Microsoft promises new search 'instant answers'

Microsoft's Live Search engine can provide what the company calls "instant answers" to various questions, and the company said on Wednesday it plans to expand the feature in the next month.

Current instant answers show up for some queries for encyclopedia facts, traffic, and horoscopes, according to a blog post from Live Search Product Manager Theo Vachovsky. He then offered a teaser for coming attractions: "Check this blog in a month to find out about other cool new instant answers on Live Search."

Microsoft declined to share details, but did confirm that "new instant answers features will be releasing in the next month."

Instant answers are designed to make the search engine more useful. "There are really just two types of searches: "Browse and seek" (and) "tell me now," Vachovsky said in the blog post. Instant answers are directed at the latter variety, such as "finding out how tall Mount Kilimanjaro is or who the 31st president of the U.S. was," he said.

Google and Yahoo often provide such information in their search results, too.

[hawkeyeaz1]

Once again, good idea Microsoft, but a day late and a dollar short.

[MagnoliaSouth]

It seems apparent to me that Microsoft is scared. All their recent "releases" seem to be Google competition related, which I find amusing. Steve Ballmer likes to bash Google for having only "one product" but isn't it funny how they're trying to run to catch up? They're offering cloud Office and desperately trying to improve their search. What Microsoft isn't getting, is that they weren't LISTENING to their users. That's where they screwed up. All their improvements now are too little, too late.

In this article (http://www.pandia.com/sew/675-microsoft-believes-google-is-a-one-hit-wonder.html), even Ballmer admits that he didn't see the "business model" in search. HELLO?! Users were screaming for a way to actually find something but did Microsoft listen? Ach! What a jerk he is.

There is really not much that Microsoft can ever do to win me back. It would have to be cold hard cash in my banking account or something. Seriously

[rapier1]

It wasn't that he wasn't aware that people wanted an effective search engine. They just didn't see how to make money with it. Which is the same problem lycos, altavista, and quite a few other search companies ran up against. He does go on to say that Google did figure out how to make money with search. What he didn't say is that no one before Google figured out how to do it effectively. I think that's in large part because Google saw search as a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.

[frasercrane]

No amount of money could win me over.

[slecalvez]

OUverture was the first company to understand search baed ads... Not Google, not by far. And yes, Google is still a One trick pony, but they are working hard to see if one of their many of their beta products can be monetized...

[EcuadorHomesOnline]

Frankly, for just plain searching, I usually use live.com - I typically (not always) get better results than I do with Google. But yes, Google has a much better business model. Yahoo is clearly the worst.

[t8]

I really hope consumers are not dumb enough to migrate to Microsoft's search.
The day that happens is the day that the Internet as a whole will bring out less innovation as Microsoft suck everything toward themselves and trash good tech that doesn't fit with their Windows vision.

Go Google.

[sds98]

At all I do not know what to tell in this occasion. Probably, what all will be better than now? And as a whole very much even it is informative!

[myles taylor]

I have two things to say about this:

Isn't that the model that Ask.com is based on?

I've given up on Microsoft actually giving us something that's as exciting as what they promised. There is always something.