5 ms·
The reason it's hard to compete in search engines is that an MVP is pretty tough. If you can't type in [espn] and get to ESPN, then your search engine hasn't hi
by lacker 14y ago
The reason it's hard to compete in search engines is that an MVP is pretty tough. If you can't type in [espn] and get to ESPN, then your search engine hasn't hit minimum viable product yet. But it's not that easy to get to the point where these "navigational" searches work. You probably can't do it with just a few people and a few months. It requires millions of up-front investment, like Cuil or Blekko.
So, if you want to build a new search engine, you need a more radical vision for what you are leaving out. Either you are leaving out the vast majority of the internet, or you are leaving out the vast majority of queries. Focusing on the areas where the press has dinged Google like privacy or an API won't get you there.
- alphazulu 14y agoTHIS. Don't try to out-Google Google. Think different, be different. Radically different. Either that or punch through the market with one, extremely well done feature (i.e. local search, photo search etc) ala Crossing the Chasm strategy. Be so good that nobody can ignore you.
- orangethirty 14y agoFor the first months (years?), it will be exclusive for hackers. Thus the curl approach to invites. Non-hackers wont get what curl is.
- ElliotH 14y agoAnd those of us who cba to leave our browsers will quickly spoof our user agent and get an invite anyway.
- orangethirty 14y agoI know that. It is merely a filter to get the right people, not a wall.
- lacker 14y agoBeing exclusive to hackers doesn't really help. Hackers still sometimes want to search for [espn]. You have to either drop a lot of web pages, or drop a lot of queries.