Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
as the web matures.

Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
a swift move.

al.

"Anders" <anders_lindman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158831286.999164.19660@k70g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> as the web matures.
>
> Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> a swift move.
>
> al.
>
If MS want to compete with Google they should sort out their serps. When
i've used it they are poor comapared to google's

DJ wrote:

> If MS want to compete with Google they should sort out their serps. When
> i've used it they are poor comapared to google's


Absolutely. They will have to produce search results that are much
better than Google's. People will not bother to abandon Google for only
a mediocre improvement. It seems that a search engine shift can only
occur when the new search engine is much better than the previous
leading search engine.

al.

In <news:1158831286.999164.19660@k70g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com>,
"Anders" <anders_lindman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
>how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
>engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
>though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
>as the web matures.
>
>Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
>first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
>looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
>will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
>exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
>search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
>a swift move.


Competition in the marketplace. Good for the little guy.

Monopolies in the marketplace. Bad for the little guy.

Google monopolizes SE. Bad for the little guy.

Microsoft monopolizes operating systems. Bad for the little guy.

If MS overtakes Google, the deteriorating SE situation can only go from
bad to worse. The little guy would end up having to pay for every click
of the mouse. And the lobbyists will continue to bribe the greedy
politicians until they bow down to their every monopolizing whim.

The monopolies always change the laws in their favor, and always at the
expense of the little guy. Very bad for the little guy.

The Internet could die at the hands of the monopolies. Very bad for
everybody.

The Internet was invented to keep communication lines open in the event of
a nuclear war, wasn't it?

Game over.




-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.

Anonymous wrote:
> In <news:1158831286.999164.19660@k70g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com>,
> "Anders" <anders_lindman@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> >how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> >engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> >though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> >as the web matures.
> >
> >Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> >first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> >looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> >will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> >exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> >search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> >a swift move.
>
>
> Competition in the marketplace. Good for the little guy.
>
> Monopolies in the marketplace. Bad for the little guy.
>
> Google monopolizes SE. Bad for the little guy.
>
> Microsoft monopolizes operating systems. Bad for the little guy.
>
> If MS overtakes Google, the deteriorating SE situation can only go from
> bad to worse. The little guy would end up having to pay for every click
> of the mouse. And the lobbyists will continue to bribe the greedy
> politicians until they bow down to their every monopolizing whim.
>
> The monopolies always change the laws in their favor, and always at the
> expense of the little guy. Very bad for the little guy.
>
> The Internet could die at the hands of the monopolies. Very bad for
> everybody.
>
> The Internet was invented to keep communication lines open in the event of
> a nuclear war, wasn't it?
>
> Game over.
>


Fortunately, I think the the three big search engine companies Google,
Yahoo and Microsoft will continue to compete with each other. If
Microsoft launches a new search engine, then Google and Yahoo probably
already have new versions of their own search engines ready to counter
such attack.

al.

"Anonymous" <BigappleRemailer@bigapple.yi.org> wrote
> Google monopolizes SE. Bad for the little guy.

I think you'll find that 'monopoly' requires more than simply being the
biggest and the best.

It suggests market distortion. I see no evidence that Google either
dominates or distorts the market.

In fact, all you need to do to knock google off
its perch is to Build A Better Search Engine
(which is exactly how google got there).

If you can prove the above statement to be false, then, and only then, can
you talk about monopoly. Until then, you'd get further by trying to build
that better search engine.
--

Andrew
Editor
http://www.seo2seo.com/

Anders schreef:

> Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> as the web matures.
>
> Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> a swift move.
>
> al.

I think the time has come for local SE's targetting specific segments
of the search market.
Local has its limits but since Google & co choose to go local they have
no longer more value then a local SE(thinking off results), when local
SE's target a specific market then they are usefull.
(I don't like that local search thing, maybe it's usefull in big
countrys but here it isn't)

My 2 cents(Eurocents)
http://zoeken.e-aanbiedingen.nl/

Anders wrote:

> Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> a swift move.

I doubt it. I don't think anyone will beat Google at regular Web search,
although other countries will try to create their own national search
engines for security reasons.

Yahoo is on the right track with things like Yahoo Answers -- getting people
addicted to a combination of information search and social networking as
well as integration with other services like MyYahoo. One service merges
with another and the user hardly has to leave the portal's web site. If
anyone "beats" Google it will be through something more innovative than
regular search.

z wrote:
> Anders wrote:
>
> > Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> > first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> > looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> > will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> > exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> > search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> > a swift move.
>
> I doubt it. I don't think anyone will beat Google at regular Web search,
> although other countries will try to create their own national search
> engines for security reasons.
>
> Yahoo is on the right track with things like Yahoo Answers -- getting people
> addicted to a combination of information search and social networking as
> well as integration with other services like MyYahoo. One service merges
> with another and the user hardly has to leave the portal's web site. If
> anyone "beats" Google it will be through something more innovative than
> regular search.


I think there is a lot of potential improvements to be made in regular
search, but the problem is that it will probably take some super sci-fi
AI algoritms to do that. Or some very innovative idea. Or, as you say,
something other than regular search.

al.

Fikkie wrote:
> Anders schreef:
>
> > Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> > how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> > engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> > though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> > as the web matures.
> >
> > Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> > first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> > looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> > will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> > exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> > search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> > a swift move.
> >
> > al.
>
> I think the time has come for local SE's targetting specific segments
> of the search market.
> Local has its limits but since Google & co choose to go local they have
> no longer more value then a local SE(thinking off results), when local
> SE's target a specific market then they are usefull.
> (I don't like that local search thing, maybe it's usefull in big
> countrys but here it isn't)
>
> My 2 cents(Eurocents)
> http://zoeken.e-aanbiedingen.nl/


Accoona has a "geo target your search" function, but I don't know how
effective it is.

al.

Anders schreef:

> Fikkie wrote:
> > Anders schreef:
> >
> > > Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> > > how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> > > engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> > > though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> > > as the web matures.
> > >
> > > Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> > > first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> > > looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> > > will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> > > exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> > > search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> > > a swift move.
> > >
> > > al.
> >
> > I think the time has come for local SE's targetting specific segments
> > of the search market.
> > Local has its limits but since Google & co choose to go local they have
> > no longer more value then a local SE(thinking off results), when local
> > SE's target a specific market then they are usefull.
> > (I don't like that local search thing, maybe it's usefull in big
> > countrys but here it isn't)
> >
> > My 2 cents(Eurocents)
> > http://zoeken.e-aanbiedingen.nl/
>
>
> Accoona has a "geo target your search" function, but I don't know how
> effective it is.
>
> al.

Google is also local overhere. I don't get the same results like people
who live 100km further using the same SE like Google.nl. (little
countrys and even in a little country there are regions)

It's not al the time and for every query but i start noticing this more
and more. (and i don't like it)

Anders wrote:
> Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> as the web matures.
>
> Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> a swift move.

Image searching will be the next big jump and after that handling
language processing,
eg big baths, large baths, spacious baths etc are all similar. A fact
lost in character matching which is Google's method.

Google software is very basic and relies almost entirely on a large
processing and storage ability.

In ten years, the company will probably be forgotten.

>
> al.

"Logician" <sales@logicians.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:1158926155.089022.200030@m7g2000cwm.googlegro ups.com...
>
> Anders wrote:
> > Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> > how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> > engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> > though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> > as the web matures.
> >
> > Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> > first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> > looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> > will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> > exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> > search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> > a swift move.
>
> Image searching will be the next big jump and after that handling
> language processing,
> eg big baths, large baths, spacious baths etc are all similar. A fact
> lost in character matching which is Google's method.
>
> Google software is very basic and relies almost entirely on a large
> processing and storage ability.
>
> In ten years, the company will probably be forgotten.


I have not trusted Google for a while now....

--
Luigi Donatello Asero
www.om-italien.eu
她是澳大利亚人

Logician wrote:
> Anders wrote:
> > Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> > how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> > engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> > though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> > as the web matures.
> >
> > Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> > first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> > looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> > will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> > exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> > search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> > a swift move.
>
> Image searching will be the next big jump and after that handling
> language processing,
> eg big baths, large baths, spacious baths etc are all similar. A fact
> lost in character matching which is Google's method.
>
> Google software is very basic and relies almost entirely on a large
> processing and storage ability.
>
> In ten years, the company will probably be forgotten.
>


It can be that Google already has language processing and other things
ready, but they wait for some competitor to make the first move before
they launch these new functions.

al.

google is the best so far but it just catches images of webs it doesnt
really understand what the user needs . its just text search and need a
lot of refinement . google is getting better with other products but
would be better if if impraoves its search engine algorithm itself
thanx

what's life without a search engine "

http://atrieecs.seo.iitm.ac.in/
http://atrieecs.seo.iitm.ac.in/2006/...e-thamesportal
Anders wrote:
> Remember how fast people moved from Webcrawler to AltaVista, and then
> how fast they moved from AltaVista to Google. When a better search
> engine appears on the web the shift to it can be very quick, even
> though each new shift will be more difficult for companies to achieve
> as the web matures.
>
> Microsoft has created Live.com as a dedicated search site. One of the
> first moves they made was to plug in a new image search engine that
> looks promising. If they seriously want to compete with Google, they
> will also have to plug in a new ordinary web search engine. That may be
> exactly what they are planning: to suddenly replace the old MSN web
> search engine with something that can pull the rug from under Google in
> a swift move.
>
> al.

First of all, Google's link processing algorithms make it more than
just a text matching service. Following a completely separate point,
barriers to entry to the market can create monopolies and oligopolies.
When Google started, they built a modern (for the time) search engine
out of a few old computers that no one else wanted. To build an
acceptable search engine today takes millions of dollars worth of
hardware, space, cooling, and rare talent. Someone could have an idea
that is as revolutionary for search as Google's was in 1998, but lack
the resources to compete with Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.

> Joe wrote:
> First of all, Google's link processing algorithms make it more than
> just a text matching service. Following a completely separate point,
> barriers to entry to the market can create monopolies and oligopolies.
> When Google started, they built a modern (for the time) search engine
> out of a few old computers that no one else wanted. To build an
> acceptable search engine today takes millions of dollars worth of
> hardware, space, cooling, and rare talent. Someone could have an idea
> that is as revolutionary for search as Google's was in 1998, but lack
> the resources to compete with Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.

But Google was not the first search engine company. Lycos and Alta
Vista predated Google by years.

They sank and Google succeeded because Google focusesd on text search
and most of the other early search engines were bought out by marketing
companies who failed to keep their Web catalogue updated.

If Google keeps their eye on the ball, they'll be fine for the
forseeable future. They have a pile of money, and they keep
expanding their technological and people resources. None of the other
search engines come close to Google.

Laurie Mann
Findable Sites
http://www.findablesites.com

"Laurie Mann" <lauriem@dpsinfo.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:1158974872.077534.322610@d34g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
> > Joe wrote:
> > First of all, Google's link processing algorithms make it more than
> > just a text matching service. Following a completely separate point,
> > barriers to entry to the market can create monopolies and oligopolies.
> > When Google started, they built a modern (for the time) search engine
> > out of a few old computers that no one else wanted. To build an
> > acceptable search engine today takes millions of dollars worth of
> > hardware, space, cooling, and rare talent. Someone could have an idea
> > that is as revolutionary for search as Google's was in 1998, but lack
> > the resources to compete with Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.
>
> But Google was not the first search engine company. Lycos and Alta
> Vista predated Google by years.


I think so. But Altavista is still doing well in my opinion although it
probably has less users than
Google. I trust more Altavista than Google.

> They sank and Google succeeded because Google focusesd on text search
> and most of the other early search engines were bought out by marketing
> companies who failed to keep their Web catalogue updated.
>
> If Google keeps their eye on the ball, they'll be fine for the
> forseeable future. They have a pile of money, and they keep
> expanding their technological and people resources. None of the other
> search engines come close to Google.


Baidu probably has a lot of money as well, does it not?
In 2007 the Women footboll Championship will take place guess where in
China....
In 2008 the Olympic games will take place in guess where...
China....
In 2010 the Expo will take place guess where.. in China
http://www.expo2010china.com/expo/ex...ish/index.html
So the world will focus its attention on China not only because it has an
economy expanding very fastly but even as a result of important events
during the next years. All that will probably be in favour of Baidu.

--
Luigi Donatello Asero
https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/it/svezia.html
她是澳大利亚人

Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:

> Baidu probably has a lot of money as well, does it not?

I'm sure Baidu would like to become a worldwide search engine, but the
English results are currenly terrible. Also, I don't think the search
engine users of the world trust China to provide uncensored information.

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:51:16 -0400, z <a@b.invalid> wrote:

>Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
>
>> Baidu probably has a lot of money as well, does it not?
>
>I'm sure Baidu would like to become a worldwide search engine, but the
>English results are currenly terrible. Also, I don't think the search
>engine users of the world trust China to provide uncensored information.

Well, we couldn't tell anyway cos we can't read Chinese <G>

--
Handmade Jewelry from Texas
http://www.houstoncrafts.com/

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"z" <a@b.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:12h94okjdfobj74@corp.supernews.com...
> Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
>
> > Baidu probably has a lot of money as well, does it not?
>
> I'm sure Baidu would like to become a worldwide search engine, but the
> English results are currenly terrible. Also, I don't think the search
> engine users of the world trust China to provide uncensored information.

When even the English results will be good it will have probably already
become No1...

--
Luigi Donatello Asero
https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/it/svezia.html
她是澳大利亚人

"z" <a@b.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:12h94okjdfobj74@corp.supernews.com...
> Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
>
> > Baidu probably has a lot of money as well, does it not?
>
> I'm sure Baidu would like to become a worldwide search engine, but the
> English results are currenly terrible. Also, I don't think the search
> engine users of the world trust China to provide uncensored information.

Baidu visited the homepage a lot ot times even yesterday...
is it perhaps looking for a Chinese version of the site?

--
Luigi Donatello Asero
https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/it/svezia.html
她是澳大利亚人

Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:

> Baidu visited the homepage a lot ot times even yesterday...
> is it perhaps looking for a Chinese version of the site?

It might be coming from other web pages that link to you. If a search
engine finds a link to your web page it will often follow it.

I don't know much about Baidu, but I don't think it is searching for a
Chinese version of your site. It probably just found a link to your web
site and is spidering and indexing your web pages. Search engines collect
whatever they find that they think is interesting.

"Luigi Donatello Asero" <jaggillarfotboll@telia.com> wrote:
>"Laurie Mann" <lauriem@dpsinfo.com> skrev i meddelandet
>news:1158974872.077534.322610@d34g2000cwd.googleg roups.com...
>> > Joe wrote:
>> > First of all, Google's link processing algorithms make it more than
>> > just a text matching service. Following a completely separate point,
>> > barriers to entry to the market can create monopolies and oligopolies.
>> > When Google started, they built a modern (for the time) search engine
>> > out of a few old computers that no one else wanted. To build an
>> > acceptable search engine today takes millions of dollars worth of
>> > hardware, space, cooling, and rare talent. Someone could have an idea
>> > that is as revolutionary for search as Google's was in 1998, but lack
>> > the resources to compete with Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.
>>
>> But Google was not the first search engine company. Lycos and Alta
>> Vista predated Google by years.
>
>I think so. But Altavista is still doing well in my opinion although it
>probably has less users than
>Google. I trust more Altavista than Google.

AltaVista (the company) no longer exists. The search engine is now
the property of Yahoo!

--gregbo
gds at best dot com

"z" <a@b.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:12h96p3lk6p6eaf@corp.supernews.com...
> Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
>
> > Baidu visited the homepage a lot ot times even yesterday...
> > is it perhaps looking for a Chinese version of the site?
>
> It might be coming from other web pages that link to you. If a search
> engine finds a link to your web page it will often follow it.
>
> I don't know much about Baidu, but I don't think it is searching for a
> Chinese version of your site. It probably just found a link to your web
> site and is spidering and indexing your web pages. Search engines collect
> whatever they find that they think is interesting.

So, why does it seem to visit always the same page?

--
Luigi Donatello Asero
https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/it/svezia.html
她是澳大利亚人