• Search 2.0 vs Google’s Goliath

    first_imgrichard macmanus The Animas Weblog has written a couple ofinteresting posts in response to Ebrahim Ezzy‘sSearch 2.0 posts, featured on Read/WriteWeb recently (part 1 and part 2). In the firstpost, Animas frames his argument as a David vs Goliath struggle (the search 2.0startups being, of course, David).OriginalimageHowever in the Gospel according to Animas, sadly David gets smashed by Goliath:“With few exceptions, I’m not convinced that any of the Search 2.0 companieshave any technology that creates a meaningful barrier to competition from traditionalengines.”In thefollow-up post, Animas looks at the search 2.0 things that Google is doing “under thehood”. Animas first argues that “Google’s ability to improve their search relevancein response to personalized usage data is pretty staggering.” He/she (the name of theAnimas blogger is unknown) then lists out the ways in which Google could alreadybe improving their search relevance:AdWords clickthrough data (all advertisers, all queries)Organic clickthroughdata (javascript redirection for select search users, myself included)AdWords conversion tracking data (transaction tracking pixel offered to AdWordsadvertisers)Toolbar data (anyone have stats on the number of toolbars currently installed?)GoogleAnalytics data (data for any websites participating in this free–for AdWordscustomers–program)Google CheckoutAlso mentioned is Google’s PersonalizedSearch. Animas notes, however, that social networking is something Google needs toimprove (a point also made recently in a CNET article entitled Google’s antisocial downside).Animas’ conclusion is that “Google is one step away from doing all of the things thatthe Search 2.0 companies in Ezzy’swriteup can do.”But actually, this was pretty much Ebrahim’s conclusion too. At the end of Part 2 ofEbrahim’s article was this statement:“While the intelligence required to conduct social search still resides in people, thekey to harnessing it lies in the network. TSEs have greater opportunities for traction,with their substantial user bases – a key ingredient of any social network.”Personally where I diverge from the Animas view is that I think the small search 2.0startups have every chance of discovering something that Google (or Yahoo or MSNor Ask) haven’t yet discovered. Just because Google has the technology and resources toimprove their search relevance, doesn’t necessarily mean they will.Also, how do we know that what Google has under the hood is the equal of what one or two of the newgeneration of search 2.0 companies have under their hoods?I asked Ebrahim what he thought about the Animas posts. His reply was that we’ve yetto see the PERFECT search 2.0 application. Ebrahim expects to see that by the end of theyear. Of course, I imagine he’s talking about his own search 2.0 startup Qube!But the point is: don’t count out David just yet 😉 Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Related Posts Tags:#search#web center_img Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Marketlast_img

    Categories: biewgzhy

    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *