6 ms·

While I also agree that Google's search results have gotten better, I just feel (this is very subjective of course) that they should be far better today than th

While I also agree that Google's search results have gotten better, I just feel (this is very subjective of course) that they should be far better today than they currently are. I don't think they're leaps and bounds better and I think they should be. I'm not one to constantly point to yesteryear and claim they were better but I do look at where they are today and think they should be further along than they are. I guess when I look at certain segments of technology in 2000, some other companies have stayed more focused on their primary goal and have made phenomenal achievements since then. For example, OS X wasn't released to consumers until 2001 and the iPod didn't exist. Yet look where we are today. I have an iPhone in my pocket with incredible computing power, a very good refined interface, and a fantastic OS. Apple has stayed very focused on OS and consumer device design and pushed the field forward very far, with everyone else scrambling to catch up. This is their main business, and while they have other side projects (like the AppleTV) they stay focused on their main thing which is making great devices for consumers. While Google, whose primary business was search+, now operates in many different business segments. Their focus has widened greatly and now they have email, payment processing, online document editing, 2 operating systems, automated cars, and the list goes on and on. Now, I have great love for many of these products and services so I do not suggest that it was a bad idea for them to do them, but I think it is apparent that search has suffered as a consequence. Had Google stayed more focused on search instead of all these side businesses, search could be far more developed than it currently is today. I think they got complacent while being on top and tried to find other places to allocate their resources. Which, from a business perspective, I understand, but from a search perspective it seems tragic. Therein lies my disappointment with Google, not that they haven't been innovating or improving search, they have. But they have spent so much time and resources on other things that search is not as far along as it should be. + Certainly it could be argued that their primary business is and always has been advertising and search is just one of the many vehicles for pushing said advertising, but the word Google is now synonymous with search and, marketing speak aside, I consider it their primary focus.

barista 16y ago
Well for 10 years I think the search results have only marginally gotten better. Besides, 10 years ago, what google was doing was revolutionary. No other search engine had such vast coverage or better intent determination. Now the competitionn is intense, Bing is almost as good as Google if not better in some scenarios, other guys are blekko are coming up with different approach (and have a better way to handle spam by avoiding it completely). I think Google is spreading itself too thin. Search is what they do the best and its their bread and butter. They should stay focused on it. Google is too engrossed in thinking about generating more ad dollars rather than making their core technology better.
- bad_user 16y ago
  Bing is almost as good as Google It's easier to be a follower (or ahem, copy search results). Also if I'm going to switch away from Google it must be something truly better (like the difference I experienced when trying out Google after using Altavista). and have a better way to handle spam by avoiding it completely I like Blekko, but avoiding spam is an impossible dream. If there are search engines (or any filtering method, automatic or based on peer reviews) out there with less spam, that's because right now only Google matters. The only way to fight it is to be a moving target, which is what Google is doing. Unfortunately spammers are also very creative, so it's a tough battle.
  - barista 16y ago
    Re: bing copying Google, it has already been profusely discussed all over the internet and has been shown as nothing more than a PR stunt by Google folks to avoid discussing spam Re: fighting spam, its a tough problem indeed but so was indexing the ever expanding web. Both Bing and Google seem to have solved the indexing problem fairly well by now. The issue with the the spam problem is not so much of how difficult it is to solve but the motivation. Clearly the spam generates a lot of cash for Google (and some for bing too) so they are less likely to be motivated to solve it. Smartest of the minds are at work at Google so I find it hard to believe that they cannot solve it (or even make a very good attempt at it). It's their intent to not solve it and that's the reason I think they are trying to avoid discussing it.
    - WalterGR 16y ago
      Re: bing copying Google, it has already been profusely discussed all over the internet and has been shown as nothing more than a PR stunt by Google folks to avoid discussing spam I'm assuming the downvotes are because of that part. I keep seeing the argument that "Microsoft didn't answer all of Google's claims," but no supporting evidence. If anyone has some, I'd be curious to see it. (This is a legitimate request: I haven't been keeping score.)
      - 16y ago
greyman 16y ago
>> Had Google stayed more focused on search instead of all these side businesses, search could be far more developed than it currently is today. I agree. Basic text search could be better, but if Google would stay focused, they could develop other technologies to stay ahead, for example - searching for something in texts written in other languages (with machine translation), search in radio stations, search what was said in a video, etc...

barista 16y ago

Well for 10 years I think the search results have only marginally gotten better. Besides, 10 years ago, what google was doing was revolutionary. No other search engine had such vast coverage or better intent determination. Now the competitionn is intense, Bing is almost as good as Google if not better in some scenarios, other guys are blekko are coming up with different approach (and have a better way to handle spam by avoiding it completely). I think Google is spreading itself too thin. Search is what they do the best and its their bread and butter. They should stay focused on it. Google is too engrossed in thinking about generating more ad dollars rather than making their core technology better.

bad_user 16y ago
Bing is almost as good as Google It's easier to be a follower (or ahem, copy search results). Also if I'm going to switch away from Google it must be something truly better (like the difference I experienced when trying out Google after using Altavista). and have a better way to handle spam by avoiding it completely I like Blekko, but avoiding spam is an impossible dream. If there are search engines (or any filtering method, automatic or based on peer reviews) out there with less spam, that's because right now only Google matters. The only way to fight it is to be a moving target, which is what Google is doing. Unfortunately spammers are also very creative, so it's a tough battle.
- barista 16y ago
  Re: bing copying Google, it has already been profusely discussed all over the internet and has been shown as nothing more than a PR stunt by Google folks to avoid discussing spam Re: fighting spam, its a tough problem indeed but so was indexing the ever expanding web. Both Bing and Google seem to have solved the indexing problem fairly well by now. The issue with the the spam problem is not so much of how difficult it is to solve but the motivation. Clearly the spam generates a lot of cash for Google (and some for bing too) so they are less likely to be motivated to solve it. Smartest of the minds are at work at Google so I find it hard to believe that they cannot solve it (or even make a very good attempt at it). It's their intent to not solve it and that's the reason I think they are trying to avoid discussing it.
  - WalterGR 16y ago
    Re: bing copying Google, it has already been profusely discussed all over the internet and has been shown as nothing more than a PR stunt by Google folks to avoid discussing spam I'm assuming the downvotes are because of that part. I keep seeing the argument that "Microsoft didn't answer all of Google's claims," but no supporting evidence. If anyone has some, I'd be curious to see it. (This is a legitimate request: I haven't been keeping score.)
    - 16y ago

greyman 16y ago

>> Had Google stayed more focused on search instead of all these side businesses, search could be far more developed than it currently is today. I agree. Basic text search could be better, but if Google would stay focused, they could develop other technologies to stay ahead, for example - searching for something in texts written in other languages (with machine translation), search in radio stations, search what was said in a video, etc...