Google Instant Announced 408
Posted
by
CmdrTaco
from the thats-faster-than-before-then-right dept.
from the thats-faster-than-before-then-right dept.
GCPSoft writes with this quote from a Google announcement:
"Google Instant is a new search enhancement that shows results as you type. We are pushing the limits of our technology and infrastructure to help you get better search results, faster. Our key technical insight was that people type slowly, but read quickly, typically taking 300 milliseconds between keystrokes, but only 30 milliseconds (a tenth of the time!) to glance at another part of the page. This means that you can scan a results page while you type."
Wasteful requests. (Score:4, Interesting)
Our key technical insight was that people type slowly, but read quickly, typically taking 300 milliseconds between keystrokes
I think what they meant to say there is that there was a group at Google that had nothing better to do than make this happen.
All that instant searching thing can be helpful at times, but it can also be wasteful of bandwidth, CPU resources, etc. The only place were I've found it essential is on youtube search on my bluray player where I don't have a keyboard to type letters, it can savea A LOT of time. Of course, I normally type 80 words a minute.
It's live now, and (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It works for Google (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's just pray Slashdot never instates a "post as you type" feature.
Have you ever used talk (old command line program)? Could you imagine if the comments section was some kind of massive talk system. I wouldn't be surprised if someone is reading this thread right now who will go off and try to make it happen. I guess Wave was kinda like that.
Useful, for slow typists. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:5, Interesting)
On another note, a quick refresh rate can pull up some non-professional images if one isn't careful. For instance in typing latent dirichlet, 'la' pulled up a partially clothed/nude image of lady gaga.This might have been a bit awkward if safe-search wasn't on.
Re:Yeah it's crap. (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh yeah, amen brother. You know how many web pages now have images that are linked 1MB BMP files that could have been optimized down to 30k JPGs? Oh my god, and how many people now design sites assuming you've got a 1240 by 1024 monitor?
I still surf using a Pentium 3 and a CRT that doesn't support any more than 1024x768. Slowly but surely, I am being locked out of the web. I think it's high time to fire up the NeXT station, load up Omniweb and see what little still works.
What annoys me most is that the same kids making these enormous web errors tend to look at the internet mostly through their iPhones, and yet, they never "get" that there's a discrepancy. The current crop of 17yr olds is the stupidest generation since cavemen.
Oh yeah, and for the record... "Get off my lawn"
I prefer Google fresh brewed. (Score:3, Interesting)
Okay, what's different with this than having search results show up in the google bar on Firefox, IE or in my Android google widget?
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it just me, or was google instant available before the /. story about the google light-up-letters story even posted? :confused look:
Yes, it is surprisingly fast, and it is great for relieving boredom. For example, I started typing llll, lllll, llllll, lllllll, etc., to see how long a string of l's I could make before it said "Press enter to search" and stopped giving me results. It seems like I needed a string of about 30 L's. It looks like the cut-off is about 5,000 hits.
Re:Censored (Score:2, Interesting)
Nice catch - just tested it. :P
Keep typing a normal query string - it will keep updating the page as you go, but then add "porn" at the end and all the results suddenly vanish! Even with safe-search Off!
Also, max string length = 100 chars, over 100 chars you need to press "Search", same as with "porn"
Re:Ad revenue driver? (Score:5, Interesting)
Talking about ad revenue, where do those suggestions come from? I typed "s" and the first three suggestions I got: skype, staples, sears. "e" - ebay, espn, expedia. "m" - myspace, mapquest, msn. Randomly tried typing two letters: "be" - best buy, bed bath and beyond, bevmo. etc.
Wouldn't some common word or a name of a pop star or whatever be the most likely thing people will search for rather than almost exclusively company names? Weird.
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:2, Interesting)
Ah, but I wasn't signed in =)
Does google roll out to some IP blocks early, as well? Or randomly to some "users" as marked by cookie signatures?
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Easy Fix For This (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:3, Interesting)
(Note: I'm not getting Google Instant yet, just ye olde fashioned guess-ahead autocompletion.)
When this was first rumored, I warned that "child por(traits)" might be unsafe to search for with this system, since it might guess along the way that you were looking for something... you shouldn't. Apparently they anticipated this, because the several autocompletion possibilities they offer for "child po" disappear altogether when you change that to "child por" (including "child portraits", even though it still matches).
ADD for the modern age (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:1, Interesting)
Or.. you could go to translate.google.com where I had no fade-in? But yeah.. i guess that would make too much sense..
Re:You know what would make it instant? (Score:3, Interesting)