• On The Insider: Judge Bans Real Housewives Sex Tape
August 19, 2008 11:50 AM PDT

Microsoft sees tailored search as way to pierce Google's armor

by Stephen Shankland

SAN JOSE, Calif.--Microsoft believes it's found a way to gain an edge against Google's dominant search engine: a deeper understanding of what people are searching for and what's on Web pages.

Search Engine Strategies

Specifically, the company believes examining a full sequence of user queries can lead to more useful results. Today, the company only keeps track of the immediately prior search, but often users use search engines to explore subject areas broadly, said Satya Nadella, senior vice president of Microsoft's search, portal and advertising platform group, at the Search Engine Strategies conference here.

"I believe this notion of understanding user intent--being able to analyze (search queries) and come up with search patterns and use them to shape the search experience--is one of the most important areas for us," Nadella said.

Many searches are quick operations to get to a specific site, but Microsoft is eying the in-depth operation search has become for many. Half of search queries at Microsoft's search site are part of a 30-minute session spent searching and checking Web sites, and at some point in that half-hour span Microsoft should be able to depart from "one-size-fits-all" search results to a more carefully tailored response, he said.

Of course, that kind of deeper analysis of people's search behavior--which presumably could be accompanied by more carefully targeted and perhaps higher-priced advertisements--could also raise hackles. Basing search ads on a few keywords typed into a search engine is less intrusive than basing them on an entire history of online behavior. Behavioral targeting of ads, though a concept that covers a broad spectrum of possibilities, is under increasing scrutiny.

Satya Nadella, senior vice president of Microsoft's search, portal and advertising platform group

Satya Nadella, senior vice president of Microsoft's search, portal and advertising platform group

(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET News)

Microsoft, which trails leader Google and second-place Yahoo, was thwarted in its effort to get ahead in the search market by acquiring either all of Yahoo or just its search assets. But Nadella takes the long view, arguing Microsoft only started its online search effort in earnest four and a half years ago. The Redmond, Wash.-based company will keep plugging away, trying to take advantage of "inflection points" where search technology changes significantly, he added.

"If we come again and again with innovation that matters, we will have the opportunity to grow our volume and our share," Nadella said. "We made decent progress but we have a ways to go."

A long way indeed. In a meeting with reporters, Nadella said he wasn't happy with Microsoft's share of search queries that's less than 10 percent. And upper management's deep interest in better results is evident not just from the Yahoo acquisition turmoil but from the company's successful acquisition of Powerset, a search start-up banking on natural language processing as a way to better understand Web page content and search queries.

"Bill has definitely not retired for us," said Scott Prevost, Powerset's general manager and product director, referring to Chairman Bill Gates' move to part-time work at Microsoft. Prevost also spoke during the meeting with reporters.

Powerset figures prominently in Microsoft's search work. The start-up's technology only made it as far as indexing and searching Wikipedia, but results, even from that relatively narrow domain, will be used to augment Microsoft's search results, Nadella said.

"You'll see us integrating that with Wikipedia articles," he said.

The Powerset technology can be used to better understand people's search queries and the Web pages that Microsoft's search engine indexes, Nadella added. "We think that tech, natural-language processing, is going to be a very critical way for us to improve relevance further, at scale," he said.

Google is of course a formidable competitor with a massive and fast-moving research effort. And while it may design its search engine for the broadest use possible, it certainly can take a user's search history into account. The optional Web History feature can adjust search results according to users' earlier practices. However, Udi Manber, head of Google's search quality work, said earlier this year that personalization has only a minor effect on the ordering of search results.

Microsoft has other ways it hopes to diverge from the one-size-fits-all approach. For example, Nadella said the company also hopes to redirect the search experience away from a generic interface depending on subcategories people are using, Nadella said, pointing to travel, health, images, and video. "These are the domains where we have domain-specific task-oriented" interfaces, he said.

The company also has ambitions for changing the business behind search, he said, pointing as one example to the Microsoft Live Cashback program, which converts the fees that search advertisers pay to Microsoft into rebates for people who buy products through the search mechanism.

Another business change coming for the search industry overall is the move toward more sophisticated payment schemes. Currently, advertisers pay search engines for ads when searchers click those ads, a model called cost per click (CPC), but the payment model will shifting toward cost per action (CPA), Nadella predicted. CPA requires more activity on the part of a searcher--registering for a service or buying a product, for example--before payment is made.

"CPC is fantastic. It will remain. But there will be additional things (such as) CPA," Nadella said. "We think that will bring next level of efficiency to the search marketplace. We're very bullish about that."

Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Recent posts from Digital Media
Seattle fire knocks out service to Bing Travel, other sites
DOJ opens formal investigation into Google Books settlement
Ad industry groups agree to privacy guidelines
Microsoft chucks vomit ad
Jammie Thomas will appeal, lawyer says
Usenet.com ruling, a 'whittling down' of Betamax defense
Microsoft resorts to vomit to market IE 8
RIAA triumphs in Usenet copyright case
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (36 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by The_Decider August 19, 2008 12:14 PM PDT
Reasoning out intent in a software system is simply not possible.

This shows how little MS knows about engineering software. They don't have a search engine that works very well, they need to fix that before going after such a radical concept. It would be like making a desktop application more flexible in design before the damn thing works properly. That would add more bugs and more issues before it is even usable.

In other words, yet again MS is ass backwards.
Reply to this comment
by gp2792 August 19, 2008 1:32 PM PDT
Oh, I don't know, the history of your cnet posts shows a high probability (read 100%) that you will post a string of negative attacks against msft for every article cnet produces. Based on a history of your activity at cnet, a search engine could easily intuit that you would like to find more half-baked arguments against msft so that you can parrot them in other forums. "Reasoning out intent" isn't too far of a stretch, is it? I am sure such technology could "reason out" your response...ms shill, perhaps? Or will you dig deeper in your bag of insults? Better consult some other linux lemmings to craft your response.
by Seaspray0 August 19, 2008 1:50 PM PDT
Yet another shill comment from someone who has admitted to being a MS hater.
by Vegaman_Dan August 19, 2008 2:46 PM PDT
I was going to reply... but I think gp2782 just totally mocked you with your own comments better than anything anyone could say. Wow.


Outside of that, predictive / proactive inquiries based on history of prior visits isn't new. Amazon, Ebay, Google, and yes, even Apple does this in iTunes. I don't think anyone has taken it to this level before which should be interesting. Is this an invasion of privacy or a useful tool? Time will tell. Unfortunately bigots like you will not be willing to open your minds long enough to accept the concept of a new idea.

by AdamMoore August 19, 2008 12:24 PM PDT
Now if another company said they would try harder, people would be donating them money. People have little faith in Microsoft, for about as little reason, as well. Sorry to say Microsoft is everywhere, and they didn't grow by being worthless. I hope they do well.

I wish I was the world's best programmer/analyst as well, so I could write more threads on this board, and also speak so low about the worlds largest software engineering firms. If only.
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 12:52 PM PDT
Depends on the company. If IBM or Intel said as much, they'd not see a dime.

Folks have little faith in Microsoft because on balance, they've not done a whole lot to earn faith.
by Vegaman_Dan August 19, 2008 2:48 PM PDT
Penguinisto wrote:


"Folks have little faith in Microsoft because on balance, they've not done a whole lot to earn faith."


Unfortunately Microsoft has plenty of ignorant people spouting unbased nonsense as well. Just trying to keep up with correcting the FUD that is spread is becoming a full time job it seems. Even when MS does something good, it's quickly bashed and turned into a hatefest about why they failed to do it earlier, how bad it is, why XYZ is better, etc. All those comments and posts that overlook that in the end, the product in question actually just works.

by dinojr August 19, 2008 4:26 PM PDT
Microsoft was convicted of illegally leveraging their OS monopoly to crush Netscape and got off easy because the case's judge was a moron. After gaining their ill-gotten web browser monopoly, they rested on their laurels by disbanding their Internet Explorer development team. End result? No competitors and we're stuck with their crappy browser for 5 years until Mozilla finally threatened them with Firefox.

Then there's Linux. With their OS monopoly threatened, Microsoft spreads blatant FUD about Linux and the GPL for years. When their lies fail to stop Linux, they very transparently try to fracture the open source community with their Shared Source and OOXML initiatives.

I used to admire Microsoft in the 90s but these are the kind of shenanigans that drove me and many others to distrust them. They had me, then lost me and I ain' going back.
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 8:05 PM PDT
@Vegaman_Dan: Vista promised a shedload of features, but delivered nearly none of them (and then insulted the user with a ton of bloat and a complete disregard for compatibility as users were promised).

...and I don't even have to touch on the other more tangible reasons that even the industry and users alike have no faith in MSFT, like:

PlaysForSure
OS/2
WindowsDefender
HD-DVD
WindowsME
Palladium

...and much, much more...

(and you expect anyone to trust, let alone partner with Microsoft out of their own free will? Err, not unless there's a decent paycheck involved, boyo. :) ).
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 12:42 PM PDT
Err, a question: Google already does this on a macro scale (correlating search results by IP addy to better contextualize search results), and Firefox already does this on a micro scale (e.g. "The Awesome Bar")...

...where does Microsoft fit into this? More importantly, how do they do it without running into a brick wall of privacy issues?

/P
Reply to this comment
by CTO_Dude August 19, 2008 1:15 PM PDT
How is it that Google does this today but Microsoft cant do it without infringement? Completely contradictory! (as usual)
by Seaspray0 August 19, 2008 1:49 PM PDT
A worthy comment, Penquisto. Totaly unbiased, and relevant. You've changed for the better. I would be interested in hearing the answer to your question as well.
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 4:57 PM PDT
@CTO_Dude (or whatever your account name is this week): I never said anything about "infringement" at all. I said "privacy issues".

Microsoft, while vague about their actual plans, apparently wants to cover it from end-to-end - to combine the two results. Now... how do you do that without coming into a bucketload of privacy issues.

Meanwhile, for a majority of users, Microsoft can (and likely does) already gather data on the user's machine (via Windows/WGA), the user's browser (via IE), and now from the default (on MSIE) search engine. Come back and shout your anguish when Google has its own browser and operating system, and maybe I can then agree to your cries of "contradiction!".

@Seaspray: I'm (strangely enough) not a Fanboy - I merely have my preferences. and happily state them in a straightforward manner. That said, I always strive to stick to the facts when I state anything not clearly labeled as personal opinion.

Besides, this has bigger implications than Microsoft, Google, or any one company. Question is: Where do you draw the line at respecting privacy?
by adham21 August 19, 2008 12:49 PM PDT
"a deeper understanding of what people are searching for" really?? How about getting THE BASICS right first? Try this little experiment, search for this sentence ".net framework 3.5 service pack 1 download" on both google and Live Search and compare the google results to the LS ones. Until MS can even index and properly search THEIR OWN WEBSITE, they should refrain from making any radical statements about future search technology.
Reply to this comment
by CTO_Dude August 19, 2008 1:15 PM PDT
@The_Decider

Perhaps not possible for the likes of you constant Microsoft naysayers. However, recognizing that software is only as smart as the people writing the code, it certainly CAN be created and done better than it is today. BTW: Google does NOT do contextual search. As a matter of fact their core algorithm hasnt changed much since inception.
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 8:13 PM PDT
I wouldn't be so sure as to what Google does and does not do. After all, their algorithm is proprietary, and there's a whole industry which has sprung up (see also the acronym "SEO") devoted to trying to figure them out.
by Seaspray0 August 19, 2008 1:57 PM PDT
Personally, I think they'd do better integrating the search where it would do them the most good - into the engine of SQL - and let the applications programmers have at it. Question: what are we searching? Answer: data. And where is alot of data stored? In a database. If you can provide a powerful search built into the front end of that database, you have a powerful edge. I'd say they are on the right track but the wrong path on this one.
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 4:57 PM PDT
JET already exists in Windows, no?
by tacit August 19, 2008 2:00 PM PDT
They keep using that word "innovation." I do not think it means what they think it means.
Reply to this comment
by i_made_this August 19, 2008 2:20 PM PDT
Search advances will come little from any particular talent at computer programming, as such. I figure the only place advances can come from would be to apply social psychology theory to hierarchy output better than Google's doing it now. AI can handle the iterations as it's doing now - that's no trick - but Microsoft must build smarter algorithms to pinpoint output more accurately on the first page. Chit chat about IP addresses and cross-session, saved personality compilers are an absurd concept, as Google knew from the beginning. Most desktop terminals are shared by quite a few people in the course of a year - in many cases, even hundreds or thousands of people, each one arguably a non-repeater - so Microsoft cannot hack the illusive user it's trying to dossier. The best Microsoft can do is to assume that user from *A* @ IP# @ this moment maybe profileable for improved search only during that user's live session at that terminal - and that once that user logs off, that user will never originate from that IP# and at that terminal again. Good luck, Redmond. I am so happy that you seem so uninterested in acquiring Yahoo!
Reply to this comment
by Vegaman_Dan August 19, 2008 2:53 PM PDT
Are you suggesting that the search engine collects search inquiries and starts to optimize results based more on the inquiry patterns than individual requests? If enough people are requesting information about Mac and cheese, would the person who just searches for Mac alone get hits for dinner meals or computer products? It's an interesting notion. I can see pros and cons to it. If you build up a huge database of just inquiries, I bet you could run a search engine on that alone to dig through the inquiries and start building predictive queries ahead of time. That could result in either better and more intuitive results, or helplessly bury you in unrelated results.


I'm not sure which works better. I can see some advantages to both.

by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 8:08 PM PDT
Err, I can easily see where cookies (and cookies that an IE user cannot erase or remove) come into the picture.
by jesseisrad August 19, 2008 2:20 PM PDT
I can see it now. Guy at work pulls up MS Search to test some recent SEO changes for a client. Before he even completes the search, the results for cosplay anime porn are already rolling in. MS knows him THAT well...
Reply to this comment
by Vegaman_Dan August 19, 2008 2:55 PM PDT
What's that? You want work related search results, Bob? No... we know you really want to see anime cat girls with big glasses, don't you? That's right, forget work, stare at the catgirls. Oh, and buy these DVD's while you're at it. You want the DVD's...


You've got a good point though for systems predicting people too well. :)

by ralfthedog August 19, 2008 2:56 PM PDT
Honestly, I don't think Microsoft has the talent working for them to pull off search. Honestly, I think they know the only way they can get the talent is to buy another company that does. If Microsoft were to purchase a company that had such talent, the best people at that company would walk out the door the next day.

How hard would it be for a Yahoo programmer to get out of a Yahoo contract if Microsoft purchased the company? An argument could be made that by it's very nature, working for Microsoft is a morally untenable position.
Reply to this comment
by a85 August 19, 2008 3:14 PM PDT
I love it. So many people make disparaging comments about MS trying to improve their search engine. The fact is we need competition. People should be supporting them. Google processes around 85-90% of searches, but people don't see the problem. Just as MS's OS dominance stifled competition, so too is Google's ubiquitousness in search. Wake up; competition should be encouraged.
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto August 19, 2008 8:09 PM PDT
I have no problems with Microsoft wanting to actually improve a product. I just want to know how someone who also happens to own the majority OS and browser will improve their search engine without totally wrecking a user's privacy.
by gp2792 August 20, 2008 8:57 AM PDT
Peng
I would have to guess that there are extremely tight rules on what data can be gathered and how that data can be used..i.e. can't use data gathered for one purpose for another purpose...that said, since you question lumping together search data and OS derived data, do you have an issue with an advertiser and search provider housing documents for businesses?...i.e.google and google docs\spreadsheets. Seems to me that scenario has a much higher chance of invading more than just privacy.
by Lancelot9201 August 19, 2008 4:17 PM PDT
M$ needs to get any software that includes the term "2008" in its name working right before allocating the resources required to take on someone like Google - Do I even need to mention the amount of work that "Vista" still requires before it's ready for the Enterprise.
Reply to this comment
by sexy_sofie August 19, 2008 5:44 PM PDT
i feel defrauded, decieved, and ripped off by microsoft. that is why i switched to linux. apparently they are still trying to decieve me. that is why i avoid anything related to microsoft like the plague. i can't believe i waste time reading these stupid microsoft articles. i get so angry when i do. how is it possible for this company to be so pathetic and stay in business?
Reply to this comment
by PCfan14 August 19, 2008 7:04 PM PDT
Stop Picking on Microsoft..
I bet that everybody on this website is using or has used something by microsoft, and
liked it..
Reply to this comment
by RompStar_420 August 19, 2008 7:43 PM PDT
Hell, No, Right now, I am using G5 PowerMac, And FireFox.

I use this computer every day, for the past 3 years, that's when I dumped and broke up with Microsoft.

In the server room, it's all Ubuntu Server 64bit. I do have a XP loaded laptop that I use once in a while and a 64-bit XP Pro workstation that I use once in a blue moon too.
Reply to this comment
by RompStar_420 August 19, 2008 7:46 PM PDT
I lost all ambitions to even buy new hardware, so I keep all my older hardware, if I buy anything it's all non-ms. When MS puts out a good stable OS, I'll take a look at it.

Back in the day when I used Windows 2000, I actually liked it. About a year after I bought my Mac I installed a a virus, never found any. On Linux I scan Viruses for fun, only found some viruses that I downloaded for PC software.
Reply to this comment
by magicmaster August 19, 2008 9:37 PM PDT
Until I could properly search the content within microsoft's websites, I would not even bother switching to Live search. Hey, by the way, I search microsoft's websites using Google! Does that make you happy, MS?
Reply to this comment
by Lee_Lorenzen August 21, 2008 1:12 PM PDT
Stephen,

As described here, http://kallout.blogspot.com/2008/08/search-is-not-zero-sum-game.html, Aaron Goldman of SearchMedia Insider makes the point that Search is Not a Zero-Sum Game.

This means that Microsoft can win by partnering or acquiring companies that create alternative starting points for search. Aaron describes our product KallOut as one of these "alternative starting points for search." Innovations in how search is invoked, how search suggestions are presented and how search results are displayed are the key to lowering the barriers to search that keep the number of searches per user at a fairly low number of only 2 per day per US user.

Our early data at KallOut shows that the "selection-based search" category that KallOut is creating may be one of the keys to massively growing the Search Query Pie which is currently 100% focused on "browser-based search."

Thanks,
Lee Lorenzen
CEO, KallOut -- a new way to search using only your mouse
Reply to this comment
by MattMcGowan September 2, 2008 12:19 PM PDT
Great piece... apps like FareCast continue to add value and should Microsoft execute on enough of them... who knows what might happen. The only guarantee is that the Search landscape will continue to change in the years to come.

Thank you for attending SES San Jose - your participation helped make it successful.
Reply to this comment
(36 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement
Click Here

Making sense of Windows 7 upgrades

faq The basics and the fine print on Microsoft's options for those eyeing the next operating system from Redmond.
• Full Windows 7 coverage

Road Trip 2009: Big Sky Country

CNET News reporter Daniel Terdiman takes his car full of gadgets to the Rockies and the Great Plains in search of tech, science, nature, and more.
• America's Fortress: Cheyenne Mountain

About Digital Media

The Web is now the place to go for news and entertainment. Look here for the latest on blogs, music, video, virtual worlds, social networking and more.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Digital Media topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right