4 ms·

Wasn't Cuil all about getting acceptable search results with less iron in the server room? If that's the case, no one should suspect they could beat Google. I

Wasn't Cuil all about getting acceptable search results with less iron in the server room? If that's the case, no one should suspect they could beat Google. I really haven't researched this, but I was under the impression they were hoping to get bought by a search giant looking to cut the operating overhead of their search division. If that's true, they don't care about uniques, and thats why they don't seem to be doing much (from the outside).

jonknee 18y ago
But the lack of users is a sign that they don't have acceptable results. I found the results to be horrible and like 99% of other people who tried it out won't be back.
- acgourley 18y ago
  Not true - their results would need to be substantially better than google to get people to navigate away from their iGoogle pages, add firefox search widgets, etc. Acceptable doesn't change user behavior.
- villageidiot 18y ago
  Agreed. But I sure wish I had their marketing team working for me - 5 million views the first month for a piece of crap like that is no small achievement.
  - jonknee 18y ago
    Too bad they weren't working for you because I think Cuil would be better off if no one had heard of them yet. Five million people now know they are really shitty. They have to work extra hard to get those people back. It's like having a store's grand opening event with empty shelves.
    - villageidiot 18y ago
      Yes, they blew a huge opportunity - they would have benefited from waiting. But, assuming they haven't burned through their $33 million nest egg, if they spend wisely they could bring their numbers up and at the same time work on improving their algorithms. They still potentially have a huge cushion. The judgement they have displayed until now does not bode well for a comeback however.
  - bbgm 18y ago
    One could just as easily argue that they are a victim of poor marketing. You can hype something up to a degree that you are setting yourself up for failure. Good marketing in the end is about setting expectations. The ones their marketing campaign set up would have been difficult to live up to under the best of circumstances.
    - villageidiot 18y ago
      Good point.
villageidiot 18y ago
Agreed. The idea that Cuil wanted nothing less than world domination and the death of Google is a naive assumption. None of the founders is going to go home hungry. You can be sure that the $33 million of VC will get put to good use - new swimming pools, private jets, etc.
- dotcoma 18y ago
  >You can be sure that the $33 million of VC will get put to good use - new swimming pools, private jets, etc. so, that's what you call "success"? It almost seems like, by your standards, Google's founders, who took in less money and worked their asses to buy themselves a plane after 10 years of incredibly hard work, are probably the ones who "failed"...
  - villageidiot 18y ago
    For that I wouldn't call them failures. Slow learners maybe.

jonknee 18y ago

But the lack of users is a sign that they don't have acceptable results. I found the results to be horrible and like 99% of other people who tried it out won't be back.

acgourley 18y ago
Not true - their results would need to be substantially better than google to get people to navigate away from their iGoogle pages, add firefox search widgets, etc. Acceptable doesn't change user behavior.
villageidiot 18y ago
Agreed. But I sure wish I had their marketing team working for me - 5 million views the first month for a piece of crap like that is no small achievement.
- jonknee 18y ago
  Too bad they weren't working for you because I think Cuil would be better off if no one had heard of them yet. Five million people now know they are really shitty. They have to work extra hard to get those people back. It's like having a store's grand opening event with empty shelves.
  - villageidiot 18y ago
    Yes, they blew a huge opportunity - they would have benefited from waiting. But, assuming they haven't burned through their $33 million nest egg, if they spend wisely they could bring their numbers up and at the same time work on improving their algorithms. They still potentially have a huge cushion. The judgement they have displayed until now does not bode well for a comeback however.
- bbgm 18y ago
  One could just as easily argue that they are a victim of poor marketing. You can hype something up to a degree that you are setting yourself up for failure. Good marketing in the end is about setting expectations. The ones their marketing campaign set up would have been difficult to live up to under the best of circumstances.
  - villageidiot 18y ago
    Good point.

villageidiot 18y ago

Agreed. The idea that Cuil wanted nothing less than world domination and the death of Google is a naive assumption. None of the founders is going to go home hungry. You can be sure that the $33 million of VC will get put to good use - new swimming pools, private jets, etc.

dotcoma 18y ago
>You can be sure that the $33 million of VC will get put to good use - new swimming pools, private jets, etc. so, that's what you call "success"? It almost seems like, by your standards, Google's founders, who took in less money and worked their asses to buy themselves a plane after 10 years of incredibly hard work, are probably the ones who "failed"...
- villageidiot 18y ago
  For that I wouldn't call them failures. Slow learners maybe.