Slashdot Mirror


Google To Shut Down 411 Service

taco8982 writes "After three years of providing free directory assistance in exchange for voice samples, Google has announced plans to shut down the GOOG-411 service, in order to focus on 'speech-enabling the next generation of Google products and services across a multitude of languages.' The service will close on November 12th."

156 comments

  1. what? by bhcompy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Never even heard of it. I wonder how many dozens of obscure Google services there are out there

    1. Re:what? by ajrs · · Score: 5, Funny

      Never even heard of it. I wonder how many dozens of obscure Google services there are out there

      If only there were some automated tool to find them all. A search engine, if you will....

    2. Re:what? by binarylarry · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ahhh, this the worst thing since they shutdown GOOG-976!

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    3. Re:what? by Donniedarkness · · Score: 3, Informative

      I had actually started using it last month. It's amazingly useful. RIP :(

      --
      Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
    4. Re:what? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I have, it was actually a pretty cool service. Given the way it was setup, it even enable free long distance/payphone calling. You'd call 800-GOOG411 and explain who/what you were looking for. It'd then connect you.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re:what? by odies · · Score: 4, Informative
    6. Re:what? by AhabTheArab · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Seems that the people who knew about it and used it actually liked the service. I used to use it, particularly when driving cross country. It was very handy to be able to find a motel in an upcoming city and be connected so I could make reservations. Texting while driving is becoming illegal in many states. Also, voice service is more reliable than data service in many parts of the country.

      I haven't used GOOG-411 for quite some time, but it was nice to have available as on option. All in all, not too big of a loss I suppose.

    7. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely agree! I have this as a favorite number on my iPhone, I sure hope they bring it back in some capacity.

    8. Re:what? by NatasRevol · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or even something... authoritative.

      http://www.googlelabs.com/

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:what? by severoon · · Score: 1

      This is the best thread ever. =]

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    10. Re:what? by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed! I used it alot instead of shelling out $1.50 for 411 calls via Verizon..... crap....

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    11. Re:what? by carlzum · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it is a great service. It's one of the only automated attendant experiences that I preferred over a human operator. Every time I suffer through a clunky, annoying IVR when I call my bank or cable company, I wonder why they can't do it as well as Google's free service. Maybe the answer is, Google blew a lot of money on it and couldn't (or didn't want to) sustain it any longer.

    12. Re:what? by ocdude · · Score: 1

      http://www.google.com/newproducts/ has a list of all of the google products out there, and even lets you filter by area of interest or search.

    13. Re:what? by ajs · · Score: 1

      There are a ton of Google services. I think the ones that would
      surprise most people are:

      Then of course, there's their non-Web site features. For example,
      they have a VC group called Google Ventures; a whole series of public
      policy and government-related initiatives such as their work with enabling
      public Q&A and CitizenTube, YouTube's public
      policy blog about "developing trends in the use of YouTube by news
      organizations, activists, politicians, and governments."

      They're also a major developer of FOSS. Sometimes this takes the form
      of giant systems like Android or Chromium, but just as often, it's
      little things like their new Image format, WEBP (my
      analysis of WEBP for screenshots, here).

      Google does so much that they really do have to mercilessly kill
      things like Wave and GOOG-411 when their either outlive their planned
      purpose (like the latter) or don't achieve critical mass (like the
      former). Otherwise they'd be buried under an avalanche of
      half-finished products.

    14. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny; the first I heard of it was when my wife used it yesterday. Now I find it is shutting down and it has been out there for three years and I never even knew it.

    15. Re:what? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      No, Google blew a lot of money on it to gather lots of real voice samples.

      They've got them now, so now they have other plans.

    16. Re:what? by carlzum · · Score: 1

      I'm OK with that if it means I'll never look like a lunatic yelling at my phone in public again.

      Residential
      Res-i-den-tial
      Res-i-den-ti-al
      RES-I-DEN-TIAL
      RESIDENTIAL!!! I live in a fucking house!!!
      OPERATOR! OPERATOR! NO! YES! NO! NNN-OOO!
      Arrrrrggg!!!

    17. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that's disappointing my phone company also overcharges for this crap and I won't pay for it. My phone internet is also $1.50 a megabyte (talk about unrealistic) so it's really not worth using google on the phone now period I guess.

    18. Re:what? by cababunga · · Score: 1

      You can google all Google services at google.com.

    19. Re:what? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Until you complain about google in public and the google web spiders find it.

      Then you'll be connected Bing Phone instead.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    20. Re:what? by BlitzTech · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the nightmares, jerk!

    21. Re:what? by treeves · · Score: 1

      My wife and I have been using for quite some time. Can't remember where I learned about it, but it's quite handy, and we'll miss it. Thing is, you can find stuff with it while you're driving, and there's no replacement for that, except now she'll probably call me and ask me to google stuff more often while she's driving.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    22. Re:what? by OnlineAlias · · Score: 1

      I've used it for months (years?). A killer pro tip was to put it on bluetooth dial in your car. Then you could just say "call Google" and then it was all voice commands to connect to anyone. Truly awesome...

    23. Re:what? by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      I've known about it for a couple years. Never used it. Never really thought about it because I always used the web based yellow/white pages.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    24. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use it all the time, especially while traveling. I'm too cheap to shell out the cash for a web-enabled smartphone (and the even more expensive data-plan). It has helped me out numerous times.

      Bummer!

    25. Re:what? by Jimmy+King · · Score: 1

      I've actually got a landline phone with a Goog-411 button on it that dials it. I've never used it, though. I might have to use it before it goes away just to check it out.

    26. Re:what? by scottbomb · · Score: 1

      Ditto. *yawn*

    27. Re:what? by swabeui · · Score: 1

      Ditto here. Not only was it cheaper, but it was far more intelligent. If that wasn't enough, the human voice mimicking a computers "be do boop beep" sound when it was 'thinking' was frickin' hilarious.

    28. Re:what? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Based on this, I think it is clear that it is your fault they are shutting this down.

      You just had to use it, didn't you?

    29. Re:what? by xda · · Score: 1

      GOOG-411 is a terrific service I'm actually having a micro panic attack because even though I've been rocking android phones for a couple years I still find myself using it once in a while if I don't have a good data signal or if I'm using some kind of ancient phone like a Blackberry for work.

    30. Re:what? by Tryle · · Score: 1

      And one ring to control them all!

      Sorry got carried away..

    31. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Google blew a lot of money on it to gather lots of real voice samples.

      They've got them now, so now they have other plans.

      Directed by M. Night Shyamalan

    32. Re:what? by frontwave · · Score: 1

      Actually Google was running TV ads just a few weeks ago. It is a great service, and connects the call for free, so if you don't have long distance and need to call a business outside your home calling area is great. About free services, Google Voice is great, if you live in the US or Canada, have a Gmail account and don't have a Google Voice number get one now! look at the features, it is great.

    33. Re:what? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      "Google 411. What City?" Los Angeles "What listing?" WHORES
      beep beep beep boop boop beep beep bboop
      "I'm sorry, did you say HOES?"

      Ah, good times, good times.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    34. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or even something... authoritative.

      http://www.googlelabs.com/

      And also this: http://www.google.com/newproducts/

    35. Re:what? by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      There's an alternative free info service you can use - I've used it for a while and it seems to have the same tech running as the for-fee telco 411 services..

      800-555-TELL - company is TellMe.com

      HTH

  2. GOOG-411 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    San Francisco! GOOG-411?

  3. Smartphones by MrEricSir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems like smartphones are making voice calls obsolete. GOOG-411 is a victim of http://www.google.com/

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:Smartphones by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hardly. When driving, I'd use voice activation to dial GOOG411 and be able to connect to any publicly listed number I desire without laying another finger on my phone. That's all sorts of awesome I can't do any other way right now. Well, for free anyhow.

      --
      A B A C A B B
    2. Re:Smartphones by GweeDo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is far more a victim of Google Voice Search on Android 2.2. The fact that I can say to my phone "Call Linex in Olathe, KS" and three seconds later it is dialing is simply to fantastic. The GOOG411 experiment gave them the testing they needed to make it a full fledge smartphone service that is only a small part of Voice Search.

    3. Re:Smartphones by adolf · · Score: 1

      Tell Me still offers similar free services, including (AFAICT) the basic directory lookups and dialing that GOOG-411 offered.

      1-800-555-TELL

      That said, I used to use GOOG-411 quite a lot before I got a Droid, but even now I still occasionally refer to it because it is both easy and hands-free.

      'Twill be missed.

    4. Re:Smartphones by whereiswaldo · · Score: 2, Funny

      What about GOOG419^WGmail?

    5. Re:Smartphones by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      Yep, I was going to say the same thing. It hasn't shut down, it's been built in and made exclusive to Android. Smart move of Google - they are differentiating Android by making their services just too good to live without.

  4. Sad day by AaxelB · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I for one am sad about this. I'm one of those holdouts who still doesn't have a (i|g|smart)phone, so it was nice to be able to call Google up to contact the restaurant I want to get reservations at, or anything like that. I can understand why they canceled it (they get way more voice data from Google Voice, I'm sure), but still, I'm a bit sad.

    Maybe I'll finally get a more intelligent phone now...

    1. Re:Sad day by Anti_Climax · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just SMS the name of the business to 46645 (googl) with your non-smart phone and get similar results messaged back

      --
      Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
    2. Re:Sad day by DingoTango · · Score: 1

      I agree. This was very useful, esp. when driving or otherwise unable to browse. Going to miss it.

    3. Re:Sad day by IronChef · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Texting is expensive and not a good idea while driving. I'll also really miss GOOG-411, with which I could search for a listing and get connected all over the handsfree.

    4. Re:Sad day by datapharmer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      unless you have tmobile prepaid or another carrier that blocks this so they can charge for 411.

      --
      Get a web developer
    5. Re:Sad day by DeathFromSomewhere · · Score: 1

      Texting is ... not a good idea while driving.

      But dialing a phone and talking on it is?

      --
      -1 overrated isn't the same thing as "I disagree".
    6. Re:Sad day by lushmore · · Score: 1

      I have a smartphone, but what I loved about Google 411 is with my in-car bluetooth it only took a button push on my steering wheel plus some voice commands to call any business, all while my phone is still in my pocket.

    7. Re:Sad day by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Informative

      On my last non-smart phone, a Moto RAZR, you could press one button to activate voice dialing. Press that, say "Google", let it connect. Talk over hands-free Bluetooth. It was less distracting than changing the radio.

    8. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can dial and talk with only hitting a single button, often on your steeringwheel if your car has bluetooth.

      Texting isn't that easy

    9. Re:Sad day by icebraining · · Score: 1

      With a cheap Nokia you could do that by pressing a single button - the speech recognition for dialing was pretty decent even on those older phones (although you had to pre-record it).
      Nowadays I never take my phone out of my pocket to dial. I just press the button on my headset and say the contact's name.

    10. Re:Sad day by rm999 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can thank competition: http://www.discoverbing.com/mobile/411/

      OTOH, msft copied Google on this one. Does that mean they will copy Google on discontinuing the service? ;)

    11. Re:Sad day by benedict · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Disco verbing"? What the hell is disco verbing?

      --
      Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
    12. Re:Sad day by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 1

      I hadn't heard of this one! Great find! I don't feel so bad after all about losing Goog 411...

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    13. Re:Sad day by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

      I guess it's kinda like Schoolhouse Rock.

    14. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft bought Tell Me which predated GOOG 411

    15. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      unless you have tmobile prepaid or another carrier that blocks this so they can charge for 411.

      I'm on T-Mobile Prepaid, and I receive 46645 (GOOGL) text just fine.

    16. Re:Sad day by tool462 · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's what you do the night after your expert sexchange.

    17. Re:Sad day by 6Yankee · · Score: 1

      Verbing adds weirdage.

    18. Re:Sad day by kdawgud · · Score: 1

      I don't think tmobile prepaid blocks this anymore, actually.

    19. Re:Sad day by imthesponge · · Score: 1

      It wasn't specifically blocking this service. I don't think any shortcodes worked.

    20. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Probably, since they discontinued backwards compatibility on the XBox360 right after Sony decided to stop putting the PS2 chips in the PS3.

    21. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MSFT didn't copy Google. If anything, Google copied Tellme (who Microsoft bought in 2007, long before Google started their 411 service). The IVR systems used (Bing vs. Google) are also different.

      You can also call 800-555-TELL (8355) and say "business search".

    22. Re:Sad day by dalan · · Score: 1

      Doesn't work in Canada. Goog 411 did.

      --
      Cheers! -- Richard
    23. Re:Sad day by uolamer · · Score: 1

      My work blocks all outgoing calls except to 800 numbers. Google 411 would also connect you to the number so I would use Google 411 to make calls to other businesses.. Anyone know of a service I can do this with still?

      Ive been using their service since it came out, gave the number to several people who still use it.

      --
      s/©//g
    24. Re:Sad day by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      Or when you "go Tahoe" and you find you've "got a hoe". I couldn't believe that ad campaign. GOTAHOE.com indeed.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    25. Re:Sad day by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they're going to do the same thing with Google Voice. That would suck. I've given out my GV number to hundreds of people. Well, dozens. Well, my mom, pretty much.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    26. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I quite regularly call goog-411 from my tmobile prepaid phone. It is in fact illegal for a carrier to block any random numbers they don't want you to call.

    27. Re:Sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft didn't copy Google. Tellme (before being acquired by MSFT) existed long before GOOG-411.

    28. Re:Sad day by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      OTOH, msft copied Google on this one. Does that mean they will copy Google on discontinuing the service? ;)

      One major difference is that Microsoft partnered with Ford on this one. Whenever you do a search on Ford's Sync system, you are really dialing a version of bing411 through your phone.

      Considering they will have to keep the service (or at least a version of it) available for Ford customers, it shouldn't be a major expense to keep bing411 running.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  5. Nuance and IBM by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nuance and IBM hold so many patents in the voice recognition field it's not even funny. With MS suing Android for things as innocuous as "syncing", I wonder what, if anything, Google is doing to protect or aid handset makers from this type of litigation. As I mentioned before in a previous post, a simple list showing all applicable patents and necessary licenses would help give a heads up to Android device makers.

    1. Re:Nuance and IBM by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      With MS suing Android for things as innocuous as "syncing"...

      No, MS is suing Motorola. Within that suit are listed patents that may or may not apply to other Android implementations. Which may or may not mean Google has the information to make such a simple list.

    2. Re:Nuance and IBM by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1

      You're right. Moto, not Android. My typing got ahead of me.

      The problem still is that Android is getting all these cool features, but it seems to be up to the OEM itself to determine what, if any, licenses need to be licensed. As much as I dislike Microsoft and think that their "indemnification" sales pitch is a load of crap, seeing them going after Moto is a bit disconcerting.

    3. Re:Nuance and IBM by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      As much as I dislike Microsoft and think that their "indemnification" sales pitch is a load of crap, seeing them going after Moto is a bit disconcerting.

      The big question is why Motorola? Why not Google? I know Motorola implemented some of their own code in their products. For example, when I got my Droid, I could sync the corporate Exchange server out of the box. I had a separate email and calendar app for Exchange than Google email and calendaring. My co-workers (G1 and a Nexus One after seeing us enjoy our phones) bought 3rd party apps. So while the lawsuit is naming the Droid2, I have to wonder if it's something Motorola's done with their devices that makes them a target.

      Of course, Motorola isn't the first. HTC came under Microsoft's guns. And the lawsuit includes filesystem compatability components. So while this particular patent might be custom-made for Motorola, it could also be just another stage in Microsoft's larger strategy.

    4. Re:Nuance and IBM by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My guess (and it's only a guess) is that the syncing software was low hanging fruit for MS. Moto included something that they shouldn't have, and to make a point MS sued them. The point, of course, being that it's DANGEROUS to use Android and it's a PATENT MINEFIELD because no one really knows what's in it and MICROSOFT WILL INDEMNIFY YOU if you use WinMo.

      The thing with HTC seems to be more related to the revenge of a spurned lover than anything else. With Moto, though, the goal seems to be about increasing the uncertainty surrounding Android.

    5. Re:Nuance and IBM by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      The big question is why Motorola? Why not Google?

      In February of 2009, Google licensed Microsofts syncing tech and then introduced Google Sync.br>
      At the time, the list then also included Apple, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, and Sony Ericsson. Note the absence of Motorola.

      From a Microsoft Press Release

      "Google's licensing of these Microsoft patents relating to the Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync protocol is a clear acknowledgment of the innovation taking place at Microsoft. This agreement is also a great example of Microsoft' s openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property. This open approach has been part of Microsoft's IP licensing policy since 2003 and has resulted in over 500 licensing agreements of the last five years."

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    6. Re:Nuance and IBM by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Very good point. What I find interesting is that Google used the ActiveSync protocol for their own services. The license doesn't appear to be intended for compatibility with Exchange. This has me pondering two points.

      First, does compatibility come in to play? Implementing ActiveSync on one's own server is one thing. But is it the same as using it to talk to someone else's server that's using that protocol? Unfortunately, I don't think there's any fair use provisions in patent law which is why patents are so prevalent these days (and often used to attack reverse engineering which is, in itself, completely legal).

      Secondly - does Google's license apply to Android code Google produces? If Google includes an API in Android that enables applications to get data from sources that talk ActiveSync without actually implementing ActiveSync themselves, does this dodge on of Microsoft's complaints? Somehow I doubt it. Microsoft got a real leg-up for WinNT by multiplexing Novell servers and have never forgotten that lesson; being very wary of someone pulling the same trick on them.

  6. Actually... by ForeverOrangeCat · · Score: 1

    Used to use this all the time before I got my android. Sure kept my crappy LG phone somewhat relevant.

    1. Re:Actually... by JSBiff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, if you have an Android phone, Goog-411 becomes kind of redundant, as the phone has built-in voice search from Google - one touch on the icon, then speak what I want, and up it pops in the built-in browser. Can even use the maps feature to locate what you want at a convenient location without having to actually know where such-and-such street is (that is, Goog - 411 would give you a list of results, with addresses, but what if you don't already know where all those addresses are? Sure nice to see them on a map).

      However, not everyone has a smart phone, and it really is a shame that the service will no longer be available for them - I used to use Goog-411 pretty frequently before getting my G1. I'm afraid just not enough people knew about Goog-411. Or perhaps they were happy with the number of users, but just decided it cost too much and as a company, didn't provide any revenue. "Free" things don't usually seem to last forever - you need *some* kind of revenue to support any service, no matter how cheap it is to provide it to the customers. Since they didn't make you listen to an ad, there was no apparent revenue stream (well, sometimes I do remember hearing something like this service brought to you by broadband.com, or something like that, so perhaps they got a little revenue from that).

    2. Re:Actually... by ForeverOrangeCat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there are other similar services out there but you have to sit through an add or a couple of adds. That and the voice recognition is not nearly as good, and often the results are bunk.

    3. Re:Actually... by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      It was a fairly inexpensive way to collect a LOT of voices saying things over and over again. That was the payoff.

    4. Re:Actually... by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I hate being forced to listen to two numbers being summed before I can place my stupid call. RIP GOOG411, they always had the decency to subtract.

      --
      A B A C A B B
    5. Re:Actually... by ForeverOrangeCat · · Score: 1

      oh damnit...

  7. Sad Day! by odin84gk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Goog411 was amazing! No ads, good results. Thankfully I have a smartphone, but there were still times that Goog411 was faster than using my smartphone.

    I guess I will go back to 1-800-Free411

    1. Re:Sad Day! by ReallyEvilCanine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It was free because they spent money to provide you a service in exchange for the voice clip they got from you. When you get stuff for free, it's not because you're the customer; you're the product.

    2. Re:Sad Day! by Tokolosh · · Score: 1

      I am an immigrant, with an obscure accent, and it always worked perfectly for me. A great service, that will be sorely missed.

      Please reconsider, Mr G!

      --
      Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    3. Re:Sad Day! by ubercow · · Score: 1

      Tried it a few times and this service was pretty useless in Hawaii. Goog-411 had issues with local city, business, and non-american restaurant names - not to mention the free entertainment you give to friends and passers-by when you intentionally butcher the pronunciation of places in an attempt to get the computer to recognize what you're saying on the second pass.

    4. Re:Sad Day! by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      They were buying voice clips and paying in service.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    5. Re:Sad Day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen the quality of the Google Voice transcripts? Seems to me they still need lots more samples.

    6. Re:Sad Day! by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      It was free because they spent money to provide you a service in exchange for the voice clip they got from you. When you get stuff for free, it's not because you're the customer; you're the product.

      So... I guess I'm supposed to think of that as a bad thing?

      I use an awesome free service that's only free so that my participation can be used to make other free services more awesome. What's the problem here?

    7. Re:Sad Day! by sznupi · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If those are the factors that matter, then I'm sorry but you're drooling over wrong piece of art - Qur'an nicely supercede it in all of those criteria (it's easy to become a Muslim, just one honest declaration needed, go ahead, you know you want to worship the right book...)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    8. Re:Sad Day! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I'm the product, did I used to call GOOG411 to tell myself the number I was looking for?

  8. read the blog! by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The blog says now all you need to do is send a txt message to 466453 (google) with name and city and state.

    It's easier that way, at least with a cell phone.

    --
    1. Re:read the blog! by demonlapin · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's great, if you have 1) a cell phone 2) with a texting plan, and 3) you aren't driving. Cell phones don't always get reception, texting a la carte is expensive, and even where it's legal you shouldn't do it on the road.

    2. Re:read the blog! by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      i used google sms for years on my old nokia 1100, it easilly outperformed smartphones from a couple years ago

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  9. NOOOOOO........ by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

    I love Goog-411. I use it at least once a week. While it may be flaky on the voice recognition more than I'd like, it's usually pretty good.

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
  10. Cordless Phones by epedersen · · Score: 1

    I wonder if there is a way to reprogram the Goog-411 buttons on the cordless phones that have them, such as this http://www.buy.com/prod/thomson-28811fe2-premiere-goog-411-dect-6-0-cordless-phone-1-x-phone/q/sellerid/22539552/loc/111/207514570.html one.

    1. Re:Cordless Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, that's hilarious!

  11. NO!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goog-411 was something that I really enjoyed using and pretty frequently mind you. As long as you don't use speaker-phone (which it will hear itself talking) it was flawless at understanding me no matter how fast I would talk. Don't die Goog-411!! ;_;

  12. I only tried it once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but, it worked wonderfully.

  13. Irony.. by SixDimensionalArray · · Score: 1

    Just got a Droid 2 and was transferring my old phone numbers over. I had just transferred the Google 411 number, and then jumped on Slashdot and determined I shouldn't bother!

    It was nice to have, even though I suppose it's not as necessary with a smartphone. Still, cheaper than calling 411 on my carrier!

    So long and thanks for all the fish!

    6d

  14. Almost as obscure as by assemblerex · · Score: 2, Funny

    Goog-8675309

    1. Re:Almost as obscure as by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Damn you Tommy Tutone.

    2. Re:Almost as obscure as by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eric Schmidt's got your data
      You'll be his info slave
      Google can follow you at
      86.75.30.9

  15. Awwww! by peacefinder · · Score: 1

    That service was really nifty, especially inthe days of dumb phones. Oh, well. It'll be missed.

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
    1. Re:Awwww! by enjerth · · Score: 1

      I still have a dumb phone, you insensitive clod!

    2. Re:Awwww! by peacefinder · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess you're REALLY gonna miss it then. :-p

      --
      With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
  16. oh hell no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    noooooooooooooo! i love this service! =[ damn you, google. whyyy? goog-411 was THE SHIT.

  17. Bing 411 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft still is in the 411 game with Bing 411. Link

    1-800-Bing-411
    (1-800-246-4411)

    1. Re:Bing 411 by amliebsch · · Score: 2, Informative

      I just confirmed Microsoft's original 1-800-CALL411 number works as well. If you used the Google service, this is a decent alternative.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    2. Re:Bing 411 by Barbarian · · Score: 1

      Works well unless you're in Canada. Then any city in Alberta is "Calgary, is that right?" and any city in Ontario is "Toronto, is that right?"

    3. Re:Bing 411 by coryking · · Score: 1

      Not even close to being as good. Google was down to earth. Bing was extra verbose

    4. Re:Bing 411 by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  18. Use it all the time by gregraven · · Score: 3, Informative

    I had a bad feeling about Google 411. It used to be one of the options when you called your own Google Voice account -- you pressed 2 to find the number you wanted. Then Google deleted it out of Google Voice without any notification that I ever saw. I use it all the time with my old "dumb" cell phone. It's a great service, and I'll be sad to see it go.

    --
    Greg Raven
    As long as there's any left, I'll take mine first.
  19. Huh. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    The service stopped working for me a couple months ago.

  20. Oh, I'm gonna catch hell from my wife. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Exactly. My wife uses GOOG411 all the time while driving. She thinks phone books and address books are obsolete. She's quite verbal and likes small flip phones, so no keyboard or smartphone.

    Given her tendency to use $1.29/call 411 services before GOOG411, I think Google ought to target people like me with $5/mo plans.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  21. Things just got more complicated by BcNexus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In other words, google is making it a lot more complicated and inconvenient. My current WinMo phone does this better. Let's compare.

    Currently, if I want to reach a company, I use one type of interaction: voice interaction. It goes like this:
    1. I tell my phone, "Call GOOG 411." My phone asks me if I want to call "GOOG 411" or whatever and gives me a chance to confirm or correct myself.
    2. I ask GOOG 411 for "Company X, Anytown USA"
    3. I listen to the results. Google gives me a chance to verify them and correct myself.
    4. I say which result I want. Google calls the business for me.
    All that without taking my eyes off of what I'm doing (walking, driving, doing the dishes, taking out the trash).

    Soon, when I want to reach a company, I'll have to do a more complicated routine:
    1. Launch Voice Search (VS for short).
    2. Ask for "Company X, Anytown USA."
    3. Voice Search terminates.
    4. To review the results on the screen, I have to take my eyes off what I am doing.
    5. If they're incorrect, I'm out of luck. My current VS session has ended and I need to start over.
    6. Assuming I found what I wanted, I try to remember the phone number of the business I want to reach.
    7. I launch Voice Actions (VA for short).
    8. I tell Voice Actions to dial the ten digit number I've hopefully remembered.
    9. VA doesn't ask me if it understood me correctly. I watch the screen to see if has. If VA got it wrong, I have to launch VA again.

    This is ridiculous. Notice how Google has made me take twice as many steps to reach a business. Notice how Google is forcing me to mix three types of interaction: -Voice interaction to initiate search and make the call
    -Screen viewing to check the results
    -Touch interaction to scroll through the results

    What a step back in functionality this is! I hope Google is paying attention and fixes this. Until they do, I have good reason to stick with my WinMo phone. It does hands-free stuff better.

    1. Re:Things just got more complicated by Asdanf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually on Android the current flow is
      1. Hold down search button.
      2. Say "Call Company X, Anytown USA"

      So, they halved the number of steps required and removed the listening requirement.

    2. Re:Things just got more complicated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Damn you're right, you should call them up and demand your money back!

    3. Re:Things just got more complicated by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      So, they halved the number of steps required and removed the listening requirement.

      Which is great when you find you've been connected to the wrong number, which you discover when you get your bill to be 1-900-HORSFUC.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    4. Re:Things just got more complicated by BcNexus · · Score: 1

      No, that's OK. Verizon already gave my my money back for my Droid Incredible powered by Google.

    5. Re:Things just got more complicated by twebb72 · · Score: 1

      What search/os are you using? My Droid Incredible does not do this.

    6. Re:Things just got more complicated by Asdanf · · Score: 1

      This is part of voice actions, available for Froyo phones.

    7. Re:Things just got more complicated by twebb72 · · Score: 1

      You insensitive clod. I'm still behind on upgrading my phone! I didn't want the OTA update to disable root. (Just another reason to finally upgrade! Thanks.)

  22. Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was a big fan of GOOG-411. I can't say I used it very much, but comparing it against 411, it won hands down, especially on the price aspect.

  23. Shame to see it go... by Barbarian · · Score: 1

    Now that google has got all the free data they need, they can shut down the service and encourage people to buy more smartphones. It's really a shame, but not unexpected from any company; I was hoping for better from google.

    Figures, just after I convinced my father to stop using the telco 411 (and paying the $$$) and to use GOOG-411.

  24. DECT considered harmful. . . by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    I was in a store recently, and my eye caught a cheap DECT phone, and I was thinking of buying it, but decided I should research DECT first. Turns out it has weak encryption which has already been broken. So, you should just throw that phone away anyhow. *grin* Well, at least, don't use it for any sensitive communications.

    Unforunately, GSM was recently 'broken' too, so there doesn't seem to be too much left in the way of secure wireless comms - maybe some sort of VoIP with TLS or AES crypto or something (seems like I remember hearing about a VoIP encapsulation scheme based on OpenPGP - I'll have to look into that.

    Still, the consumer electronics industry needs to really update their encryption standards.

    1. Re:DECT considered harmful. . . by DocHoncho · · Score: 0, Troll

      what the hell are you talking about? If, in the unlikely event that some TLA government agency actually cared about your communications they would in all likelihood already have a back door into whatever crypto you might get from a consumer grade device. However, back here in the real world, no one, not even the NSA gives a good goddamn about whatever trivial bullshit you would be spewing over that "poorly secured" line anyway. Get over yourself. Your paranoia does not reflect reality.

      Better make sure your call to Grandma is using 256-bit AES encryption, wouldn't want the government stealing her brownie recipe now would we?

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    2. Re:DECT considered harmful. . . by Magada · · Score: 1

      There's always PGPfone. Some assembly required, but I bet you could make it work on any smartphone.

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    3. Re:DECT considered harmful. . . by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like anybody would care about what encryption is used by the wireless interface, while setting up data recording at the carrier (like anybody without such legal means would care about you when practically everybody around have mobile phones). Like some bug in the place where you talk / in the phone was hard.

      Do you feel more paranoid already?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:DECT considered harmful. . . by russotto · · Score: 1

      I was in a store recently, and my eye caught a cheap DECT phone, and I was thinking of buying it, but decided I should research DECT first. Turns out it has weak encryption which has already been broken. So, you should just throw that phone away anyhow. *grin* Well, at least, don't use it for any sensitive communications.

      If you've got enemies sophisticated enough to break the encryption, you probably should stick to either corded phones or a whole-house faraday cage. Because an enemy sophisticated enough to break the encryption is probably sophisticated enough to pick up the incidentally radiated conversation in the clear.

      Better yet, end-to-end strong encryption. Because picking up the conversation in the clear off the phone line isn't hard either, if you don't have FTTH.

    5. Re:DECT considered harmful. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe this is what you're looking for

      I haven't used it but I don't have an android either

      http://www.whispersys.com/

  25. Hey Google? by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 1

    What do you think about open sourcing that voice recognition software? Goodness know OS needs it.

    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    1. Re:Hey Google? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > What do you think about open sourcing that voice recognition software?

      Who is going to pay the patent royalties?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  26. Used it for customers by adairw · · Score: 1

    I set it up on customers phone systems when they didn't want to pay for real 411 service. Dialing 411 or any other such directory assistance number would actually dial the 1800 number to google 411... oh well...

  27. King of the Beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google is definitely "King of the Beta"

  28. It was temporary by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

    I think what a lot of people are missing is that this was never intended to be a continuing or for-profit service for Google. They *only* set this service up to collect voice data to improve speech recognition.

    Now that they have the data they needed, they're closing it down.

    Sounds pretty crystal clear to me.

    --
    If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
  29. Nooooooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nooooooo! I use this frequently. Come Nov., I'll have to give Bing a try.

  30. t-mo prepaid doesn't block this by SpammersAreScum · · Score: 1

    I have t-mobile prepay. I just sent a text to 46645 and got a prompt text back with the info for the store I specified.

  31. I use this all the time by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 1

    I have used this service since the beta, for like hhm at least 3 years. use it all the time, sometimes it doesn't quite get it, but usually it was like an audio google search over and phone, toll free. it was all voice recognition and synthesis and it would make this delightful android "pepepdpidpdp" sound while it was thinkning.

    anyone else ever use this?

    who knows ive been trying all of googles wierd stuff since the beta of gmail. and this was one of the things that was actually useful.

    1. Re:I use this all the time by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      I thought it was pretty good, except for the rare case where what you were looking for wasn't the first or second hit. Then it got a little strange. You would have to do this dance between listening to various search results and saying "Next result" or "OK" with typical voice recognition accuracy

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
  32. Strategy by RonVNX · · Score: 1

    Could be war by proxy, but the logic here is probably that Google will fight on its own behalf to the death for Android, as Oracle is about to find out, and it's more productive to scare the handset makers into not wanting to use Android. In this regard, whoever is calling these shots at Microsoft seems smarter than Larry Ellison.

    1. Re:Strategy by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      In this regard, whoever is calling these shots at Microsoft seems smarter than Larry Ellison.

      I agree with your initial point, re: war by proxy. But on Ellison's intelligence, it's probably more a matter of goals. Microsoft needs to salt the earth for Android (and Linux in general) as it is taking the market niche Microsoft wants. Sun / Oracle is more interested in protection / maintaining control over Java. These very different goals can mean vastly different strategies and targets.

  33. Dang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used this service a ton. I am sad to see it go.

  34. Sad to see it go.... by Ruvim · · Score: 1

    This was a great tool for calling businesses while driving, Google would even text the matching result if I wanted a record on my phone. I think I would even be willing to pay a small monthly/per-use fee for this service, as long as it's under $2/call current AT&T directory assistance rip-off.

  35. 411 services? by EricX2 · · Score: 1

    How many services do they have if they have enough to be shutting down 411 services? I bet 400 of those are internal use only, like their specialty child porn searcher, and the legal torrent search which no one has any use for.

    Yes, I am joking!

  36. One of their better services. by MikeFM · · Score: 1

    GOOG-411 is actually one of their better services. It's a shame that they're scraping it and replacing it with some stupid mobile apps of dubious value. If I have a good enough connection to pull data from the web I can just Google the damn thing anyway. GOOG-411 is good because any crappy old phone can handle it even with a pretty bad signal and it's easy to understand. It's like the 411 we already are familiar with except it actually finds the right information for you and doesn't charge you a small fortune.

    I really hope they reconsider the shutdown. Don't kill good products to make room for crap products. Instead why not try marketing it and making it a profit center?

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  37. Um, what? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    How is this easier?

    Voice method:

    1. Dial 1-800-Goog-411 (hey, speed dial is just one button!)
    2. Speak name of City and State and Name
    3. Hear info, have Google send it as a text message with voice command, or even dial it for you.

    Text method:

    1. Open text message editor.
    2. Type name of City, State, and Name (and we all know how useful T9 isn't for uncommon people names and business names that are not common nouns.
    3. Send text message to Google (requires typing number or finding in phone's memory). (extra messaging charges may apply)
    4. Receive text message.
    5. Try to memorize number or write it down somewhere else if you can't dial and read the text at the same time.
  38. Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or you could just use 1-800-JUSTDIAL, also funded by Sequoia Capital - the same guys behind Google.

    They are operating a completely free service as well and instead of a software VR which can give some real howlers - this service has human operators taking your call.

  39. It seems at&t is aware ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would seem at&t is aware of this

    http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=6755

  40. TELLME by Mana+Mana · · Score: 1

    > Just SMS the name of the business to 46645 (googl) with your non-smart
    > phone and get similar results messaged back

    Google SMS is not as good as it once was! I used it constantly in 2006 and 2007, perhpas early 2008 for all sorts of useful, accurate, fuzzy searches, the stuff you can do with Google Maps but fast. To wit:

    * lowes in 10038
    * starbucks in 07310
    * old navy in 07020
    * ducati dealer near metuchen nj

    and I immediately received 2, 3 invariably USEFUL texts that I could peruse for proximity, preference. This was prior to smartphone wide adoption. It could have well have been or be for renegade, anti-materialist, unemployed, frugality reasons. However, Google's results began to go absent, un-fuzzy, useless. I was standing on Eight Avenue near Garfield Street in Park Slope, Brooklyn when I once again needed home supplies and tried the above first search. No results! I wasted ten minutes on the street, eight to ten texts to see why I could not get useful results that I knew Google had; it was a regular search for me then. I was so frsutrated as I needed the information, my Garmin unit's DB was incompltete on this topic, I already knew, and Google's results were always fresh AND proximitous if I used a zip code. It turned out that if I used the local Lowe's (home supply) mailing zip code I would get a result! I had to know of its existence and location to receive Goog's result. Unreal! Mind you even searching for Brooklyn, NY gave no results---they have one, as I should have already made concrete.

    Emblematically this state of affairs was typical for the next two years and I gave up on Google SMS to their detriment.

    Google411 in my experience was like speaking to a dense human, I would shout at it in despair. It would not understand a spoken zip code location, you would have to type it upon its bork. Then would have to repeat search object. Then it would launch into results, which upon selection would dash to dial unwantedly, which upon the command of "next result" would bail to a new search, etc. *sigh* You had to learn its dense syntax, fine, but its frequent aborts, forced repetition, forced repetition, was is grating. Hasta la vista! That's as far as I have wanted to get to it in years, line-of-sight only..

    Anyway, use the MS alternative it is less grating, just as (more) useful and Google's loss is the monopolist's gain. Whatevers.

    1-800-555-TELL

    http://www.tellme.com/you