tag:,2008:/1/tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818- 2008-07-02T20:23:51Z Comments for How Alt Search Engines Implemented Universal Search...Well Before Google Did Movable Type 4.1 tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818 2007-05-24T02:20:02Z 2007-12-16T23:11:32Z How Alt Search Engines Implemented Universal Search...Well Before Google Did Written by Nitin Karandikar At the Searchology press conference last week, Google announced a slew of new features that are getting integrated into their main search engine. The key focus was on a new feature called Universal Search. Google's Marissa Mayer explained this feature as follows on the Official Google blog: "... [this is] the... Guest Author Written by Nitin Karandikar

At the Searchology press conference last week, Google announced a slew of new features that are getting integrated into their main search engine. The key focus was on a new feature called Universal Search. Google's Marissa Mayer explained this feature as follows on the Official Google blog:

"... [this is] the first step in the evolution toward universal search. Today, we're making that first step available on google.com by launching the new architecture and using it to blend content from Images, Maps, Books, Video, and News into our web results."

Here's what a sample search would look like, using this feature. In this case, searching for the term "hydrofoil" displays images embedded in the results (technically, the new feature is that the images could be anywhere on the page, rather than only at the top; but I'm not sure it makes all that much difference to an end user):

]]>

As with any exciting Google search announcement, this feature received a lot of coverage in the blogosphere: Read/WriteWeb, John Andrews, Manoj Jasra and many others. Interestingly though, Universal Search is not a particularly new idea - other search engines (especially the smaller "alt" search engines) already include this feature. Let's take a look at a few examples.

Hakia

Hakia is one of the new general-purpose search engines, with an emphasis on "meaning-based" relevance of search results. Here's a search for the term "toyota" on this search engine - as the screenshot shows, the results incorporate news headlines, an image, a company profile and a systematic Table of Contents that neatly tabulates all of the available results data. In terms of organization of search results, it doesn't get any better than this!

Retrevo

Retrevo is a specialized search engine that focuses on providing comprehensive information about consumer electronics and helping users find the best gadgets to match a particular need. Right from the start, Retrevo results have included multiple data types consistent with their domain; search results automatically include Product Documents, Manufacturer Info and a preview of a product's User Guide (usually in PDF format). There are also tabbed links to forums, reviews, blogs and so on.

Clusty

Clusty is a search engine that specializes in grouping results into tag clouds. The image below shows a news item included in search results, along with the table of contents.

Microsoft

Microsoft search gets dissed a lot in the media, compared to Google, but in fact they already had images embedded in Live.com search results.

Cross Language Information Retrieval is new

In addition to existing search engines, the Universal Search concept has been tried before elsewhere. Don Dodge has a thoughtful post on this topic, explaining why the concept of Universal Search failed before. Ashkan Karbasfrooshan of MojoSupreme (which created the MetaMojo search engine) also has an interesting post: Oh Google ... stop copying us!.

This is not to say that Google does not deserve kudos for adding new features and providing a better search solution for users. To be fair, Google has special challenges that most of the smaller search engines do not - as the market leader in Internet search, Google's search engine is used by a huge number of users. Any change to core functionality or user interface carries the risk of alienating these users, even when it's a change for the better; Google has to proceed with these changes slowly and carefully.

In that vein, one of the new features that is both new and innovative in Google's upgrade, is the concept of Cross Language Information Retrieval. Tony Ruscoe described it in his excellent Searchology article on Google Blogoscoped:

"Cross Language Information Retrieval, as Google are calling it, will initially be launched in just 12 languages. By using their statistical machine translation technology, Google will apparently translate your search query into other languages and then search websites written in other languages using your translated query."

For more information about these new features, check out the detailed article by Danny Sullivan and this post from David Berkowitz for the impact on Marketers.

Conclusion

What other search innovations will Google copy from alternate search engines in the future? It is certainly interesting to speculate. Add a comment below and let us know what you think! For ideas, check out our previous featured article: Top 17 Search Innovations outside of Google.

]]> tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32814 Comment from Jean Biri on 2007-05-23 Jean Biri "Borrowing" innovative ideas from smaller companies is how big dogs stay at the top. They certainly don't want the little players getting attention with their revolutionary ideas.

Since bigger companies also have the biggest voice through their deep pockets, they can easily get away with it.

Sad fact of business life I guess.

The question becomes: how should this alt search engines get their innovations noticed?

]]> 2007-05-24T05:07:24Z tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32815 Comment from E Morris on 2007-05-24 E Morris Others in this game are Yahoo alpha, askx and Kosmix. I guess now that google launched universal search, everyone is going to take notice.

]]> 2007-05-24T07:54:32Z tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32816 Comment from Zeno Davatz on 2007-05-24 Zeno Davatz http://zeno.davaz.com You should not confuse Cross-Language Search with Multilingual Search:

What is cross-language search?

A1. The question is being translated: Examples of companies that do a simple one-on-one translation: Eurospider, Convera, Google Cross-Language, Temis.

A2. Content is indexed across several languages ergo the question is being asked across several languages: InfoCodex.

Shortcomings of A1.:
**********************
a) The translation is never sharp. What meaning does "Automobile" have, what are the possible translations into German:
- Automobil
- Auto
- Kraftfahrzeug
- Motorfahrzeug
- Personenkraftwagen
- PKW
etc.

b) What meaning does "Insurance" have when translated into German:
- Versicherung
- Haftpflichtversicherung
- Assekuranz
etc.

c) What meaning does "IT" have when translated to German:
- IT
- Informatik
- EDV
- Elektronische Datenverarbeitung
etc.

The A1 solution will always only give you just one solution for a translation of a word even though there are always several translations of a common word. With a linguistical database you do not have this problem, i.e. your search result increases.

Advantages of A2:
*******************
a) A linguistical database with synonym groups will help you put a document or a search term into context (Verschlagwortung).

b) A linguistical database with a taxonomy will help you do more then just a one-on-one translation.

c) With a linguistical database you can search in more then just one language. You can search in 5 languages at the same time.

See: http://www.ywesee.com/pmwiki.php/Ywesee/InfoCodexProcedure

]]> 2007-05-24T12:12:27Z tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32817 Comment from G on 2007-05-24 G http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/05/google_hot_flas.html

Nitin good post - also one from Don Dodge above.

]]> 2007-05-24T13:36:22Z tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32818 Comment from Prashanth on 2007-05-24 Prashanth We should not compare Google's Universal search results with other search engine's results organized in categories. They are different in the sense that other search engines, gets back all category results and presents it in a tabular(or something else) format. Google on the other hand goes a couple of steps further. They rank web + video + News + Images. Results are presented according to the rank of that. This is the most hard part as it depends on the relevancy of the search results and everything has to be presented in a sub second.

I am not saying other search engine implementation is not so good but comparing is not a fare thing to do.

]]> 2007-05-24T13:39:01Z tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32819 Comment from Danny Sullivan on 2007-05-24 Danny Sullivan http://searchengineland.com What Google has done is either new or not depending on what you want to focus on.

Absolutely, other search engines -- and Google itself -- have shoved things like images above or below "regular" search results. Not new.

What is new is the idea of pulling out web search results and inserting in non-web content.

Clusty and some of the others you mention, by the way, are doing more categorization of web pages than grouping of different content types into categories. Of course, others (Technorati being the latest) fall to the mixing different content types by segmenting them.

I think the main point isn't that Google is or isn't copying anyone. It's that it fundamentally moved away from the supremacy of 10 web page links. That makes it easier for everyone to be innovative, regardless of how the Google "standard" changed.

]]> 2007-05-24T16:01:28Z tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3818-comment:32820 Comment from Sandi on 2007-05-25 Sandi Prashanth,
You are completely wrong about other search engines. They also rank web+video+image. Showing them in different tab does not mean they do not do it.

I guess some people are too fascinated to see stuff in Google that they do not do in case of others. Open your eyes, guys! A mere labelling is not indicative of super-smartness.

]]> 2007-05-25T23:55:55Z