4 ms·

Google won because they started early and had the right algorithm. Back in 1998, Google's PageRank was an innovative algorithm that calculated relevance based o

Google won because they started early and had the right algorithm. Back in 1998, Google's PageRank was an innovative algorithm that calculated relevance based on counting backlinks instead of parsing the word counts in embedded HTML text like other search engines. This made Google way better than any other available search engine back then (Lycos, Yahoo, AltaVista, etc.), and within weeks, everyone was switching to Google. A successful Google competitor just needs to be way better than what’s currently available. Nobody seems to have the next big idea for a better search engine yet.

foobarian 4y ago
> way better than what’s currently available Hand-curated walled garden sub-web that bans SEO spam with an iron hand.
- ricardo81 4y ago
  wikipedia? Beyond their remit for some queries for sure, but they fit the mold.
  - pja 4y ago
    A search engine that only searched sites that wikipedia links to might be a fairly decent source in fact. If monetisable, it would turn gaming wikipedia into a whole new level of shitshow of course.
    - xtracto 4y ago
      Mhmm great idea
rvz 4y ago
> A successful Google competitor just needs to be way better than what’s currently available. Nobody seems to have the next big idea for a better search engine yet. I would speculate that Apple could roll their own search engine using Siri. We'll see what happens in either WWDC or in a few years, but it seems to be quite early for that and certainly have a long way to go.