Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the let-them-float dept.
x00 writes "The BBC News site is currently reporting that Altavista is going to float and that it could be worth 5 Billion Dollars. It also states that it could possibly merge with Lycos. "
Altavista's going to float and it's worth 5 billion dollars, you say? Good thing I didn't try to read this in Italian via babelfish, or else I'd probably be reading something about my mother and a fish.
For Japanese text, I use a third party program called Translingo http://www.translingo.com. It trasnlates right off NS or IE. Unfortunately it's crippled after 30 days, unless you decided to purchase the full version.
-- "I just can't sit while people are saying nonsense in a meeting without saying it's nonsense" J Watson, Sci Am 288:(4)51
Why, I much prefer Google, except for babelfish
by
georgeha
·
· Score: 2
I so rarely use altavista anymore, I like google much better.
Now if they had done an IPO a year ago, they might have done better.
George
Re:Why, I much prefer Google, except for babelfish
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yup. Google rocks. I was surprised the other day when I did go back to Altavista, and found an unrecognizable and confusing jumble of random portal shite. They've screwed it up the same way they did for Deja(News).
Rich.
Re:Why, I much prefer Google, except for babelfish
by
slashdot-terminal
·
· Score: 1
Re:Why, I much prefer Google, except for babelfish
by
treat
·
· Score: 1
I so rarely use altavista anymore, I like google much better.
I just gave google a shot, and it's just become my new favorite. I did a few searches, and all turned up good results on the first screenful.
I used to have such good luck with altavista that I would use it all the time, and only use others when altavista completely failed me. Usually the others would fail me as well in that case. But I've noticed a steady decline in how easy it is to search the web. (It's not Altavista's fault, and I don't know why Google turned up such good results for me - maybe just random chance.) It's the way things have always been, but it used to be manageable. Any simple search just turns up far too many hits - I may have to go through dozens of screenfulls of hits, and load dozens of pages to look for what I want. Most of the hits were by accident, or are not what I want at all (e.g. I want information on something, and all I can find is people trying to sell me one). I can guess at words or phrases that will be included in the page I want, but they're just wild guesses and I'm relying on luck. It can be impossible to find certain pieces of simple information that I'm sure are out there.
Some things are nearly impossible to search for, a single letter, an acronym with multiple meanings, a product that is also a foreign word. Sometimes it's nice how altavista replaces - and / with space, sometimes you really do need to explicitly match that - or/, and then you're out of luck.
As the net grows, there will be more information on it, and it will be harder to find. I'm not sure that there's any way to solve the problem. More advanced search engines would definately help - are there even any that support regex searches?
Re:Why, I much prefer Google, except for babelfish
by
pkalaher
·
· Score: 1
Does anyone out there use Dogpile? I prefer it, because it shoots back so many different sources (no, I don't work there).
Re:Why, I much prefer Google, except for babelfish
by
Bacteriophage
·
· Score: 1
I happen to LOVE Altavista, it has the vastest search in the land... If you know how to use it. There are serveral tricks that get you just what you want. I haven't used Google much, but I still think A-vista's better...and I like the new layout, believe it or not, even though I don't use the site as a portal. I'm sure there are others who agree with me.
"There are no shortcuts to any place worth going."
-- "Be regular and orderly in your life, so that you may be violent and original in your work." -Flaubert
I wonder when the Internet IPO boom is going to quiet down.
And its funny how a simple search engine can end up making so much money... but i guess even though there are so many search engines out there already, altavista has achieved "brand-name loyalty" among its users.
Basically they are trying to make money from putting out crappy portal services and such. That's what all major search engines do. It tries to make the site to be the one and only place you go on the internet with the exception of the pages you visit and they are trying to eliminate the need for that as well.
-- Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
A sign of the Internet 'maturing'
by
mrpacmanjel
·
· Score: 1
This is just the start...
Next year is going to be another significant year for the Internet -
Consolidation and major buyouts of Internet companies is on the way (and will break a few records in the process)
the only problem with this is...
by
apocalypse_now
·
· Score: 1
...altavista will never make much money.
Or, to be more specific, it will never make much money. Not enough to justify the types of prices that it will go for. In an age where clickthrough ratios are steadily declining, why would anyone buy stock in a pure search engine? It doesn't have the traffic or services of Yahoo!, nor does it have the number of steady users. -- Matt Singerman
I remember when they were a search engine. A damn good one too. Then they decided to really cash in on making money and nothing but. That's when they started to get greedy. Their service started to go down the drain and they lost my respect.
-- Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
So it's finally going to happen
by
cyoon
·
· Score: 2
Too bad those who could have gained the most from AV going public have left the company a long time ago. I work for a company that was founded by ex-AV employees. They waited, along with every other employee, for AV to public so they could make their money. They quit waiting a couple of years ago and started a consulting firm. Apprently, many other people quit, too: VP's, managers, techies, all types. It was just too long. AV has already lost the best it had.
Re:So it's finally going to happen
by
slashdot-terminal
·
· Score: 1
Why leave? I don't judge a job based on the remote possibility of making a quick stock option cash in.
http://astalavista.box.sk Wonder if they are a parent company?;-) ____ Check out the new case I built at the url above in the computers section. -S Scott Ruttencutter
The Best is now forming, right on Schedule.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The proposed (and it has been proposed, in secret) merger between Altivista and Lycos can only be interpreted as the advent of the Beast of Revelation.
Now that reliable evidence indicates that the Feminists have acquired nuclear weapons from sources in the former Soviet Block, it's time to face facts and get right with God. Hold on to your hats, guys, it's gonna get rough.
Re:The Best is now forming, right on Schedule.
by
slashdot-terminal
·
· Score: 1
Now that reliable evidence indicates that the Feminists have acquired nuclear weapons from sources in the former Soviet Block, it's time to face facts and get right with God. Hold on to your hats, guys, it's gonna get rough.
Billy, mommy said that you can come in and stop playing CIA spy ok? Dinner's ready.
Let me get this straight? This is a company which has even less in the way of physical assets, than (for example) Redhat, who (you will remember) are now worth an absolutely ridiculous amount of money.
Can anyone tell me exactly what Altavista owns, how it makes money (if it does?) and what its turnover, net assests etc are?
5 billion is a lot, no matter how you say it. The only thing I can imagine is that people will invest in case AV starts to make money. But with the 5 billion investment, AV could easily itself invest in other companies with tangible assets - maybe this is the point though, and I'm missing it? If anyone out there has some spare cash to invest mail me, I know the ideal thing for you (no really!).
But yeah, this is one almighty head-f*** so early in the morning!
Mong.
* Paul Madley...Student, Artist, Techie - Geek *
--
*...Slacker, Artist, Techie - Geek *
Remember: Nothing is Cool.
Re:5 Billion? Hmm...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The American economy is currently in an asset-bubble phase, which means assets are not rationally priced. Moreover, there's a great deal of hype surrounding anything which is seen to be Internet-related, and a `herd' mentality which feeds on this hype.
Attempting to rationalise this behaviour will only lead to headaches.
Loyalty among users? Yeah, both of 'em.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Heh.
I favor the Beast of Revelation theory, myself.
Re:Loyalty among users? Yeah, both of 'em.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No it's the international masonic conspiracy. They are also receiving aid from Bolshiveki agents of radicalism as well. Damn you all can't you just see the conspiracy.
Altavista will probably be valued below it's original estimate. Too much competition, too little value.
It would be a very tempting target for Microsoft, who still want the portal market. It would also let them kill off some of the competition.
No sane investor is going to hang around to see if Altavista is Y2K-compliant. Any IPO this close, EITHER side, is likely to be doomed by market panic.
Even if the investors don't panic, other companies they've invested in -may-. A market crash is no time to be investing.
Non-productive IPOs have done extremely badly, overall. BeOS dropped like a stone, and despite initially doing OK, MP3.com didn't come out smelling of roses, either.
-- It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I think you may be right, this may very well spell the end for the bound-to-succeed portal IPO period. Altavista has a name and has been around for while, but beyond that it has absolutely nothing to offer. Its no longer the best search engine (by far), nor the smartest. The portal services are as glued on, unncessary, and artificial as anywhere else.
In a way I hate to see Altavista targeted like this. It was a very good services around its inception, and though I don't use it anymore, I have some fond memories of first learning its advanced search syntax. Altavista has mostly suffered from being the bastard child in two mismanaged companies that didn't care about it. On the other hand: it is about time.
It's worth noting however that everyone who has predicted the end of the stupid IPOs for anything with a name in Cyberspace has turned out to be wrong, and that this has costed some conservative investors a lot of money. I have been opposed to the portal concept since its inception: I believe that as people get more at home on the Net, they will use portals less, not more (the only search services I use are Google and Alltheweb, both demo services by companies selling search technology), but so far, I have been proved wrong again and again.
I hasn't been a great few years for the devils advocates of the stock markets...
- We cannot reason ourselves out of our basic irrationality. All we can do is learn the art of being irrational in a reasonable way.
It's funny how everyone downplays what they think Altavista will do, considering the success of Redhat. The points against Redhat go along the lines of:
They're only gaining popularity because of the trial against MSFT.
They're worth as much as they're worth because one day they may make a bundle of money.
They have no proprietary advantage over their competitors, in fact they have a huge potential for competition, since their product is free...
They've fared very well, thus far.
As far as Altavista goes, if they were a new search engine, then yeah, it'd be a waste of dollars. But they're not a new company. They're a well established search engine. They've got a HUGE audience. Yes, click-throughs are dropping, but they've expanded their services to include shopping, etc... so there's a clear money making scheme at work.
If Amazon and Redhat can see their market caps hit 15 billion based on the expectationt hat one day (not today) their earnings will make their share prices worthwhile, then surely Altavista can be afforded the same luxury.
And lets not forget, Altavista's being run by CMGI - a 17 billion dollar company. This will be a killer IPO, IMHO.
1. At 23 million hits daily (reference: Doubleclick - AV's ad agent) they are not doing so badly... Many would agree that in today's market an established brand name and a history as the first in the market it the more important than product, revenue or anything else. Google might get the attentitive young slashdot geeks but this is not the general market. 2. I doubt CMGI will sellout to MSFT very easily. 3/4. If the stock market falls on Y2K, BUY!!! Seriously, I think the kind of people who are honestly afraid of Y2K already took out all their assets in gold and moved to Utah. 5. Yeah.. but BeOS is not an internet company. Hey, so maybe Altavista doesn't see the stick price triple on the first day.. it sure isn't as easy as it used to be - but then again, remeber that their underwriter gaurentees sale of all their stock... so even if their stock sits exactly at opening price, they will make some $80 million in hard cash, no strings attached... (almost)
What does altavista sell/provide that could possibly be worth $5 billion?
A search engine that, while popular, can't match the quality of some of its upstart competition, ie google.
A portal that, while somewhat popular, is not much better than any other portal, and portals are a dime-a-dozen these days.
Some web-auction services that, quite frankly, aren't going to unseat ebay any time soon.
Web-based email service, as if no one else is doing that these days.
An online yellow-pages-like business directory -- a market that lots of companies are entering and which has had a lot of competition (like switchboard) for a while.
Plus some other assorted things like stockquotes, weather, etc. that are well covered by other sites.
All altavista has going for it right now is an established brand name and an established web presence. While those two things are good to have, their value is diminished as most of the rest of the business world gets onto the web. There's room for altavista to make some sort of profit, perhaps, but it likely wouldn't be soon, and it certainly wouldn't justify a multi-billion-dollar market cap. Most internet IPOs just don't.
--
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
If AltaVista is worth $5 billion, I'll pour a hot bowl of grits down my pants !!! Wait a minute...I'll do that anyway !!!
Altavista will help you buy books from Amazon about pouring hot grits down your pants.
George
With Lycos? How sad.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Should've merge with Yahoo instead. YaltaVista is soooo much cooler than... LaltaVista? AltaLycos? LycosVista? MastaLista? Nah, no chance.
Re:With Lycos? How sad.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
MastaLista?
MisterLister?
...it's about time to go home.
"The Best of Revelation"?! As in Greatest Hits?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Do you think that was a typo, or are we in for some very weird times in the recording industry?
Re:"The Best of Revelation"?! As in Greatest Hits?
by
slashdot-terminal
·
· Score: 1
Do you think that was a typo, or are we in for some very weird times in the recording industry?
I actually am interested about why I haven't seen any really cool millenium oriented music out there in the popular stream. Now that would be cool. Just have some rapper rap to passages in Revelation.
Hey, I'm totally serious about this: Are you one person or a couple of people? I think the original grit-boy should create an account... Of course with the karma-thing now, you'd never be able to post... Oh well.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
if it weighs the same as a duck, then...
by
beme
·
· Score: 1
Like a stone? BeOS at yahoo finace And what exactly does non-productive mean? They are selling a product, after all. (Ok, so maybe not selling like gangbusters).
I'm no investor, so this is probably a naive comment, but does an IPO have to be wildly successful to be considered successful at all? I thought the whole point was to get some cash on hand to use to grow the business. If people think the business will really take off and they want a piece of it, the price should shoot up. But if people are cautious, shouldn't you see a mediocre response? The company still gets some cash so it can get on with convincing people why it's a good investment. Does a mediocre IPO mean you should just turn off the lights, last one out lock the door?
-beme
--
-beme
1971
Re:if it weighs the same as a duck, then...
by
jd
·
· Score: 2
They won't market the product (other than Slashdot, exactly WHERE have you seen BeOS advertised?).
They won't support the product (you might have seen the BeOS users from the M68K flavour make rather pointed comments on the subject).
They won't expand the product (ever seen a BeOS driver? They're rarer than NT's!)
They aim for the multimedia market, but there's next to zero multimedia software.
I'm sorry, but I wouldn't call that selling, unless "selling" is somehow extended to include deliberate self-destruction. I'd say they were adopting kamakazi tactics, but as they're not likely to take any of their competitors out in the process, that would be at best wildly inaccurate.
-- It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Re:if it weighs the same as a duck, then...
by
beme
·
· Score: 2
If you go to www.bedepot.com you can buy the BeOS. Therefor I concluded that they are selling a product. As for their marketing practices or business plan, I'm in no position to comment.
As far as my experience with the company goes, they do support the product. I've received several updates, which included new drivers for hardware that was previously unsupported. While there may not be shelves full of software for the BeOS, there's some out there and it appears that there is more on the way.
Now, although their IPO was not a smashing success, I believe it did generate the cash they wanted. Now they just need to utilize that cash to impress other investors and drive their value up.
My main point was that I didn't think an IPO needed to rocket to amazing prices immediately to be considered worthwhile.
-beme
--
-beme
1971
Re:Hi People
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I am the original grits boy. Malda and gang have made it more difficult to add my contributions to this website because they are eliminating posts from accounts or ip adresses for 24 hours if they have been moderated down more than 5 times.
I have an account (Grits Boy), but alas this account too has hit the dreaded ban. I can get around this when I am home by using anonymizer.com but that site is banned where I dwell during the day *sigh*.
I've noticed several people purporting to be me, even down to copying my sig. Don't be fooled. It is evident that they are second class when it comes to witticisms !!!
--- Linux and grits down my pants. Does it get any better?
AltaVista+Lycos == stupid
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I can understand why AltaVista would want to go public soon. In the last few years several internet companies have gone public and have generated a great deal of wealth and capital for themselves and their investors. Most of these.com companies aren't profitable (ebay being the big exception). However, I think that the internet fevor for investors is beginning to break and AltaVista wants to get on the bandwagon before it's too late and they can't make any money.
Personally, I don't understand how AltaVista and Lycos could benefit from merging. Everything AltaVista has Lycos also has: email, stock quotes, auction site, etc. Either Lycos has all the portal features or they can easily build them theirselves. The only thing that AltaVista has that Lycos doesn't maybe could be a better search engine and a better database of webpages.
Personally, I see too much overlap between the two companies. Unless this is a business thing since CMGI has a stake in both... but I fail to understand how even they would benefit.
Get Ready, Dude
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If he widens his scope and starts to contribute poems and lyrics, Grits-Boy could become The Glorious MEEPT! 2.0.
If nothing else, GB will give us a break from all of the self-proclaimed brainiacs and consultant wannabes who take themselves so damn seriously on this site.
Ahh...looks like they're finally gonna make back all that money they poured into buying the altavista.com domain. That's a lot more than what can be said for whoever baught business.com today.;)
Last time I checked, Lycos and HotBot were tightly partnered. Adding Altavista to the mix could be interesting, since I see Altavista and HotBot's search functionality essentially the same, and in fact I would guess they view each other as competitors...
AltaVista used to be good, back when you could do a single search over the entire usenet space.
Now a usenet search simply returns the list of usenet groups which match your search.
I used to feel that altavista was one of the single most useful information sources on the planet. It went from being number one in my book to the bottom of the heap.
Anyone know of a good place (deja.com excluded, I don't like their searches) to do usenet-wide searches?
Re:Statuephiles vs. Sexualists... who is "right"??
by
Lavahead
·
· Score: 1
SEX IS KILLING OUR WORLD!!!
Sex is absolutely necessary for the propogation of the species. Where do you propose to draw the line? Sex that *you* deem is okay?
Sex violates. Sex hurts. Sex demeans. Sex insults.
People enjoy sex. Period. Do you really think it would be popular if _everyone_ was hurt, violated, and insulted by it?
I consider sex to be the most disgusting thing in the world.
Sex is a natural genetic instinct inherent to every species. Some animals give their lives simply to mate and pass on their genes. From an evolutionary standpoint, every creature's action is either to contribute to survival, or to increase the success of mating. Humans are the only exception to this. In their continued pursuit of 'higher meaning' some completely reject anything that looks silly (eg sex) and is unusally gratifying. A few scant individuals, such as you Mr. Coward, go so far as to say they don't enjoy sex at all. This is denial and repression of natural desires, and probably frustrates you more than you care to admit. If you *genuinely* don't enjoy sex and are not just denying it for the sake of appearing 'holy', then you have a medical condition and should see your doctor.
Oh shoot, there i go again: being just as off-topic as the AC before me.
Re:Statuephiles vs. Sexualists... who is "right"??
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
HOORAY!
i was wondering how long it would take to ressurect the state scene ever since segfault bit it.
more statues! especially of MAE LING MAK and NATALIE PORTMAN!
philogenous stoat bird. harry@angryanddrunken.com
Let's not forget who wons AltaVista.
by
z4ce
·
· Score: 1
Concidering Digital(err I mean compaq) owns AltaVista, and they're already publicly traded, could it actually drop the price of the compaq stock when altavista is seperated? And who is the CEO/etc? I didn't think AltaVista was even a company, I thought it was just a division of compaq.
Ian
Re:Let's not forget who wons AltaVista.
by
Bryant
·
· Score: 1
Actually, CMGI owns us. Compaq has some small percentage, around 15%, you can look it up -- it's a matter of public record. It's probably even mentioned in the article to which this story points.
Re:Let's not forget who wons AltaVista.
by
divbyzero
·
· Score: 1
Well, now that the precedent has been set of a company insider posting on this thread, I'll say my piece:
Whenever you list the assets of the AltaVista company, don't forget our very strong AltaVista Search product, which we have in addition to our better-known AltaVista Search service.
This is a commercial product which is nicely profitable for the company (although there is a free version available for those who are interested). Take a look at www.altavista-software.com for details.
-- Div. But my grandest creation, as history will tell,
-- But my grandest creation, as history will tell,
Was Firefrorefiddle, the Fiend of the Fell.
YOU WEREN'T EVEN PAYING ATTENTION
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Geez, can't you read?
The species won't *NEED* to propogate The women will be STATUES. The men will either be dead or statues, depending on how things turn out. The statues will live forever. There'll be no NEED to reproduce!
Does that clarify things?
Re:Statuephiles vs. Sexualists... who is "right"??
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Hey, *I'M* harry@angryanddrunken.com.
Oh, yeah..... wait a sec. Nevermind.
Let's have a harry@angryanddrunken reunion!
The reunion will feature the following things:
1. Mae Ling Mak naked and petrified 2. Natalie Portman naked and petrified 3. Richard Stallman naked and petrified 4. Natalie Portman's genitals 5. First post 6. That "cow" guy trying to pretend he's not an idiot. 7. Second post 8. Last post 9. REMOVE THIS FEATURE 10. All you people are idiots.
Re:Statuephiles vs. Sexualists... who is "right"??
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Thanks for the open letter. Now here's mine right back.
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE STATUEPHILES ON SLASHDOT
Dear Slashdot,
I'm a sexualist, but I have a statuephile friend (it's hard to, seeing that the world is probably at most 1% statuephile), and many statuephile enemies.
I don't really have anything AGAINST statuephiles. I can't say I understand their philosophy at all. And I consider what they do -- abstinence from the intersection of human genitals -- to be absolutely disgusting. I consider sex to be the most glorifying thing in the world. But they have their desires, just as I have mine. So I don't criticize them. I do unto them as I would have them do unto me.
But do I get the same treatment in return? No. Because I prefer preservation rather than destruction, glorification over violation, I'm called a "bad guy", a "freak", "sick", etc. etc. etc. I've even been compared to a rapist! Try figuring that one out... next they'll be comparing Bill Clinton to a good president.
Anyway, just another example of the tyrrany of the majority. Anything that is normal is wrong. Anything that seems strange to them must be sick, twisted, perverted, and evil.
But regardless of how the two sides treat each other, there is one simple fact: SEX IS NECESSARY TO OUR WORLD!!! Sex creates life. Sex can cause accidents. But sex can cause death. Sex can spreads disease which are destroying millions of uneducated people and hundreds of neophobic cultures of this world. Not only practicing statuephiles are affected, the children of a statuephile could have invented a cure for these diseases.
Sex creates. The gratuitous sex in societies all over the world today result in millions of unwanted births and a population explosion that is rapidly creating more resources in our world. It can last forever. The statuephiles will eventually see the folly of their ways. But it'll probably be too late. (damn biological clock)
Sex euphorizes. Almost everyone in the world today engages in premarital sex, homosexual sex, or some other kind of sex that violates God's old guidelines, but he changed them some time ago. This has reached ACCEPTABLE levels. You're becoming a world of lost people.
And yet, anyone who doesn't buy into the destructive statuephile paradigm is a "freak." Sex gives. Sex heals. Sex clarifies. Sex compliments.
People are too guided by their over-large god complexes to even think about these things clearly!!! They see sexualists as a threat to their narrow-minded paradigm and immediately say "VILLAIN!!" "FIEND!!" "FREAK!!", then they go out, get drunk, and jerk off all night. All they care about is where their next bible-thumping period is going to be.
THAT is their life. Hollow, empty, just a constant quest for emptiness. That is the life of a statuephile. They refuse to see past their "I'm-better-than-you" morals and look at what they're DOING to the world. They refuse to look at the consequences of their stagnant lifestyles.
All I advocate is HAPPINESS. I envision a world ruled by thousands of happy, nude, teenage girls. It's a dream, but it's fun to think about.
And I'm some kind of monster because of this. Just look at all that's been said about me so far.
It's getting hard to care about the world. The statuephiles will never change. They'll never realize that what we REALLY need to do is band together, find a way to turn make love not war, and make it happen. In the Peace Age, the girls will be happy. The world will be happy.
Now, I know most people reading this are going to read it and say "his philosophy is something I've never heard before, and I don't agree with it, so that means he MUST be crazy." Typical Slashdot attitude. Typical WORLD attitude. We're all tempted to think like that sometimes. You guys in the minority have it easy. But please think about who you're judging.
ow!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I just blew fizzy cola out my nose. Don't do that!:)
I'm 19. Okay?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Is that okay with you? How do YOU know my age? Since you were wrong, I guess you dont. I'm also not homosexual, but I AM repressed, by the sexualist majority.
The struggle that we statuephiles faced is very similar to the struggle that homosexuals faced in their attempts to reach public acceptance. We face the same kind of persecution as they did/do, but probably to a greater degree. We deal with the same ignorant, judgemental people. We deal with the same lack of understanding. People say we WEREN'T born this way, people say it's a CHOICE, people say that we can be changed.
But we are proud of who we are, and nothing will change that. Though I don't really care for homosexuals more or less than any other group of people, we do share a certain kinship with them. The only difference is that they got something of a head start: they've already reached widespread public acceptance, while we're just starting. We've only started to organize into active, cohesive groups within the past decades, while homosexuals have been at it for several decades.
There are homosexual statuephiles as well. I know several. They're nice people. They must have it the worst off of anyone: worse than the statuephiles who are not homosexuals, and worse than the homosexuals who are not statuephiles.
But don't forget. We all have to live on this planet together. Let's try to get along!
Google is crap
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Google appears to be limited to simple, basic searches, with nothing even remotely comparable to AltaVista's Advanced Search page.
It beggars belief that someone who understands how to write Boolean queries, and is familiar with the rich features offered by AltaVista, would want to suffer with something as primitive as Google.
1) Google loads fast. Pages that take more than 5 seconds to load had better have some pretty damn good content. 2) Google searches fast. It doesn't take forever to return results. 3) Google really is more accurate. Go to google, type "trek", hit "I feel lucky punk" and Blammo, you're there. With AltaVista, all you get is some other page. You have to hunt through a huge list to find what you want.
Boolean queries are nice, but they fall down sometimes. Google does a better job more often than Alta Vista.
yahoo profitable since early on, moreso than ebay
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
thats one reason they continue to get glowing analyst reports.
Google's a handholding search engine for beginners
by
VAXman
·
· Score: 1
The advantage of Altavista is that it gives you exactly what you type. The search engines such as Excite and Lycos try to actually figure out what you want, and Google goes one step farther and finds the "net consensus" for what you typed, and the pages are often totally unrelated to what you typed. I am experienced, and I know what I'm looking for, so I prefer Altavista, because it doesn't try to change my search on me like Google does.
If you are searching for a technical term, Altavista is by leaps and bounds better than the other search engines. You can specify exactly what you want, and you will get back exactly what you typed. It has extremely powerful features such as quotes searching which Google and the others STILL do not have.
Google thinks it knows more than you and does things behnd your back. If you are new to the web or are looking for pages which about something you do not know much about, it is useful, but when you are more experienced, Altavista is the source.
I just hope Altavista isn't turned into a "smart" search engine like all of the others. It really is the last pure search engine left today.
Compaq sure got a good deal
by
VAXman
·
· Score: 1
Compaq bought DEC for $9.6 billion. Included in this packages was Altavista which has since blossomed into a $5 billion enterprise. If Altavista is really worth that much, then DEC without Altavista was worth only $4.6 billion. The most successful computing enterprise in history was worth less than 1/3 of some startup which presses Linux CD's. Absolutely frightening...
Google, as I understand its algorithms, does not do anything behind anybody's back. Its purpose and nature are simply different than Altavista's.
I agree with you about the flawed nature of Excite and Lycos: they are ANNOYING. Google, however, is completely different.
I spent the last two years using the Altavista boolean search almost exclusively. I now favor google for several reasons. The main advantage of google is that it has a useful relevancy scheme based on solid algorithms. The basic consideration is that the internet's topology is useful for picking out the richest sites.
The bottom line for me is that even for technical terms, I find that google's index is much more comprehensive, and that it does a better job at avoiding pages that are designed to attract search engines.
That said, Altavista is always my second location in case I'm unsatisfied with google's results. If Altavista hadn't decided to intentionally neglect some parts of the internet in its index, it would probably be better than google. But google is not a "beginners'" search engine.
Though I generally despise the Internet's do-jack-and-get-rich IPO situation, Altavista is a quality service and my exclusive search engine until google came along. For actually doing something of merit, Altavista should be rewarded. Of course, the computer industry has a long history of punishing quality and rewarding mediocrity.
Good luck Altavista. I hope that Andover, on the other hand, tanks.
_.......................__ ||.....__...._._||_..||-\\..._...._._||_ ||......_\\.(/_'..||....||-//.//.\\.(/_'..|| ||__((_||_,_/).||_..||....\\_//.,_/).\\_ HAHA! LAST POST! Anything following is redundant.
to andover:
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
to andover: congratulations. i never thought i'd see an IPO more worthless than yours.
Re:Hi People
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The problem is that Malda and gang don't know the pleasure of pouring hot grits down their pants like you and me. They really don't know what joy they miss, and I think all this anti-grits sentiment is just jealousy on their part.
C'mon, people now, smile on your brothers Ev'rybody get together Pour some grits down your trousers right now...
BeOS dropped like a stone, you say.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Hmmm, I bought it at $6, and it went to $10, and then sat around $6 to $7. Not exactly dropping like a stone. It dipped down to $3-4 for a few days, followed by a jump to about $18 (at which point I sold and then bought on the dip down).
The difference between BEOS and RHAT is that BEOS is more closely priced to their worth, whereas RHAT is ridiculously over-valued... $250 per share for a company that has one product which you can download for free........ uhhhhh.
Anyway, just thought I'd clear up the BEOS FUD.
(Besides, with WebPAD coming out soon, they will be rising soon enough my friends! =)
Slashdot Mirror
Altavista's going to float and it's worth 5 billion dollars, you say? Good thing I didn't try to read this in Italian via babelfish, or else I'd probably be reading something about my mother and a fish.
I so rarely use altavista anymore, I like google much better.
Now if they had done an IPO a year ago, they might have done better.
George
I wonder when the Internet IPO boom is going to quiet down.
And its funny how a simple search engine can end up making so much money... but i guess even though there are so many search engines out there already, altavista has achieved "brand-name loyalty" among its users.
This is just the start...
Next year is going to be another significant year for the Internet -
Consolidation and major buyouts of Internet companies is on the way (and will break a few records in the process)
...altavista will never make much money.
Or, to be more specific, it will never make much money. Not enough to justify the types of prices that it will go for. In an age where clickthrough ratios are steadily declining, why would anyone buy stock in a pure search engine? It doesn't have the traffic or services of Yahoo!, nor does it have the number of steady users.
--
Matt Singerman
Matt Singerman
http://matt.vegan.net/
I remember when they were a search engine. A damn good one too. Then they decided to really cash in on making money and nothing but. That's when they started to get greedy. Their service started to go down the drain and they lost my respect.
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
Too bad those who could have gained the most from AV going public have left the company a long time ago. I work for a company that was founded by ex-AV employees. They waited, along with every other employee, for AV to public so they could make their money. They quit waiting a couple of years ago and started a consulting firm. Apprently, many other people quit, too: VP's, managers, techies, all types. It was just too long. AV has already lost the best it had.
http://astalavista.box.sk Wonder if they are a parent company? ;-) ____ Check out the new case I built at the url above in the computers section. -S
Scott Ruttencutter
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
The proposed (and it has been proposed, in secret) merger between Altivista and Lycos can only be interpreted as the advent of the Beast of Revelation.
Now that reliable evidence indicates that the Feminists have acquired nuclear weapons from sources in the former Soviet Block, it's time to face facts and get right with God. Hold on to your hats, guys, it's gonna get rough.
Let me get this straight? This is a company which has even less in the way of physical assets, than (for example) Redhat, who (you will remember) are now worth an absolutely ridiculous amount of money.
...Student, Artist, Techie - Geek *
Can anyone tell me exactly what Altavista owns, how it makes money (if it does?) and what its turnover, net assests etc are?
5 billion is a lot, no matter how you say it. The only thing I can imagine is that people will invest in case AV starts to make money. But with the 5 billion investment, AV could easily itself invest in other companies with tangible assets - maybe this is the point though, and I'm missing it? If anyone out there has some spare cash to invest mail me, I know the ideal thing for you (no really!).
But yeah, this is one almighty head-f*** so early in the morning!
Mong.
* Paul Madley
*...Slacker, Artist, Techie - Geek *
Remember: Nothing is Cool.
Heh.
I favor the Beast of Revelation theory, myself.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
A search engine that, while popular, can't match the quality of some of its upstart competition, ie google.
A portal that, while somewhat popular, is not much better than any other portal, and portals are a dime-a-dozen these days.
Some web-auction services that, quite frankly, aren't going to unseat ebay any time soon.
Web-based email service, as if no one else is doing that these days.
An online yellow-pages-like business directory -- a market that lots of companies are entering and which has had a lot of competition (like switchboard) for a while.
Plus some other assorted things like stockquotes, weather, etc. that are well covered by other sites.
All altavista has going for it right now is an established brand name and an established web presence. While those two things are good to have, their value is diminished as most of the rest of the business world gets onto the web. There's room for altavista to make some sort of profit, perhaps, but it likely wouldn't be soon, and it certainly wouldn't justify a multi-billion-dollar market cap. Most internet IPOs just don't.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
If AltaVista is worth $5 billion, I'll pour a hot bowl of grits down my pants !!! Wait a minute...I'll do that anyway !!!
Altavista will help you buy books from Amazon about pouring hot grits down your pants.
George
Should've merge with Yahoo instead. YaltaVista is soooo much cooler than... LaltaVista? AltaLycos? LycosVista? MastaLista? Nah, no chance.
Do you think that was a typo, or are we in for some very weird times in the recording industry?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Like a stone? BeOS at yahoo finace
And what exactly does non-productive mean? They are selling a product, after all. (Ok, so maybe not selling like gangbusters).
I'm no investor, so this is probably a naive comment, but does an IPO have to be wildly successful to be considered successful at all? I thought the whole point was to get some cash on hand to use to grow the business. If people think the business will really take off and they want a piece of it, the price should shoot up. But if people are cautious, shouldn't you see a mediocre response? The company still gets some cash so it can get on with convincing people why it's a good investment. Does a mediocre IPO mean you should just turn off the lights, last one out lock the door?
-beme
-beme
1971
I am the original grits boy. Malda and gang have made it more difficult to add my contributions to this website because they are eliminating posts from accounts or ip adresses for 24 hours if they have been moderated down more than 5 times.
I have an account (Grits Boy), but alas this account too has hit the dreaded ban. I can get around this when I am home by using anonymizer.com but that site is banned where I dwell during the day *sigh*.
I've noticed several people purporting to be me, even down to copying my sig. Don't be fooled. It is evident that they are second class when it comes to witticisms !!!
--- Linux and grits down my pants. Does it get any better?
Personally, I don't understand how AltaVista and Lycos could benefit from merging. Everything AltaVista has Lycos also has: email, stock quotes, auction site, etc. Either Lycos has all the portal features or they can easily build them theirselves. The only thing that AltaVista has that Lycos doesn't maybe could be a better search engine and a better database of webpages.
Personally, I see too much overlap between the two companies. Unless this is a business thing since CMGI has a stake in both... but I fail to understand how even they would benefit.
If he widens his scope and starts to contribute poems and lyrics, Grits-Boy could become The Glorious MEEPT! 2.0.
If nothing else, GB will give us a break from all of the self-proclaimed brainiacs and consultant wannabes who take themselves so damn seriously on this site.
Ahh...looks like they're finally gonna make back all that money they poured into buying the altavista.com domain. That's a lot more than what can be said for whoever baught business.com today. ;)
-B
Last time I checked, Lycos and HotBot were tightly partnered. Adding Altavista to the mix could be interesting, since I see Altavista and HotBot's search functionality essentially the same, and in fact I would guess they view each other as competitors...
AltaVista used to be good, back when you could do a single search over the entire usenet space.
Now a usenet search simply returns the list of usenet groups which match your search.
I used to feel that altavista was one of the single most useful information sources on the planet. It went from being number one in my book to the bottom of the heap.
Anyone know of a good place (deja.com excluded, I don't like their searches) to do usenet-wide searches?
SEX IS KILLING OUR WORLD!!!
Sex is absolutely necessary for the propogation of the species. Where do you propose to draw the line? Sex that *you* deem is okay?
Sex violates. Sex hurts. Sex demeans. Sex insults.
People enjoy sex. Period. Do you really think it would be popular if _everyone_ was hurt, violated, and insulted by it?
I consider sex to be the most disgusting thing in the world.
Sex is a natural genetic instinct inherent to every species. Some animals give their lives simply to mate and pass on their genes. From an evolutionary standpoint, every creature's action is either to contribute to survival, or to increase the success of mating.
Humans are the only exception to this. In their continued pursuit of 'higher meaning' some completely reject anything that looks silly (eg sex) and is unusally gratifying. A few scant individuals, such as you Mr. Coward, go so far as to say they don't enjoy sex at all. This is denial and repression of natural desires, and probably frustrates you more than you care to admit. If you *genuinely* don't enjoy sex and are not just denying it for the sake of appearing 'holy', then you have a medical condition and should see your doctor.
Oh shoot, there i go again: being just as off-topic as the AC before me.
HOORAY!
i was wondering how long it would take to ressurect the state scene ever since segfault bit it.
more statues! especially of MAE LING MAK and NATALIE PORTMAN!
philogenous stoat bird.
harry@angryanddrunken.com
Concidering Digital(err I mean compaq) owns AltaVista, and they're already publicly traded, could it actually drop the price of the compaq stock when altavista is seperated? And who is the CEO/etc? I didn't think AltaVista was even a company, I thought it was just a division of compaq.
Ian
Geez, can't you read?
The species won't *NEED* to propogate The women will be STATUES. The men will either be dead or statues, depending on how things turn out. The statues will live forever. There'll be no NEED to reproduce!
Does that clarify things?
Hey, *I'M* harry@angryanddrunken.com.
Oh, yeah..... wait a sec. Nevermind.
Let's have a harry@angryanddrunken reunion!
The reunion will feature the following things:
1. Mae Ling Mak naked and petrified
2. Natalie Portman naked and petrified
3. Richard Stallman naked and petrified
4. Natalie Portman's genitals
5. First post
6. That "cow" guy trying to pretend he's not an idiot.
7. Second post
8. Last post
9. REMOVE THIS FEATURE
10. All you people are idiots.
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE STATUEPHILES ON SLASHDOT
Dear Slashdot,
I'm a sexualist, but I have a statuephile friend (it's hard to, seeing that the world is probably at most 1% statuephile), and many statuephile enemies.
I don't really have anything AGAINST statuephiles. I can't say I understand their philosophy at all. And I consider what they do -- abstinence from the intersection of human genitals -- to be absolutely disgusting. I consider sex to be the most glorifying thing in the world. But they have their desires, just as I have mine. So I don't criticize them. I do unto them as I would have them do unto me.
But do I get the same treatment in return? No. Because I prefer preservation rather than destruction, glorification over violation, I'm called a "bad guy", a "freak", "sick", etc. etc. etc. I've even been compared to a rapist! Try figuring that one out... next they'll be comparing Bill Clinton to a good president.
Anyway, just another example of the tyrrany of the majority. Anything that is normal is wrong. Anything that seems strange to them must be sick, twisted, perverted, and evil.
But regardless of how the two sides treat each other, there is one simple fact: SEX IS NECESSARY TO OUR WORLD!!! Sex creates life. Sex can cause accidents. But sex can cause death. Sex can spreads disease which are destroying millions of uneducated people and hundreds of neophobic cultures of this world. Not only practicing statuephiles are affected, the children of a statuephile could have invented a cure for these diseases.
Sex creates. The gratuitous sex in societies all over the world today result in millions of unwanted births and a population explosion that is rapidly creating more resources in our world. It can last forever. The statuephiles will eventually see the folly of their ways. But it'll probably be too late. (damn biological clock)
Sex euphorizes. Almost everyone in the world today engages in premarital sex, homosexual sex, or some other kind of sex that violates God's old guidelines, but he changed them some time ago. This has reached ACCEPTABLE levels. You're becoming a world of lost people.
And yet, anyone who doesn't buy into the destructive statuephile paradigm is a "freak." Sex gives. Sex heals. Sex clarifies. Sex compliments.
People are too guided by their over-large god complexes to even think about these things clearly!!! They see sexualists as a threat to their narrow-minded paradigm and immediately say "VILLAIN!!" "FIEND!!" "FREAK!!", then they go out, get drunk, and jerk off all night. All they care about is where their next bible-thumping period is going to be.
THAT is their life. Hollow, empty, just a constant quest for emptiness. That is the life of a statuephile. They refuse to see past their "I'm-better-than-you" morals and look at what they're DOING to the world. They refuse to look at the consequences of their stagnant lifestyles.
All I advocate is HAPPINESS. I envision a world ruled by thousands of happy, nude, teenage girls. It's a dream, but it's fun to think about.
And I'm some kind of monster because of this. Just look at all that's been said about me so far.
It's getting hard to care about the world. The statuephiles will never change. They'll never realize that what we REALLY need to do is band together, find a way to turn make love not war, and make it happen. In the Peace Age, the girls will be happy. The world will be happy.
Now, I know most people reading this are going to read it and say "his philosophy is something I've never heard before, and I don't agree with it, so that means he MUST be crazy." Typical Slashdot attitude. Typical WORLD attitude. We're all tempted to think like that sometimes. You guys in the minority have it easy. But please think about who you're judging.
I just blew fizzy cola out my nose. Don't do that! :)
Is that okay with you? How do YOU know my age? Since you were wrong, I guess you dont. I'm also not homosexual, but I AM repressed, by the sexualist majority.
The struggle that we statuephiles faced is very similar to the struggle that homosexuals faced in their attempts to reach public acceptance. We face the same kind of persecution as they did/do, but probably to a greater degree. We deal with the same ignorant, judgemental people. We deal with the same lack of understanding. People say we WEREN'T born this way, people say it's a CHOICE, people say that we can be changed.
But we are proud of who we are, and nothing will change that. Though I don't really care for homosexuals more or less than any other group of people, we do share a certain kinship with them. The only difference is that they got something of a head start: they've already reached widespread public acceptance, while we're just starting. We've only started to organize into active, cohesive groups within the past decades, while homosexuals have been at it for several decades.
There are homosexual statuephiles as well. I know several. They're nice people. They must have it the worst off of anyone: worse than the statuephiles who are not homosexuals, and worse than the homosexuals who are not statuephiles.
But don't forget. We all have to live on this planet together. Let's try to get along!
Google appears to be limited to simple, basic searches, with nothing even remotely comparable to AltaVista's Advanced Search page.
It beggars belief that someone who understands how to write Boolean queries, and is familiar with the rich features offered by AltaVista, would want to suffer with something as primitive as Google.
thats one reason they continue to get glowing analyst reports.
The advantage of Altavista is that it gives you exactly what you type. The search engines such as Excite and Lycos try to actually figure out what you want, and Google goes one step farther and finds the "net consensus" for what you typed, and the pages are often totally unrelated to what you typed. I am experienced, and I know what I'm looking for, so I prefer Altavista, because it doesn't try to change my search on me like Google does.
If you are searching for a technical term, Altavista is by leaps and bounds better than the other search engines. You can specify exactly what you want, and you will get back exactly what you typed. It has extremely powerful features such as quotes searching which Google and the others STILL do not have.
Google thinks it knows more than you and does things behnd your back. If you are new to the web or are looking for pages which about something you do not know much about, it is useful, but when you are more experienced, Altavista is the source.
I just hope Altavista isn't turned into a "smart" search engine like all of the others. It really is the last pure search engine left today.
Compaq bought DEC for $9.6 billion. Included in this packages was Altavista which has since blossomed into a $5 billion enterprise. If Altavista is really worth that much, then DEC without Altavista was worth only $4.6 billion. The most successful computing enterprise in history was worth less than 1/3 of some startup which presses Linux CD's. Absolutely frightening...
Google, as I understand its algorithms, does not do anything behind anybody's back. Its purpose and nature are simply different than Altavista's.
I agree with you about the flawed nature of Excite and Lycos: they are ANNOYING. Google, however, is completely different.
I spent the last two years using the Altavista boolean search almost exclusively. I now favor google for several reasons. The main advantage of google is that it has a useful relevancy scheme based on solid algorithms. The basic consideration is that the internet's topology is useful for picking out the richest sites.
The bottom line for me is that even for technical terms, I find that google's index is much more comprehensive, and that it does a better job at avoiding pages that are designed to attract search engines.
That said, Altavista is always my second location in case I'm unsatisfied with google's results. If Altavista hadn't decided to intentionally neglect some parts of the internet in its index, it would probably be better than google. But google is not a "beginners'" search engine.
Though I generally despise the Internet's do-jack-and-get-rich IPO situation, Altavista is a quality service and my exclusive search engine until google came along. For actually doing something of merit, Altavista should be rewarded. Of course, the computer industry has a long history of punishing quality and rewarding mediocrity.
Good luck Altavista. I hope that Andover, on the other hand, tanks.
_.......................__
||.....__...._._||_..||-\\..._...._._||_
||......_\\.(/_'..||....||-//.//.\\.(/_'..||
||__((_||_,_/).||_..||....\\_//.,_/).\\_
HAHA! LAST POST! Anything following is redundant.
to andover: congratulations. i never thought i'd see an IPO more worthless than yours.
The problem is that Malda and gang don't know the pleasure of pouring hot grits down their pants like you and me. They really don't know what joy they miss, and I think all this anti-grits sentiment is just jealousy on their part.
C'mon, people now, smile on your brothers
Ev'rybody get together
Pour some grits down your trousers right now...
Hmmm, I bought it at $6, and it went to $10,
and then sat around $6 to $7. Not exactly dropping
like a stone. It dipped down to $3-4 for a few
days, followed by a jump to about $18 (at which
point I sold and then bought on the dip down).
The difference between BEOS and RHAT is that
BEOS is more closely priced to their worth,
whereas RHAT is ridiculously over-valued... $250
per share for a company that has one product which
you can download for free........ uhhhhh.
Anyway, just thought I'd clear up the BEOS FUD.
(Besides, with WebPAD coming out soon, they will
be rising soon enough my friends! =)
-thomas