4 ms·

Did you experience the Internet before google? The idea of a world where Alta Vista won is truly chilling.

by linsomniac 2y ago

washadjeffmad 2y ago
I'd be okay with a world in which everyone else in search didn't lose, too.
msk-lywenn 2y ago
In some way, didn't Google become Alta Vista?
- linsomniac 2y ago
  How so? My memory of Alta Vista was so-so search results with a top page littered with garbage.
  - solardev 2y ago
    Exactly
  - eitland 2y ago
    Exactly like Google since 2011 +/- 2 years (the so-so search results part) and Google the last few years (the littered with garbage part)? I have used Google since probably 2001-2002 sometime and a number of other search engines before. It is rather obvious to me and I have writing and screenshots from around the time quality took a dive that supports it.
    - marginalia_nu 2y ago
      I think over time the story has become that AV and Yahoo were overtaken by Google because the latter had a cleaner design, which if you think about it for more than a moment doesn't really constitute much of a moat.
      - eitland 2y ago
        Google was also technically better when it released and importantly there was no way to buy ones way to the top. Back then I think people mostly agreed that the results that ranked on top in Google generally were there because of criteria that benefited the end user. I mean, even as crazy as Google results has been the last few years they have still managed to be better than Bing and DDG who both manages to have worse ranking and also like Google completely ignore my doublequotes.
  - linsomniac 2y ago
    Reminder: Alta Vista looked like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltaVista#/media/File:Altavista-1999.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltaVista#/media/File:Altavist...
  - mastercheph 2y ago
    Google
thsksbd 2y ago
You mean a world where people still knew how to use a library catalog, still relied on more than one source of information and curious crazy tid bits are still out there? The internet is boring. And the trash is still there. Its just become reputable instead.
- linsomniac 2y ago
  There's a lot to unpack here... Can you expand on how a card catalog improved the world? As a kid I used the card catalog a lot, both the physical version and the later electronic versions. Full text search definitely leads to pulling in information from a wider selection of sources. I remember a lot of stratification of news sources pre-Google (which news channel you watched, which papers/magazines you read). Did Google cause reliance on one source of information, or does Google simply exist in a world where people tend towards echo chambers? How would Alta Vista have improved that?
  - jareklupinski 2y ago
    > how a card catalog improved the world i was lamenting the library recently and remembered how books were organized on shelves using the dewey decimal system this meant that if you knew of one book that has something you're looking for, you can find all the _other_ books about the same topic right next to the first book, even if you knew nothing about the contents of the related books
    - staticman2 2y ago
      Libraries still exist and sort books like that, don't they?
      - yencabulator 2y ago
        I believe the point is that the commenter wishes more things operated like that, where adjacent items were related and likely of similar quality, not just boosted with money and SEO trickery.
vouaobrasil 2y ago
Yes, I did! I used to use Yahoo search where the results were more hand-curated and people did not create websties for intensive commercial purposes with useless SEO fluff like it is today.
- linsomniac 2y ago
  I have been thinking a lot about Yahoo (pre yahoo-search, largely) lately. I don't fully understand how we lost the curated catalog, especially considering the success of Wikipedia. The latter demonstrates users willingness to curate knowledge bases... We have "awesome" lists, but I rarely seem to use them.
  - xnx 2y ago
    Yahoo directory was largely pay-to-play and very affected by proto-SEOs trying to game the system for direct traffic or PageRank value. Collaborative directories like dmoz.org suffered the same fate before shutting down.
    - A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
      Pay-to-play is actually a very decent business model for a directory, though. Pay a one-time fee, establish that you're a legitimate business or website, undergo a quality assessment, and you're in. There's no paying for extra promotion, e.g. with ads, and website owners don't need to warp their sites in anticipation of what they think the search engine wants. (Which often results in a decrease in usability, e.g. all of those recipe sites with low-quality 2000-word essays before they get to the actual recipe.) It's a more level playing field, and it's intrinsically more human-friendly.

Did you experience the Internet before google? The idea of a world where Alta Vista won is truly chilling.

washadjeffmad 2y ago

I'd be okay with a world in which everyone else in search didn't lose, too.

msk-lywenn 2y ago

In some way, didn't Google become Alta Vista?

linsomniac 2y ago
How so? My memory of Alta Vista was so-so search results with a top page littered with garbage.
- solardev 2y ago
  Exactly
- eitland 2y ago
  Exactly like Google since 2011 +/- 2 years (the so-so search results part) and Google the last few years (the littered with garbage part)? I have used Google since probably 2001-2002 sometime and a number of other search engines before. It is rather obvious to me and I have writing and screenshots from around the time quality took a dive that supports it.
  - marginalia_nu 2y ago
    I think over time the story has become that AV and Yahoo were overtaken by Google because the latter had a cleaner design, which if you think about it for more than a moment doesn't really constitute much of a moat.
    - eitland 2y ago
      Google was also technically better when it released and importantly there was no way to buy ones way to the top. Back then I think people mostly agreed that the results that ranked on top in Google generally were there because of criteria that benefited the end user. I mean, even as crazy as Google results has been the last few years they have still managed to be better than Bing and DDG who both manages to have worse ranking and also like Google completely ignore my doublequotes.
- linsomniac 2y ago
  Reminder: Alta Vista looked like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltaVista#/media/File:Altavista-1999.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltaVista#/media/File:Altavist...
- mastercheph 2y ago
  Google

thsksbd 2y ago

You mean a world where people still knew how to use a library catalog, still relied on more than one source of information and curious crazy tid bits are still out there? The internet is boring. And the trash is still there. Its just become reputable instead.

linsomniac 2y ago
There's a lot to unpack here... Can you expand on how a card catalog improved the world? As a kid I used the card catalog a lot, both the physical version and the later electronic versions. Full text search definitely leads to pulling in information from a wider selection of sources. I remember a lot of stratification of news sources pre-Google (which news channel you watched, which papers/magazines you read). Did Google cause reliance on one source of information, or does Google simply exist in a world where people tend towards echo chambers? How would Alta Vista have improved that?
- jareklupinski 2y ago
  > how a card catalog improved the world i was lamenting the library recently and remembered how books were organized on shelves using the dewey decimal system this meant that if you knew of one book that has something you're looking for, you can find all the _other_ books about the same topic right next to the first book, even if you knew nothing about the contents of the related books
  - staticman2 2y ago
    Libraries still exist and sort books like that, don't they?
    - yencabulator 2y ago
      I believe the point is that the commenter wishes more things operated like that, where adjacent items were related and likely of similar quality, not just boosted with money and SEO trickery.

vouaobrasil 2y ago

Yes, I did! I used to use Yahoo search where the results were more hand-curated and people did not create websties for intensive commercial purposes with useless SEO fluff like it is today.

linsomniac 2y ago
I have been thinking a lot about Yahoo (pre yahoo-search, largely) lately. I don't fully understand how we lost the curated catalog, especially considering the success of Wikipedia. The latter demonstrates users willingness to curate knowledge bases... We have "awesome" lists, but I rarely seem to use them.
- xnx 2y ago
  Yahoo directory was largely pay-to-play and very affected by proto-SEOs trying to game the system for direct traffic or PageRank value. Collaborative directories like dmoz.org suffered the same fate before shutting down.
  - A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
    Pay-to-play is actually a very decent business model for a directory, though. Pay a one-time fee, establish that you're a legitimate business or website, undergo a quality assessment, and you're in. There's no paying for extra promotion, e.g. with ads, and website owners don't need to warp their sites in anticipation of what they think the search engine wants. (Which often results in a decrease in usability, e.g. all of those recipe sites with low-quality 2000-word essays before they get to the actual recipe.) It's a more level playing field, and it's intrinsically more human-friendly.