Comments on: MS + Yahoo = We are Doomed

By: lylebot

lylebot — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:23:49 +0000

Just wanted to add one more thing. Yahoo is a big supporter of its researchers and scientists publishing. You can go to the ACM Digital Library and search for papers published by Yahoo scientists, and while you won’t find one that explicitly describes how Yahoo’s engines work, you can probably piece together quite a bit by reading a few of them. Google hires Ph.D. computer scientists as engineers, essentially, and it “does not encourage publishing” (their words, told to me when I asked, and understood by me to mean “frowns on or actively discourages publishing”). Yahoo and Microsoft both have a much better track record than Google on publishing the science done there.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:21:17 +0000

Lylebot: First, I’d like to throw my bid in for at least some regular expression use, and it is not even close to impossible (Extended may be).

Google is using Python, and this would be possible. I suspect that much of the stuff Google does with their data is done with regular expressions.

But the main point: The issue with their corporate policy, do you not remember the Chinese Dissident issue? Yahoo unnecessarily handed information over to the Chinese government that led to the arrest and torture of several dissidents.

By: lylebot

lylebot — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:08:57 +0000

I have pretty close ties to Yahoo. I don’t use it as my search engine, but I have spent some time there (on a paid basis) and I have many friends working in their research labs and applied research labs.

I’m sure you are aware of their highly questionable corporate practices.

I am not. What do you mean?

it looks like Yahoo was actually using Altavista as it’s search engine.

Yahoo was using Google as its search engine from 2002 to 2004. Before that they were using Inktomi, which they bought in 2002 (and which became the core of their own search engine).

That their search engine was, and is, so inferior as to be completely blown away by Google’s algorithms

Do you have data to back this up, or is it just your anecdotal opinion? There are tried-and-true means of measuring search engine performance, and they generally suggest that while Google is indeed better, it doesn’t blow anyone else away.

I will go with the engine that allows use of extended regular expressions.

Pretty close to impossible on the amount of data they have. They’re not using grep…

It’s a desperate play by a company who couldn’t evolve.

I basically agree with this.

By: Enoch

Enoch — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:36:39 +0000

Alta Vista was the best and its search language is still better than google’s. The “near” function alone makes it very powerful.

By: jj

jj — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:20:59 +0000

@Jason #11 – Babelfish was one of the best things to come from Altavista, especially back when it first came out (also I love the name, I always wanted one of those!) But as for yahoo, it looks like Yahoo was actually using Altavista as it’s search engine. (That is, once ti went to a search engine, started as a directory). So I guess they weren’t very different (just the interface)

By: JJ

JJ — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:16:30 +0000

t comes on every windows loaded computer (except for in GB now, right?)

Well, at first MS was planning on removing IE from all windows 7 copies going to the EU, due to litigation (not too sure if it was EU only but they were not being sued here in the states).
http://gizmodo.com/5290032/microsoft-volunteers-ie-removal-from-windows-7-to-appease-eu
But since this would cause problems for many, especially novice users (as there would be NO browser, and if this was you’re only computer, and you were unfamiliar with using FTP, you’d be screwed) so MS decided to give a “choice” between browsers (IE is still the default though)
http://gizmodo.com/5322453/microsoft-gives-europeans-choice-of-browser-instead-of-none-by-default

By: LightningRose

LightningRose — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:12:14 +0000

Doridoidae @#7,
Yahoo photos was shutdown after they acquired Flickr, which is arguably the best photo website available today.

By: Jason Thibeault

Jason Thibeault — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:12:11 +0000

JJ — I had a brief flirtation with Altavista, but mostly just used their Babelfish. Somehow Yahoo kept me coming back. I don’t even know if it was because their search engine was more relevant (which I strongly doubt), or because the side services offered were useful, or because I just had unearned brand loyalty, but it was my homepage for a good while.

None of that mattered when Google took over. It still owns, at providing relevant results.

By: jj

jj — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:10:48 +0000

Hm, didn’t realize that by 1996 Altavista was providing the search for Yahoo! until 2004 (by then it was owned by Yahoo)

By: marilove

marilove — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:06:16 +0000

Considering even my almost 80 year old grandmother knows what I’m talking about when I say, “I’ll just google that!” I SERIOUSLY doubt Google is going to have much trouble if Yahoo/Microsoft do this.

I use gmail, google docs, their search engine, google maps (on my cell phone, too!), among other google services, as does almost every single person I know. Almost everyone I know uses gmail.

Yahoo/Microsoft are trying sooo hard, but it’ll never work.