Comments

Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts

1. Great sum up of all the alternative search engines!!

   uLinkx (http://www.ulinkx.com/) Video Search Engine is very fast and provides very accurate result. You can even LIVE search on Youtube, Myspace, metacafe, Grouper... We crawl videos from top video sharing web sites. You can do lot more than only video search (Organize videos in playlist, syndicate using gadget/widgets).

   Give it a try!!

   Posted by: Saket Kumar | March 28, 2007 2:28 PM





2. To tell the truth I am tired of search engines that all they do is to re-organize the results in new and un-unified way. When I need to find something I want to find it quick and in a familiar structure. I don't need clustering when I am looking for an historical fact, I don’t need sophisticated graphics when I am looking to solve a problem. I think that you should write more about vertical search engine, those who truly give the user added-value over Google. A good example is Omgili, it searches for information in discussions and QnA sites, so when I need to find an answer for a question I try it first before I post it on a forum or an QnA site (yahoo answers etc.). Omgili also enables you to search only in the topics or titles or even the replies of the discussions – now this is something that Google couldn't do.

   Posted by: jp | March 28, 2007 3:26 PM





3. I love this list: I've never seen anything else like it.

   I'm surprised that you didn't include Kosmix, though! =) [Note: I am a former employee of Kosmix]

   Posted by: Mark Johnson | March 28, 2007 3:36 PM





4. I wanted to try kooltorch but got the following message:
   "At present, the KoolTorch technology only works with Microsoft Internet Explorer browsers.

   We are working to remedy this problem and we apologize for the inconvenience."
   You should probably mention that in your post. I got all excited to try something shiny & bubbly, but the prospect of opening IE to do so really puts a downer on that excitement.
   (Although, yeah, I do have the IE Tab extension for Firefox so it just takes one more button click to open it, but still)

   Posted by: Pamela Fox | March 28, 2007 3:37 PM





5. Ok, I've tried out KoolTorch now and have some comments.
   I find it really not-helpful to refer to search results by their search rank. I find myself constantly mousing over bubbles to see what that search result was. I would prefer if I'd mouse over a category bubble, and that bubble would expand to fill the page and the numbers were replaced with the page titles. Then I could mouse over them for the ones I was more interested in. A better way to demonstrate the search rank would be by relative bubble size or even bubble color.
   Also, not to be a web2.0 snob, but the buttons/bubbles do remind me of the early 90s button style. Perhaps someone here can volunteer a quick redesign.
   Anyway, it has potential. It's probably the best categorization attempt I've seen so far. I use "fox" as my search whenever trying these types of engines, to see what kind of clustering/analysis they do.

   Posted by: Pamela Fox | March 28, 2007 3:44 PM





6. I have to agree with Pamela, KoolTorch has made it diffcult to find what I'm looking for. It's a nice UI but it's not a good one for search engines

   Posted by: ryan | March 28, 2007 3:51 PM





7. Grokker, which is in your list of search engines, has been doing what KoolTorch does since 2001. They also have a series of patents related to that. So it's really nothing new. Good luck to them anyway...

   Posted by: Bob | March 28, 2007 4:18 PM





8. I think www.congoo.com is a news site. Its listed here as a search engine though

   Posted by: david | March 28, 2007 5:50 PM





9. Let me jump in here for just a second, please. Re: Comment

   #1 uLinkx - Thanks for the tip!

   #2 Omgili is one of the Top 100; but as for Yahoo! Answers and their kind, I don't like the uneven quality of the answers when anyone can pitch in.

   #3 Ah yes, Kosmix. Sadly, there are hundreds of vertical search engines alone, and Health is certainly a worthy sub-category (see Healthline, Symptom Search, Healia, et al)

   #4 That message is now listed in the Post. Thanks!

   #5 Ms. Fox uses Fox? That's a new one! :-) I have forwarded your comments to KoolTorch, although I imagine they are reading them right here.

   #6 See #5

   #7 Ah, listen up people! Bob makes an observation that I have overlooked a similar feature in Grokker. You should go to Grokker (www.grokker.com) and look at the Map view, which is what Bob is talking about, to see for yourself.

   It is 10:OO PM EST right now, but I encourage you to keep checking back to this comment section. Thanks, Bob!

   #8/9 Congoo is both; it searches for Premium News Content.

   Posted by: Charles Knight | March 28, 2007 7:05 PM





10. I find it odd that you would choose as your 'pick of the month' a website that is still coded in the dark ages of serving up to only one browser. Not only are Linux users left out in the cold but so is Mac. And yes I realize there are work arounds, but I don't think those of us who've been snubbed are going to waste our time on a company that isn't providing for the 21st century.

    Posted by: Mike Moschini | March 28, 2007 8:23 PM





11. It seems the three top categories for the alt search engines are clustering, meta, and visual. This is pretty interesting because even though clustering and meta have been around, visual search engines have experienced some super growth among the startups.

    Posted by: kaz | March 28, 2007 8:57 PM





12. How the hell did you miss http://www.younanimous.com ????

    Posted by: dan | March 28, 2007 11:15 PM





13. Hello Charles,

    Its pretty interesting that Snap.com is not in the list of Alternative Search engines. If you take a look at our numbers on Alexa and other metrics systems we are ranked very high. Not only have we stormed the scene in recent months with our 'preview' blog widget, but we have previously developed and evangelized CPA (which now both Google and Amazon are getting their feet wet with in specialized programs). Any thoughts on this intentional or maybe unintentional omission of Snap.com?

    Jason Fields
    Product Evangelist, Emerging Technology
    www.Snap.com

    Posted by: Jason Fields | March 28, 2007 11:33 PM





14. Are you sure Quintura is a clustering search engine? From my impression, they position themselves another way - visual, associative... (check the Wikipedia article).

    Posted by: Jessica | March 29, 2007 12:01 AM





15. Snap sucks- Nothing but bloatware and unneeded features.

    Posted by: Big_Esquire | March 29, 2007 1:04 AM





16. wink.com/ is an interesting social and people search engine

    it searches MySpace, Bebo, LinkedIn, Live Spaces, Friendster

    Posted by: Search Engine Web | March 29, 2007 3:28 AM





17. Fisssh is new to the list, very impressed I am to with the layout and presenatation of search results, however the news results offer a very diverse range of articles that will be appreciated by the casual web surfer.

    Posted by: Edgar Samuels | March 29, 2007 4:17 AM





18. What about SugarCodes.com ..?

    Posted by: Max | March 29, 2007 5:10 AM





19. This should be comment #18. It's 8:00AM EST, and it should be an interesting day for comments; now, to catch up:

    #10 Mike Moschini - could you please give me some examples here in the comments of Linux or Mac friendly search engines? You haven't been snubbed - I invite you to help the Cause!

    #11 Visual Search Engines, and now "Talking" (for lack of a better term) Search Engines are certainly interesting. On the Top 100, that which is "new" (new engine or older engines with new features)is highly prized. Before each list is published, I check the ones that are so new that they're not available yet! (See Cydral, Digger, dipsie, Megaglobe, mobot, Powerset, Serph, and subjex.net) Please not that the CogHog demo on the list is as new as it gets!

    It's also why there were 32 + 16 = 48 new search engines on The List in the past two Updates; almost 50% of the 100!

    #12 I missed www.younanimous.com because I rely on readers like you dan! It's in the "binder" now - for next month.

    #13 SNAP. First off, Alexa and "other metrics" are of no weight on this particular list - please see the beginning of the article again. Also discussed in the beginning of the article: inclusion and exclusion are very intentional! In general, "previews" (KoolTorch uses them - see graphics) are fine. Big_Esquire (comment #15) is not complimentary of Snap; I would like to throw it out to the readers:

    *Folks, What Do You Think of Snap(www.snap.com)?

    #14 Yes, I'm pretty sure that Quintura is a clustering search engine in my book. However, this is why I used the term "scattergories," There Is No Unanimous Consensus on what the categories are, much less which engine fits in which category. And which feature is primary? Is Slifter a Mobile Shopping engine, or a Vertical|Shopping engine that happens to also be Mobile (secondary category)?

    #15 See above

    #16 Yes, Wink is a nice engine.

    #17 Yes, and fisssh! is very new (to me).

    Please keeps those cards and letters (comments) coming!

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 29, 2007 5:32 AM





20. P. S. I know it, I took so long, I ended up #19, not #18!

    "Please KEEP those cards and letters (comments) coming!

    #18 Max, what about Sugarcode? (www.sugarcode.com)
    In what way is it better than Google? Why do you think it
    should be in the Top 100? Who would you delete? Thanks!

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 29, 2007 5:37 AM





21. #19/20 Charles, I think sites like SugarCodes or Yubnub are a different type of searchengine. They don't have an own searchengine but you can use any engine you like within one interface. Maybe there should be a new "Scattergorie" for those kind of sites.

    Some examples:

    SugarCodes.com
    YubNub
    Sidekiq

    Or others you might know ..?

    Posted by: Max | March 29, 2007 5:54 AM





22. NOTICE: New Rule! If you suggest that I add a search engine to the Top 100, you should share with everyone which of these alt search engines listed above that you would delete; after all, that's what you're asking me to do...

    This is not the Top 115 Alternative Search Engines. So:

    #1 Sakit - uLinkx should replace which one of the 100?

    #2 jp - Yahoo! Answers should take the place of....

    #3 Mark - Kosmix should be listed; who should be delisted?

    #10 Mike - who would your Search Engine of the Month be?

    #11 kaz - Which Visual Search Engines are missing??

    #12 don - If I put Younanimous on, who should I take off?

    #13 Jason, Ah yes, Snap. Jason, please "boot" someone off!

    #18 Max, already asked you about Sugarcodes. Your reply?

    This is a "reality check:" If you don't have an *appropriate* alt search engine on this version of the Top 100 that you would replace, your search engine should really go into the "Bottom 500" database that I maintain.

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 29, 2007 6:14 AM





23. #21 Charles, I did reply but I got a message that you have to approve it before it will be posted.

    Because of the "New Rule" I suggest to delete CrossEngine. Its kinda like SugarCodes but I like the commandline type of site

    Posted by: Max | March 29, 2007 6:27 AM





24. KoolTorch.com is ridiculous... In a bad way.

    It only supports IE. I'm not switching my browser to use their search engine. The search results are virtually unusable. To me they are.

    I have to mouse over ten results to see what they are instead of just quickly scanning the page and reading all 10 results in a matter of seconds?

    It also doesn't actually let me see multiple results at once so I have no immediate reference when deciding if I want to click on -this- link or -that-.

    Awful awful awful.

    Posted by: The New Revelation | March 29, 2007 7:56 AM





25. No Firefox for Kooltorch. Ain't so Kool with me.

    Posted by: Matt Franck | March 29, 2007 8:02 AM





26. Is there any engine that would allow me to embed search functionality into my website without showing ads? (Something like Google Co-op)

    Posted by: Andres Monroy-Hernandez | March 29, 2007 8:19 AM





27. No offense but how can you possibly give KoolTorch search engine of the month when it only works in IE? Thats ridiculous. If the author of this site didn't know this, then he must be an IE user. Double yikes. =\

    Posted by: www.celebritypwn.com | March 29, 2007 9:56 AM





28. @Andres Monroy-Hernandez:
    "Is there any engine that would allow me to embed search functionality into my website without showing ads? (Something like Google Co-op)"

    There is the no-cookie, no records Google proxy Scroogle Scraper from the anti-Google site Google Watch.

    And they have a way to embed their search in your site. They use the Google engine but their results come up without ads: See here.

    Posted by: phummers | March 29, 2007 10:00 AM





29. I am sad to see that Bessed could not beat out a Russian search engine. I know that Russian is a language that more and more people are learning, what with English and Spanish on their way out, but still I hoped we could beat the Russians. One day perhaps...

    Posted by: Adam Jusko | March 29, 2007 10:34 AM





30. I'm providing a link to this page on a (weak) search engine portal I have for myself and a few friends. It would be nice if the most recent page was always the same url. One could either might redirect to the url with date or just rename the old page to a url with date. This way the link would always point to the most recent article. If there's a better way please let me know.

    Posted by: DeuxBits | March 29, 2007 11:25 AM





31. DeuxBits, thanks for the suggestion. I think you're saying you want one URL for the list, every month. While each month's list needs a unique URL, I can also set up a re-direct and manually update that each month. I will look into that.

    btw I just approved the comments that were waiting in the moderation queue. sorry for delay (I just woke up).

    Posted by: Richard MacManus | March 29, 2007 12:43 PM





32. Tough crowd, but Mom always said getting beat-up on the playground will develop character!#@ Anyway, your candor and no-holds-barred approach is certainly genuine and appreciated. In response:

    * The interface at www.KoolTorch.com is first generation. It was developed to showcase some of our patented visualization concepts, the inevitable future of search interfaces. The traditional long text listings are simply ineffective for reviewing large numbers of results, an inefficient use of screen real estate, insulting to your intelligence and not a feasible mobile solution. How many times have you even reached items 91-100? With the traditional text list, we really just see what’s on the first few pages – not the full picture of what your search produces. Using graphics and other features, KoolTorch gives you a bigger picture and hopefully a little credit for your intelligence.

    * With KoolTorch, many results (we chose 50, 100 for this version) are provided on the very first screen along with immediate information (ranking number, time remaining till auction or something else) and a context for review and drill down navigation (the categories) after just one click to initiate the search. If you want to see the results in a textual listing, just hit the ‚ÄúTEXT‚Ä? button near the top of the screen. This provides all depicted results in a text list (along with the same category drill down capability as the GUI pages). And you can go back and forth between formats. So, when you reach a GUI screen where you want to see descriptions for all the depicted results at once, whether it‚Äôs the first GUI screen or a drill down screen, you can convert to TEXT with one click. This unique KoolTorch feature allows you to switch to a text listing from any category at any level in the category tree.

    * As to the Firefox glitch, we have no excuse. We are working on it and hope to have it back soon. As a gesture of our regret, let’s meet at Denny’s tonight at 11 and we'll treat all you Firefoxers to a big bowl of ice cream so you can CHILL OUT! Or just give us (and Charles Knight) a little slack.

    * As to Grokker, Bob (#7), its actually very different. Here are a few differences. On the first KoolTorch screen, each search result is shown and accessible. This is not the case with Grokker. The results that reside in the small orbs on the first screen of Grokker are not shown or accessible until you click on the orb; then they are shown in isolation and not in relation to all the other results on the first screen. So Grokker does not give you the same big picture as KoolTorch. Second, Grokker does not have the same ‚Äútrue‚Ä? drill-down capability of KoolTorch. With KoolTorch, you can drill down through every level in the category structure of the underlying database to further narrow your navigation. Grokker seems to go down only a few levels. Finally, though we respect Grokker, it seems a little too complex and confusing for the masses. KoolTorch‚Äôs focus is to make search user-friendly for everyone.

    * Pamela Fox (#5), we appreciate your comments. We readily admit KoolTorch is in a rudimentary form at this early stage; it will have significant development over time. Pamela, we would be grateful to have the opportunity to talk with you personally; if you would, please e-mail us at info@kooltorch.com and we will be in touch.

    * KoolTorch, LLC is an early stage company with a strong patent foothold in the field of search GUI’s seeking capital, acquisition or strategic relationship to help take the technology to the next level.

    Regards,

    Randy Smith, Co-founder
    KoolTorch, LLC

    Posted by: Randy Smith | March 29, 2007 1:22 PM





33. I visited sugarcodes.com and it is pretty similar to YubNub.com. I marked them in my book as "command line search engines".

    Posted by: kaz | March 29, 2007 2:02 PM





34. Good and helpful site.

    Posted by: Rajesh | March 29, 2007 2:04 PM





35. How can KoolTorch be so cool if it doesn't support Firefox? It seems like the browser requirement should be HUGE markers off of its coolness. I realize IE is still the dominant browser, but part of good web design and good web application is opening it to the largest number of users possible. Tsk tsk for the programmers painting themselves into the corner with technology which did not work in all browsers, and tsk tsk to RWW for thinking it is so cool.

    Posted by: Patrick | March 29, 2007 2:39 PM





36. ***How fast do things update in the Search "space?" Well,
    before lunch I wrote that Serph had not launched yet. I get back from lunch and find that it launched while I was out!

    Check it out: SERPH (http://www.serph.com/) Please come back and share your impressions with the rest of us! -Charles

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 29, 2007 3:18 PM





37. Charles, I think Snap.com should make the list, not because of their Alexa ranking, but they do better than Google in providing a fast and elegant way of previewing sites before you decide to access them.

    Following the new rule, I would delete turboscout, which is a documented Crossengine copycat.

    I also tried Serph, which I found really genuine and useful, it should be considered to be part of the list.

    Keep up the superb job you are doing!

    Posted by: Juan C. Sosa | March 29, 2007 4:14 PM





38. # 22 Hey Charles,

    Rather than replacing any Video Search Engine with uLinkx, I would suggest to expand the "Video Search Engine" list. Currently, it has only 3 entries. May be take out some of the Meta Search or Cluster Search.

    In my view, Video Search Engine section needs little more exposure.

    Posted by: Saket Kumar | March 29, 2007 5:09 PM





39. 很喜欢你的文章，谢谢

    Posted by: Rain | March 30, 2007 1:39 AM





40. Thanks for the BIG list :)

    Pratheep

    Posted by: Pratheep | March 30, 2007 2:06 AM





41. Hey folks, here's a great quote by Google's Matt Cutt's over on Rick Skrenta's blog:

    http://www.skrenta.com/2007/03/how_to_beat_google_part_1.html

    "Rich, Matt says, that was a fun post. I know I enjoy playing the thought experiment of "What's the best way to compete with Company X?". I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on how to beat other companies in the search...industry..."

    Wow, my understanding is that it is Google's corporate policy not to discuss alternative search engines by name, but it seems as though they wouldn't mind if Rick did a little research for them on how to beat those "other companies."

    Well, here's one way, Matt, check out this list of The Top 100 Alterative Search Engines each month and then "cherry pick" the ones you like and leave the rest to fail for lack of market share. Good plan!

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 30, 2007 9:40 AM





42. As to the Firefox glitch, we have no excuse. We are working on it and hope to have it back soon. As a gesture of our regret, let’s meet at Denny’s tonight at 11 and we'll treat all you Firefoxers to a big bowl of ice cream so you can CHILL OUT! Or just give us (and Charles Knight) a little slack.

    It looks like most of your client-side logic -- including even the most trivial scripts -- is written in VBScript. That's why it won't work with Firefox, or any other non-Microsoft browser.

    Posted by: John Zenger | March 30, 2007 2:39 PM





43. Ok I have been looking at KoolTorch and thinking long and hard. There is no way that KoolTorch should be on the list let alone number 1, I simply found that it wasnt easily usable - but perhaps I am not the target audience. Personally I prefer the traditional approach; with traditional search engines you can read a description of the result sets, you can also use the browsers in built search features to find results within the page. I would suggest that it would be quicker and easier (especially for users on slower connections) to look through 10 pages on google than it would to look through 100 entries within KoolTorch.

    In todays environment there is no excuse for having a user interface such as the one that KoolTorch shows, it is possible to be so much more dynamic.

    I cant look at it on my home mac so i wont be able to have a look at their code but the fact that they use VBScript rather than Javascript just shows that they dont care about cross browser support, from memory it didnt seem to be too complicated to code in javascript.

    Now I know KoolTorch is more of a tech demo than a working product but I have a few suggestions:
    1) Measure relevancy by how far away its circle is from the central column.
    2) Arrange by relevancy achieving a spiral like effect.
    3) Show a preview of the top 3 results within the selected category
    4) allow the user to rotate the category updating the corresponding results as you move it. Clicking on any orb will automatically rotate to that bit.
    5) cache the results within javascript, intelligently preload images so that you are always just ahead of what the users want.
    6) Dont patent ideas such as that, I would think that an interface would be hard to defend in court, you should conentrate on beating people by offering a better service.

    With exception to the rotating code all of this is achievable by even middling javascript developers. You dont even need to visually rotate the categories, as long as you have a graphical way of viewing a few results at a time and moving to the next result set. You could still maintain the mouse over previews.

    Perhaps I have missed a part of the functionality because I only had a quick look at it at work.

    Posted by: Ryan McCarvill | March 30, 2007 9:14 PM





44. Ryan says, "You dont even need to visually rotate the categories."

    Ryan, in my pre-publication discussions with KoolTorch, that was one of my sugestions also. Having the wheels rotate like a (very) old telephone dial. Some of the Top 100 SE move or light up, or talk, etc.; gnod (music-map, liveplasma), Quintura and KartOO, Foxy Voxy and AbbyMe. Oh yes, and Google doesn't (move or light up or talk - not counting the personalized home page thingy).

    I also think you have a good point about being the target audience. ChaCha, for example, is often said to have slow and/or Google-like responses; but the highly skilled techies that say this forget that ChaCha's Guided search is for those who Need Help Searching, it's not for experts!

    Likewise, when I give a presentation on "The List," people do the "Oooh!" and "Aaah!" vocalizations because a) they have never seen most (all?) of these SE before, or b) they don't know or care what's "under the hood;" they just like the shiny bubbles. ;-)

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 31, 2007 4:32 AM





45. Hi Charles,

    I'm not sure about Kooltorch, it looks dated and of course the firefox issue. But the results, well i think its too much hard work for the individual who is searching and can't quite understand why you would choose this as your number 1.

    I have outlined my top 5 out of your list and stated reasons :

    1. Findsounds - I think this is super cool, and very niche. I have never come across a search engine like that before and find it very easy to use and find sounds.

    2. ChaCha - This is very clever, what I like is that people can earn money by becoming guides that has to be cool. I think this would be very useful for older people who use the net and new users, ChaCha is not going anywhere and that's one to watch for me.

    3. fisssh! - I like this one, being british and seeing this is from Wales, im surprised and impressed. My favourite tool on this one is the podcast search. As a huge fan of podcasts this brings back some good stuff.

    4. Clusty - Again this is another brilliant search engine and i also like the name. The reviews are cool and i like that you can search wikipedia too!

    5. Hakia - This is a cool one which returns good results however the whole logo and interface is slightly boring and not new.

    I'd like to see some of these really take off, so let's wait and see!

    Cheers Charles - Great Blog You Have!

    Posted by: Simon Morgans | March 31, 2007 5:15 AM





46. Thanks, Simon, for submitting such a detailed post. At least we can agree on ChaCha; they were my #1 Search Engine of the Year - 2006. Your other four choices are great, also. I hope readers won't think of the Featured Search Engine of the Month as "1 winner and 99 losers."

    That's wrong.

    It's really 1 winner and 99 other winners; isn't it?

    Posted by: Charles Knight | March 31, 2007 11:25 AM





47. My favorite (in the future) will be hakia of course. It will be interesting to see what Powerset comes up with after the doors open.
    Dr. Berkan told me in an interview we had that he would eventually go open source with their innovation. I was really looking for a collaboration between several of these entities, and after having talked to Jimmy Wales and Berkan, the possibility or even likelihood of such a venture seems imminent at some point.

    Great Report BYW!
    Always,
    Phil

    Posted by: Phil Butler | April 1, 2007 4:47 PM





48. I would like to suggest a new category in your next list: Charity search engines. These are engines that donate part or all of their advertising revenue to charity.

    The best I have seen is www.searchkindly.org. This site is non-profit, and donates 100% of advertising revenue to a charity chosen by user-voting each month. At the moment, every visit generates 1/3 of a cent for the charity - but this should increase as the site grows. It is powered by google, so you get awesome results, but the ingenuity of searching for charity makes the site that much better.

    Another good site, www.goodsearch.com, donates more (1 cent) per visit, but is powered by yahoo, so the results aren't as good. Also, it is for-profit so does not donate all revenue.

    Goodtree.com would also be worth checking out, but its legitimacy has been questionned. Everyclick.com is in a similar vein but less pleasent to use.

    
    I think this type of search engine is a fabulous idea, and would merit being included in your list. These sites (and the charities they support) certainly could use the publicity. Searchkindly.org gets my vote.

    Posted by: Andrew | April 2, 2007 12:18 AM





49. Hi Charles,

    Interesting list. I believe that your visual search category lacks Picsearch. As one of the three major image search providers (besides Google and Yahoo) we might not be alternative when it comes to syndication. But as an end-user destination site Picsearch is alternative. Picsearch is market leaders when it comes to relevancy and family firendliness within in image search. Picsearch is also the only carbon free search engine so far.

    Best Regards
    Carl Sarnstrand
    Communications Manager
    Picsearch

    Posted by: Carl Sarnstrand | April 2, 2007 2:49 AM





50. Charles,

    Compete.com Search should be on your list.

    Why should it be on your list?!

    Compete Search combines Compete SnapShot with Yahoo's search technology, alerting searchers to site traffic profiles, promotional codes and trust scores for each search result displayed. Search results also include special Compete Picks, that are selected and highlighted based on the actual post-click online activity of the Compete community for each keyword across Google, Yahoo, MSN, Live, etc.

    ex. http://data.compete.com/results?Keywords=apple.com

    Best,
    Jay

    Posted by: Jay | April 2, 2007 7:45 AM



1 2 Next