IN SEARCH of AN ENGINE
Content
SEARCH
ENGINE
by MOHAMED FAIZAL BIN BUANG P45099
SOME IDEAS OF SEARCH Googling is prettyENGINE much an established
word right now. You want to look on something on the Internet? Google it, people say. Some people won’t even answer your queries unless you’ve Googled for answers first. When Google appeared all those years ago, it was just a small, quick light search engine that, well worked. Yahoo has long had the most established search presence despite Microsoft’s effort to force its own search engine on everyone. In the early days of the Internet, Yahoo and its directory page was something essential. It made sense of the vast unexplored
SOME IDEAS OF SEARCH makes an engine a good engine? ENGINE
What It’s pretty much the algorithm behind it. Search engines are more than mere web pages. What happens with each search is a long process requiring the methodical approach which search engines will often guard jealously. It’s sophisticated technology which people can speculate about but neither Google nor Yahoo will willingly tell you what exactly happens. A successful search engine does this thing best – determine the most accurate results for a given search.
MAKING THE CHOICE Despite the myriad Ask engines available Bing right now, it was Cuil easily enough to narrow it down to Google six (6) search Wolfram Alpha engines that make Yahoo the most sense for the average Web The engines were compared by simpler surfer. standards to make it more relevant. Most comparisons of the engines are rather technical but we can simplifying it to the
MAKING THE CHOICE Performanc e Usability Features
How fast does the engine retrieve searches? How relevant are the links displayed? Is it as easy to use as Google or does it require more reading than necessary? Where does the engine rank features wise? How much additional value does it give? Does it integrate into browsers?
MAKING THE CHOICE BROWSER
Ask
Bing
Cuil
Google
Wolfram Alpha
Yahoo Media
SPAM WARNING
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Handles queries/ computati on fields
Directory listing, customize d content
SPECIAL FEATURES CATEGORIS ED SEARCHES BROWSER INTEGRATI ON CACHES
Questio Decision Semanti nengine, Custom c based thumbnails searches searche searche , ‘instant , analytic s s answers’ Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Ask.com Define it: Formerly Ask Jeeves, the engine tries to encourage searching by using natural questions Verdict: Nice concept but poor results. Naturalistic attempt doesn’t make up for mediocre search results Website: www.ask.com
Ask.com started off as Ask Jeeves which was a pretty cool concept in the late 1990s. Ask was built around the concept of users entering the actual questions instead of the way we search now with term. Search-wise, Ask also tries to make searching easier with related searches shown at the bottom. Unlike Google’s large index, Ask’s repository doesn’t seem to be as wide which proves a bane to it as far as its fetching capabilities go. Ask has good intentions foiled by poor execution.
Bing Define it: MSN Live Search attempts to rebrand its search with a kooky name Verdict: Better presentation makes Bing a contender but not replacement for Google Website: www.bing.com
It used to be a standard joke that no one uses MSN Live Search despite Microsoft attempting to embed it into its operating system. Now Microsoft has rebranded with a new look and a new attempt to capture some search engine market share from Google. Bing is unfortunately named service. It just doesn’t have the same ring to it to tell someone to Bing something as opposed to Googling it. On the plus side, it’s far more polished than the original MSN Search. There’s been improvement on the interface side, with a lot of similarities to Google with its cleanness which is definitely a blessing. Bing also added in things we take for granted in Google such as a builtin calculator and dictionary. On the whole it’s pretty, it’s fast and it works
Cuil Define it: Defines itself as intelligent search that improves the more you use it. Verdict: Innovation and privacy just aren't enough to make this a search engine of choice. Website: www.cuil.com
Here’s another search engine that’s trying to be cool when it’s not really clear what’s cool about it at all. Cuil is pronounced ‘cool’ and it does, to its credit, have a pretty decent interface that is simple, uncluttered and fuss-free. What defines it, purportedly is that it gives longer descriptions about its searches and a large index of about 120 billion web pages. It also attempts to really do no evil, the way Google professes to, by refusing to store user search activity or IPs. The question is: do all these spanking new features make cuil better search engine? Cuil makes a lot out of its supposedly 120 billion links but it’s only claimed with no real evidence to support it. Out of those billion pages, how much of that is actually relevant pages and not spam generated? It’s an interesting complement to Google but it just doesn’t prove
Google Define it: The reining king of search, always waiting for dethroning. Verdict: Speed and accuracy are where the Goog still reigns. Website: www.google.com
Google’s pretty much been everyone's’ search engine of choice despite having starting out with Yahoo all those year ago. It was such a refreshing change from trawling through Yahoo’s inefficient algorithm that it made a mark by being the much better alternative. What works for Google is its simplicity. Despite the search categories added over the years, the proliferation of advertisement and the emergence of competition, its managed to stay easy to use and basically idiot-proof. Unless you’re unable to spell and are cursed with an inability to search for. Google’s Page Rank algorithm works as a system, managing to create a means of indexing and serving up results that are very accurate. Keywords work best when using Google, a system that spammers have been known to abuse by peppering link farm site with popular search terms or creating spam links on the fly.
Yahoo! Define it: Still here, but how long can Yahoo! Survive without progressing? Verdict: Aging search engine needs a real overhaul before it can get in the game. Website: www.yahoo.com
It’s estimated that Yahoo! Is now behind Google and Bing when once it held the lion’s share of the search market. Yahoo! was a web directory that tried to be the internet equivalent of the Yellow Pages. What Yahoo! didn’t think about was how many people still depend on the Yellow Pages? That former bible of reference has now become a near obsolete as people don’t want to bother with telephone directories now they have the Internet. Yahoo! probably placed too much dependence on external search providers. The problems with Yahoo! is its lack of intuitiveness and always lagging behind Google in the simplicity stakes. It’s a shame because Yahoo! owns a huge host of useful Internet service but the sheer breadth makes it hard for any one service to shine including its search. As to accuracy, Yahoo! probably does offer more than Bing but its
Wolfram Alpha Define it: More encyclopedia than search engine, Wolfram Alpha offers up neat statistics Verdict: Think of this as a Wikipedia supplement more than a real search engine Website: www.wolframalpha.com
Its more than the basics’ approach puts the engine as an interesting tool, especially for scholars and researches. Why it differs from other Web tools is that it’s not an archive of web pages as much as it is a huge database of structured data. Why does that mean for Wolfram? Its actually meant more for specific computations where you can actually enter in questions. This is primarily due to Wolfram Alpha’s being built on an easier product, Mathematica, which handles statistics, algebra and symbolic computation among others. What happens is that the engine will render easily understandable answers to the point of even showing derivatives of a formula. Wolfram Alpha isn’t really a replacement for Google and its awful but a handy tool for those who need the data.
ENGINE
by MOHAMED FAIZAL BIN BUANG P45099
SOME IDEAS OF SEARCH Googling is prettyENGINE much an established
word right now. You want to look on something on the Internet? Google it, people say. Some people won’t even answer your queries unless you’ve Googled for answers first. When Google appeared all those years ago, it was just a small, quick light search engine that, well worked. Yahoo has long had the most established search presence despite Microsoft’s effort to force its own search engine on everyone. In the early days of the Internet, Yahoo and its directory page was something essential. It made sense of the vast unexplored
SOME IDEAS OF SEARCH makes an engine a good engine? ENGINE
What It’s pretty much the algorithm behind it. Search engines are more than mere web pages. What happens with each search is a long process requiring the methodical approach which search engines will often guard jealously. It’s sophisticated technology which people can speculate about but neither Google nor Yahoo will willingly tell you what exactly happens. A successful search engine does this thing best – determine the most accurate results for a given search.
MAKING THE CHOICE Despite the myriad Ask engines available Bing right now, it was Cuil easily enough to narrow it down to Google six (6) search Wolfram Alpha engines that make Yahoo the most sense for the average Web The engines were compared by simpler surfer. standards to make it more relevant. Most comparisons of the engines are rather technical but we can simplifying it to the
MAKING THE CHOICE Performanc e Usability Features
How fast does the engine retrieve searches? How relevant are the links displayed? Is it as easy to use as Google or does it require more reading than necessary? Where does the engine rank features wise? How much additional value does it give? Does it integrate into browsers?
MAKING THE CHOICE BROWSER
Ask
Bing
Cuil
Wolfram Alpha
Yahoo Media
SPAM WARNING
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Handles queries/ computati on fields
Directory listing, customize d content
SPECIAL FEATURES CATEGORIS ED SEARCHES BROWSER INTEGRATI ON CACHES
Questio Decision Semanti nengine, Custom c based thumbnails searches searche searche , ‘instant , analytic s s answers’ Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Ask.com Define it: Formerly Ask Jeeves, the engine tries to encourage searching by using natural questions Verdict: Nice concept but poor results. Naturalistic attempt doesn’t make up for mediocre search results Website: www.ask.com
Ask.com started off as Ask Jeeves which was a pretty cool concept in the late 1990s. Ask was built around the concept of users entering the actual questions instead of the way we search now with term. Search-wise, Ask also tries to make searching easier with related searches shown at the bottom. Unlike Google’s large index, Ask’s repository doesn’t seem to be as wide which proves a bane to it as far as its fetching capabilities go. Ask has good intentions foiled by poor execution.
Bing Define it: MSN Live Search attempts to rebrand its search with a kooky name Verdict: Better presentation makes Bing a contender but not replacement for Google Website: www.bing.com
It used to be a standard joke that no one uses MSN Live Search despite Microsoft attempting to embed it into its operating system. Now Microsoft has rebranded with a new look and a new attempt to capture some search engine market share from Google. Bing is unfortunately named service. It just doesn’t have the same ring to it to tell someone to Bing something as opposed to Googling it. On the plus side, it’s far more polished than the original MSN Search. There’s been improvement on the interface side, with a lot of similarities to Google with its cleanness which is definitely a blessing. Bing also added in things we take for granted in Google such as a builtin calculator and dictionary. On the whole it’s pretty, it’s fast and it works
Cuil Define it: Defines itself as intelligent search that improves the more you use it. Verdict: Innovation and privacy just aren't enough to make this a search engine of choice. Website: www.cuil.com
Here’s another search engine that’s trying to be cool when it’s not really clear what’s cool about it at all. Cuil is pronounced ‘cool’ and it does, to its credit, have a pretty decent interface that is simple, uncluttered and fuss-free. What defines it, purportedly is that it gives longer descriptions about its searches and a large index of about 120 billion web pages. It also attempts to really do no evil, the way Google professes to, by refusing to store user search activity or IPs. The question is: do all these spanking new features make cuil better search engine? Cuil makes a lot out of its supposedly 120 billion links but it’s only claimed with no real evidence to support it. Out of those billion pages, how much of that is actually relevant pages and not spam generated? It’s an interesting complement to Google but it just doesn’t prove
Google Define it: The reining king of search, always waiting for dethroning. Verdict: Speed and accuracy are where the Goog still reigns. Website: www.google.com
Google’s pretty much been everyone's’ search engine of choice despite having starting out with Yahoo all those year ago. It was such a refreshing change from trawling through Yahoo’s inefficient algorithm that it made a mark by being the much better alternative. What works for Google is its simplicity. Despite the search categories added over the years, the proliferation of advertisement and the emergence of competition, its managed to stay easy to use and basically idiot-proof. Unless you’re unable to spell and are cursed with an inability to search for. Google’s Page Rank algorithm works as a system, managing to create a means of indexing and serving up results that are very accurate. Keywords work best when using Google, a system that spammers have been known to abuse by peppering link farm site with popular search terms or creating spam links on the fly.
Yahoo! Define it: Still here, but how long can Yahoo! Survive without progressing? Verdict: Aging search engine needs a real overhaul before it can get in the game. Website: www.yahoo.com
It’s estimated that Yahoo! Is now behind Google and Bing when once it held the lion’s share of the search market. Yahoo! was a web directory that tried to be the internet equivalent of the Yellow Pages. What Yahoo! didn’t think about was how many people still depend on the Yellow Pages? That former bible of reference has now become a near obsolete as people don’t want to bother with telephone directories now they have the Internet. Yahoo! probably placed too much dependence on external search providers. The problems with Yahoo! is its lack of intuitiveness and always lagging behind Google in the simplicity stakes. It’s a shame because Yahoo! owns a huge host of useful Internet service but the sheer breadth makes it hard for any one service to shine including its search. As to accuracy, Yahoo! probably does offer more than Bing but its
Wolfram Alpha Define it: More encyclopedia than search engine, Wolfram Alpha offers up neat statistics Verdict: Think of this as a Wikipedia supplement more than a real search engine Website: www.wolframalpha.com
Its more than the basics’ approach puts the engine as an interesting tool, especially for scholars and researches. Why it differs from other Web tools is that it’s not an archive of web pages as much as it is a huge database of structured data. Why does that mean for Wolfram? Its actually meant more for specific computations where you can actually enter in questions. This is primarily due to Wolfram Alpha’s being built on an easier product, Mathematica, which handles statistics, algebra and symbolic computation among others. What happens is that the engine will render easily understandable answers to the point of even showing derivatives of a formula. Wolfram Alpha isn’t really a replacement for Google and its awful but a handy tool for those who need the data.
