4 ms·

It's a video demo of bing, a supersonic flyover of the features. The demo is obviously consumer oriented, but the teaser in interesting enough that I will give

by russell 17y ago

It's a video demo of bing, a supersonic flyover of the features. The demo is obviously consumer oriented, but the teaser in interesting enough that I will give it a try for my consumer searches. Recently my SO and I made a trip to Virginia and Washington for her daughter's wedding. We did a lot of tedious planning using Google. If bing can ease the process, I'll use it. Most of my searches are tech related. Google is pretty painful, but I hold little hope that bing is going to be my salvation. When in the name of <insert your favorite deity> is anyone going to implement HN-style modding for search results?

chanux 17y ago
duckduckgo.com the search engine recently featured on HN might help you.
nostrademons 17y ago
"When in the name of <insert your favorite deity> is anyone going to implement HN-style modding for search results?" Google already has it. Have you played with SearchWiki?
- anuraggoel 17y ago
  A user's SearchWiki rankings do not influence other users' search results. Yet. Till that happens, it's not really HN-style modding.
  - frossie 17y ago
    How about xmarks (used to be foxmarks)? They highlight search results depending on which of their users have bookmarked them (they are a bookmark sync service so they have access to that data). After all, bookmarking is a way of upmodding. http://www.xmarks.com/about/features/smarter_search http://www.xmarks.com/about/features/smarter_search
    - anuraggoel 17y ago
      Xmarks search is indeed a cool concept (much like delicious search), but I don't bookmark everything useful I find on the web - so bookmark-based search will never be quite as comprehensive. In a way, search engines already account for up-modding by factoring in which links you click on when you are given a page of search results. But you are more likely to click on results already at the top, so I wouldn't give too much weight to that information. The SearchWiki concept has a lot of potential if Google decides to go down that path though.
      - frossie 17y ago
        I agree that a bookmark based search will never be comprehensive. Neither will any other kind of social solution - I doubt anything will do sort of a search engine that looks at semantics. The real problem with SearchWiki (or other upvoting/downvoting) is that you keep going back to the search page while your search is failing. As soon as you click through and find the page that you want, you stop - you do what you wanted and get on with your life. Whereas if that is the page you need and bookmark it (granted your point that we don't bookmark everything), that is a true and accurate indicator of success. Since HN was explicitly mentioned upthread, it would be interesting to know how many people upvote/downvote stories (which you have to get back to the main page to do) versus comments (which are in your face in their totality when you are asked to vote). I can only speak for myself, but I vote on comments massively more often than I vote on stories, exactly for the reason I described. So in order for SearchWiki to really work for me, I want to express my happiness when I am viewing the target page, not the search page. (I am sure this can be accomplished in theory, I just don't think the support is currently there).
        derefr 17y ago
        How about a history-based search engine? A plugin that simply submits every link you visit (when your privacy features are off) to the aggregator, along with how long you kept each page open before you closed it/surfed away. I know it would be incredibly invasive, but it would basically be a Nielsen Box for the Internet.
  - gojomo 17y ago
    I wouldn't be so sure SearchWiki has no influence. It's data; Google has it; they didn't get where they are by ignoring free user-behavior data. It's not explicit, just like all sorts of other ranking details and polcies are secret, to keep manipulators in the dark as long as possible.
    - anuraggoel 17y ago
      They explicitly state they don't use SearchWiki to influence ranking right now. From http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2008/11/google-searchwiki-launched.html http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2008/11/google-searchwiki-l...: "At this time we aren't using SearchWiki to influence ranking but it is easy to see how that could happen in the future," says Marissa Mayer. I suppose they are going to wait until they get a meaningful amount of user data before they start using it.
      - gojomo 17y ago
        It's already 6 months "in the future" from that statement. Google also didn't get where they are by waiting indefinitely to do 'easy' things.
potatolicious 17y ago
I like what I see so far - the usability of Kayak and its similar aggregators is pretty poor at times, and recently the quality of their results have been dropping precipitously. If MS can step in to fill this void... oh boy. I think MS has something worthwhile here - they've realized that people are looking for information, not links, and if they can get good data together, they stand a good chance of beating Google at the search engine game, without ever building a traditional search engine.
whatusername 17y ago
stackoverflow maybe? Only a Q&A - but the up/down voting on answers is kinda nice.

by russell 17y ago

chanux 17y ago

duckduckgo.com the search engine recently featured on HN might help you.

nostrademons 17y ago

"When in the name of <insert your favorite deity> is anyone going to implement HN-style modding for search results?" Google already has it. Have you played with SearchWiki?

anuraggoel 17y ago
A user's SearchWiki rankings do not influence other users' search results. Yet. Till that happens, it's not really HN-style modding.
- frossie 17y ago
  How about xmarks (used to be foxmarks)? They highlight search results depending on which of their users have bookmarked them (they are a bookmark sync service so they have access to that data). After all, bookmarking is a way of upmodding. http://www.xmarks.com/about/features/smarter_search http://www.xmarks.com/about/features/smarter_search
  - anuraggoel 17y ago
    Xmarks search is indeed a cool concept (much like delicious search), but I don't bookmark everything useful I find on the web - so bookmark-based search will never be quite as comprehensive. In a way, search engines already account for up-modding by factoring in which links you click on when you are given a page of search results. But you are more likely to click on results already at the top, so I wouldn't give too much weight to that information. The SearchWiki concept has a lot of potential if Google decides to go down that path though.
    - frossie 17y ago
      I agree that a bookmark based search will never be comprehensive. Neither will any other kind of social solution - I doubt anything will do sort of a search engine that looks at semantics. The real problem with SearchWiki (or other upvoting/downvoting) is that you keep going back to the search page while your search is failing. As soon as you click through and find the page that you want, you stop - you do what you wanted and get on with your life. Whereas if that is the page you need and bookmark it (granted your point that we don't bookmark everything), that is a true and accurate indicator of success. Since HN was explicitly mentioned upthread, it would be interesting to know how many people upvote/downvote stories (which you have to get back to the main page to do) versus comments (which are in your face in their totality when you are asked to vote). I can only speak for myself, but I vote on comments massively more often than I vote on stories, exactly for the reason I described. So in order for SearchWiki to really work for me, I want to express my happiness when I am viewing the target page, not the search page. (I am sure this can be accomplished in theory, I just don't think the support is currently there).
      - derefr 17y ago
        How about a history-based search engine? A plugin that simply submits every link you visit (when your privacy features are off) to the aggregator, along with how long you kept each page open before you closed it/surfed away. I know it would be incredibly invasive, but it would basically be a Nielsen Box for the Internet.
- gojomo 17y ago
  I wouldn't be so sure SearchWiki has no influence. It's data; Google has it; they didn't get where they are by ignoring free user-behavior data. It's not explicit, just like all sorts of other ranking details and polcies are secret, to keep manipulators in the dark as long as possible.
  - anuraggoel 17y ago
    They explicitly state they don't use SearchWiki to influence ranking right now. From http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2008/11/google-searchwiki-launched.html http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2008/11/google-searchwiki-l...: "At this time we aren't using SearchWiki to influence ranking but it is easy to see how that could happen in the future," says Marissa Mayer. I suppose they are going to wait until they get a meaningful amount of user data before they start using it.
    - gojomo 17y ago
      It's already 6 months "in the future" from that statement. Google also didn't get where they are by waiting indefinitely to do 'easy' things.

potatolicious 17y ago

I like what I see so far - the usability of Kayak and its similar aggregators is pretty poor at times, and recently the quality of their results have been dropping precipitously. If MS can step in to fill this void... oh boy. I think MS has something worthwhile here - they've realized that people are looking for information, not links, and if they can get good data together, they stand a good chance of beating Google at the search engine game, without ever building a traditional search engine.

whatusername 17y ago

stackoverflow maybe? Only a Q&A - but the up/down voting on answers is kinda nice.