no requirements or limits on using BOSS.

  10. And it's going to be called... by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ChairSearch!

  11. It's a relaunch of an old API with a new TOS by Animats · · Score: 5, Informative

    BOSS is not really new. Yahoo already had the Yahoo Search API, which does essentially the same thing. BOSS is essentially the Yahoo Search API with different terms of service. In particular, BOSS will, in future, allow "monetization". BOSS also allows users to intersperse their own search results with Yahoo's and run ads.

    Google used to have a SOAP-based API, but they stopped allowing new users in 2006. It didn't force the caller to display ads. There's still a Google search API, but it's tied to their widgets and has restrictive terms of service.

    We support both with SiteTruth. Yahoo search API version Google AJAX search version. The interface code is quite different but the end results are similar.

    It's not about technology. It's about what you're allowed to do with the data:

    • The Yahoo search API terms of service have a rate limit, don't allow you to add ads, but do allow reordering of results.
    • The Google AJAX API terms of service don't have a rate limit, restrict presentation to Google's format, and don't allow reordering of results.
    • The first rule of the BOSS Terms of Use is that you don't talk about the BOSS terms of use. "You shall not issue a press release or other written public statement regarding this TOU without Yahoo!'s written approval."
    1. Re:It's a relaunch of an old API with a new TOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      These are some of the limitations imposed by Google's API that are NOT applicable to BOSS:

      "The API may be used only for services that are accessible to your end users without charge."

      "You agree that you will not, and you will not permit your users or other third parties to: (a) modify or replace the text, images, or other content of the Google Search Results, including by (i) changing the order in which the Google Search Results appear, (ii) intermixing Search Results from sources other than Google, or (iii) intermixing other content such that it appears to be part of the Google Search Results; or (b) modify, replace or otherwise disable the functioning of links to Google or third party websites provided in the Google Search Results."

      " incorporate Google Search Results as the primary content on your website or page; "

      "You agree to include and display the "powered by Google" attribution adjacent to the Service search box."

      "For all Search Results available through the Service, Google provides Google AJAX Search API attribution language (such as "clipped from Google - date" or such similar language as may be used from time to time). You agree to include this attribution, unmodified, adjacent to Search Results on your site."

      Most importantly, BOSS can be completely under the covers, and allows you to MODIFY the results themselves as you see fit.