Comments on: Microsoft Search http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/ Screams in the Night Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:12:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: rick http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-16002 rick Wed, 17 Oct 2007 03:04:55 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-16002 Do you think I would like Microsoft Search? Do you think I would like Microsoft Search?

]]> By: Andy Freeman http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15944 Andy Freeman Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:42:14 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15944 search.yahoo.com is a search box and nothing more - it's more sparse than www.google.com . www.yahoo.com is a portal page. search.yahoo.com is a search box and nothing more – it’s more sparse than http://www.google.com .

http://www.yahoo.com is a portal page.

]]> By: Bob B. http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15938 Bob B. Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:50:49 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15938 @Tom I really think this is no longer a valid excuse. www.yahoo.com has always been cluttered, it's a portal page, not a search page. If you want a clean Y! search experience, use search.yahoo.com. Better yet, assign a bookmark shortcut on your browser, y for Yahoo, g for Google. That way you can just use the address bar. @Tom

I really think this is no longer a valid excuse. http://www.yahoo.com has always been cluttered, it’s a portal page, not a search page. If you want a clean Y! search experience, use search.yahoo.com. Better yet, assign a bookmark shortcut on your browser, y for Yahoo, g for Google. That way you can just use the address bar.

]]> By: Tom Primožič http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15922 Tom Primožič Sat, 06 Oct 2007 11:22:17 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15922 In response to Ben: Although I speak on my behalf, I believe that many many users agree. The reason I use Google (over Yahoo!) is that it is Concentrated - search only. Whenever I stumble across Yahoo!'s home page, I am horrified by the amount of non-search-related content (possibly called spam in this context?) present on the site. When I want to search, I want search only - and that is exactly what Google gives me. Nothing more. - Tom In response to Ben:

Although I speak on my behalf, I believe that many many users agree. The reason I use Google (over Yahoo!) is that it is Concentrated – search only. Whenever I stumble across Yahoo!’s home page, I am horrified by the amount of non-search-related content (possibly called spam in this context?) present on the site. When I want to search, I want search only – and that is exactly what Google gives me. Nothing more.

– Tom

]]> By: Bogdan Ghervan http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15908 Bogdan Ghervan Sat, 06 Oct 2007 00:34:43 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15908 This is really a good piece of article you wrote! I really enjoyed when you compared to competing with the U.S. Military with a powder-gun :). As for the stemming issue, it is more probable that Nadella didn't know the exact situation or how to put it in words that sounded better for the media. However, I'm not sure if he realizes how lame is to admit how poor their engine is and recognize in the public (as a competitor) that they're going to become a worthy Google rival soon. This is really a good piece of article you wrote! I really enjoyed when you compared to competing with the U.S. Military with a powder-gun :).

As for the stemming issue, it is more probable that Nadella didn’t know the exact situation or how to put it in words that sounded better for the media. However, I’m not sure if he realizes how lame is to admit how poor their engine is and recognize in the public (as a competitor) that they’re going to become a worthy Google rival soon.

]]> By: Sean Hederman http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15895 Sean Hederman Fri, 05 Oct 2007 16:25:13 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15895 Funny that Rob Mathieson laughs at you when his CV (at http://195.97.193.35/robmathieson/CV.htm) is such a grammatical disaster. My favourite: "This was alongside advanced some .Net functionality, such as HTTPXML" Funny that Rob Mathieson laughs at you when his CV (at http://195.97.193.35/robmathieson/CV.htm) is such a grammatical disaster. My favourite: “This was alongside advanced some .Net functionality, such as HTTPXML”

]]> By: Rob Mathieson http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15890 Rob Mathieson Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:08:00 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15890 It pisses me off when people don't proof read their own articles first. Your open source text editor probably doesn't have spell check though. Hahahahaha. It pisses me off when people don’t proof read their own articles first. Your open source text editor probably doesn’t have spell check though. Hahahahaha.

]]> By: wdr1 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15877 wdr1 Fri, 05 Oct 2007 06:45:22 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15877 Yep, thanks for the correction Jeffrey. Your eye for detail is much better than mine. ;-) Yep, thanks for the correction Jeffrey. Your eye for detail is much better than mine. ;-)

]]> By: wdr1 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15867 wdr1 Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:18:50 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15867 RR, I'm not oversimplifying, Satya Nadella, the MS VP is. The "drive" vs "driving" example is his. RR, I’m not oversimplifying, Satya Nadella, the MS VP is. The “drive” vs “driving” example is his.

]]> By: Jeffrey Friedl http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15866 Jeffrey Friedl Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:05:46 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15866 I think you meant 2004 WRT Wikipedia's entry on Stemming. I think you meant 2004 WRT Wikipedia’s entry on Stemming.

]]> By: RR http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15864 RR Fri, 05 Oct 2007 00:09:13 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15864 You are oversimplifying (somewhat, at least). Take the case of stemming. While it sounds good (and obvious), I am not sure if it leads to really great gains. For example, I found this page on a google search: http://grapeshot.co.uk/shared/porter-stemmers.php In 3 real evaluations, the most commonly used (Porter) stemmer did slightly better than no stemming on 2 evaluations, and did not do better on a third. Bottom line is, I cannot believe Microsoft Live Search programmers didn't already know about stemming. The latest "innovation" is probably smarter than just a naive stemming algorithm. You are oversimplifying the task! And, the search for "Denzel Washington" works just fine on Live Search. The suggestions are interesting too (e.g., when I search Pitt, I get both the college and Brad Pitt as suggestions). [Disclaimer: I don't work at Microsoft!] You are oversimplifying (somewhat, at least).

Take the case of stemming. While it sounds good (and obvious), I am not sure if it leads to really great gains. For example, I found this page on a google search:
http://grapeshot.co.uk/shared/porter-stemmers.php
In 3 real evaluations, the most commonly used (Porter) stemmer did slightly better than no stemming on 2 evaluations, and did not do better on a third.

Bottom line is, I cannot believe Microsoft Live Search programmers didn’t already know about stemming. The latest “innovation” is probably smarter than just a naive stemming algorithm. You are oversimplifying the task!

And, the search for “Denzel Washington” works just fine on Live Search. The suggestions are interesting too (e.g., when I search Pitt, I get both the college and Brad Pitt as suggestions).

[Disclaimer: I don't work at Microsoft!]

]]> By: Bob Warfield http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15859 Bob Warfield Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:58:42 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15859 Did you try typing "Driving" and "Drive" into Google to see if you get the same search result? Hmmm, BW Did you try typing “Driving” and “Drive” into Google to see if you get the same search result?

Hmmm,

BW

]]> By: dk http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15858 dk Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:55:47 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15858 really liked this line *after* the patent stuff "Although, if you work for Microsoft (or Google), it’s probably best you didn’t." really liked this line *after* the patent stuff “Although, if you work for Microsoft (or Google), it’s probably best you didn’t.”

]]> By: Jeremy Osborne http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15856 Jeremy Osborne Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:35:00 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15856 Just a random reader directed here to your website by a friend. Amazingly good read, and a great follow up about developers just like this he and I run into. Just a random reader directed here to your website by a friend. Amazingly good read, and a great follow up about developers just like this he and I run into.

]]> By: ben http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/comment-page-1/#comment-15812 ben Wed, 03 Oct 2007 14:43:02 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/09/29/microsoft-search/#comment-15812 I think where Yahoo! really screwed up was not getting their search to be the default search in Firefox and Safari. I'm not sure if other people would agree with me on that, but that's one of the key reasons I use Google. And where Microsoft screwed up was trying to run their search on Windows Server. :) Also for some reason, Microsoft marketing and branding is horrible. Windows Live Search? Windows Live in general is a stupid concept -- it's not fucking Windows. It's the internet. I think where Yahoo! really screwed up was not getting their search to be the default search in Firefox and Safari. I’m not sure if other people would agree with me on that, but that’s one of the key reasons I use Google.

And where Microsoft screwed up was trying to run their search on Windows Server. :)
Also for some reason, Microsoft marketing and branding is horrible. Windows Live Search?
Windows Live in general is a stupid concept — it’s not fucking Windows. It’s the internet.

]]>