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

Though it failed to buy its way into search through Yahoo, Microsoft believes close scrutiny of users' search history and other ideas will help it take on Google.

[The_Decider]

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.

[gp2792]

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.

[Seaspray0]

Yet another shill comment from someone who has admitted to being a MS hater.

[Vegaman_Dan]

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.

[AdamMoore]

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.

[Penguinisto]

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.

[Vegaman_Dan]

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.

[dinojr]

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.

[Penguinisto]

@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. :) ).

[Penguinisto]

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

[CTO_Dude]

How is it that Google does this today but Microsoft cant do it without infringement? Completely contradictory! (as usual)

[Seaspray0]

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.

[Penguinisto]

@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?

[adham21]

"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.

[CTO_Dude]

@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.

[Penguinisto]

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.

[Seaspray0]

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.

[Penguinisto]

JET already exists in Windows, no?

[tacit]

They keep using that word "innovation." I do not think it means what they think it means.

[i_made_this]

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!

[Vegaman_Dan]

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.

[Penguinisto]

Err, I can easily see where cookies (and cookies that an IE user cannot erase or remove) come into the picture.

[jesseisrad]

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...

[Vegaman_Dan]

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. :)

[ralfthedog]

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.

[a85]

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.

[Penguinisto]

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.

[gp2792]

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.

[Lancelot9201]

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.

[sexy_sofie]

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?

[PCfan14]

Stop Picking on Microsoft..
I bet that everybody on this website is using or has used something by microsoft, and
liked it..

[RompStar_420]

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.

[RompStar_420]

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.

[magicmaster]

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?

[Lee_Lorenzen]

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

[MattMcGowan]

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.