Yahoo! Releases New Search Tool 146
rcrc writes "Yahoo! Research Labs has recently released a new search tool that gives the opportunity to the user to choose whether they are looking for informational sites, or shopping sites, based upon a slider bar. This tool is currently in beta and more information can be found in the FAQ." From the article: "With the slider in the middle position, only the default Yahoo! Search sort is used. When the slider is at either end, only the secondary commercial/non-commercial sort is used. But when the slider is anywhere in between, Yahoo! Mindset presents a blend of the two sorting systems."
Does this mean no paid positioning? (Score:2)
Re:Does this mean no paid positioning? (Score:1)
Search for nvidia geforce with the slider full on research and the sponsors will always be "buy nvidia" shops. However, the search results were (from what I could tell) 100% reviews and such.
Pretty cool tool, surprised google didn't come out with this first!
Re:Does this mean no paid positioning? (Score:2)
That isn't evil, it's sense.
Re:Does this mean no paid positioning? (Score:1)
yahoo! Next (Score:2, Interesting)
http://next.yahoo.com/ [yahoo.com] this one is cool http://farechase.yahoo.com/ [yahoo.com] try this http://movies.yahoo.com/recommendations/ [yahoo.com]
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:2)
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:2)
The only thing I don't like about this one is that it is Yahoo doing it. They have too much presence and too much potential for data mining that the old single site I used to use didn't have.
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:2)
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:2)
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:2)
Roughly speaking, we classify the movies based on a variety of criteria, from actual attributes such as ratings, directors, actors and such to latent attributes such as whether the movies is thought provoking or thrilling.
We then create a profile of the user's preferences for those attributes.
Finally, we recommend items matching either the preferences that the user has specifically stated *or* items with a
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:2)
Really? I can't. Much easier for me to rate them on a scale, like NetFlix. Of course Netflix just proves people are morons because the only movies that get rated well are the cheesy mainstream crap. Good, unique, Indie stuff doesn't usually make the cut.
The other thing I don't like about the A or B method is what if both movies are good (or bad). Which did you like better, "Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle" or "Without a Paddle".
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:1)
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:3, Insightful)
Nonetheless, cool stuff.
Re:yahoo! Next (Score:1)
[SPOILER] Photoshop Lense Flare Plugin Warning!! (Score:2)
I only say this as some people have an aversion to that 35mm lense flare and can actually spasm and go into arrest when they see it.
Seriously, I don't need a site like this, I just go and see ANY movie that my girlfriend says "I don't want to see that one, how about this one" where the 'this one' is DIRE SHIT, and the one she doesn't want to see has been directed by covering a camera in chocolate, and throwi
Nice idea (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nice idea (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Nice idea (Score:1)
Great idea, poor execution (Score:2, Interesting)
(56) Cooperative Linux. Open this result in new window Main site. Publications. Development. Search. All the web. Only www.colinux.org. References. What is coLinux. If Linux runs on every architecture, why should another operating system be in its way? "
Re:Great idea, poor execution (Score:1)
What happens if... (Score:1)
Users first, instead of corporations? (Score:1)
Re:Users first, instead of corporations? (Score:1)
Re:Users first, instead of corporations? (Score:2)
Urgently needed (Score:1)
Re:Urgently needed (Score:2)
Re:Urgently needed (Score:2)
If you want to find out what the guide number is for the built-in flash on a Sony T7, for instance, to help somebody on a web forum who's asking for it, you might (after finding out that Sony doesn't make it easy to find their manuals online, if they're available at all on their own site) try searching Google for
'sony T7 flash "guide number"'.
And the first link you get is for a shopping site for a completely different camera. The second is from that same si
Another slider idea: Date vs. Page Rank (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Another slider idea: Date vs. Page Rank (Score:1)
http://news.google.com/ [google.com]
Re:Another slider idea: Date vs. Page Rank (Score:1)
This would give you a bit more flexibility as it would allow more current information to perculate to the top while supressing current, but non-relevant, information from appearing.
Re:Another slider idea: Date vs. Page Rank (Score:1)
search.msn.com let's you do this too.
In the "search builder" tab (subtab results ranking) there are slidebars that let you rank based on page freshness. Or just include it in your search: http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=linux+%7Bfrsh %3D100%7D&FORM=QBRE [msn.com] vs. http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=linux+%7Bfrsh %3D0%7D&FORM=QBRE [msn.com]
Specifying Date Range in Google (Score:2)
Sorting (Score:2)
But on another look at this, maybe it will work out well... sort of like filtering your search, but instead of eliminating things, it will move them to the bottom of the list, so you still have ALL items displayed, but
Great idea (if it works) (Score:1)
My big suggestion would be to have a customizable slider, where I could have one end of it say "research" and the other end say "let in all the assbags trying to sell me crap".
For those who want to learn how to search: (Score:1)
Re:For those who want to learn how to search: (Score:2)
Re:For those who want to learn how to search: (Score:1)
Re:For those who want to learn how to search: (Score:1)
Nuclear Weapons (Score:2, Funny)
Yahoo! blog (Score:1)
Blend? (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyone have a clue?
I would use one or the other but I can't think of any situation where I would prefer blending to doing two different searches.
Re:Blend? ... for profit! (Score:2)
Presumably if one wants an ad in the information-only (!) section one has to pay an extreme premium.
That's why blend the results!
I'm just suprised that they don't charge users for the information-only results.
Re:Blend? ... for profit! (Score:2)
You're thinking old world style advertising. Paid search is all about being able to target customers who actually want to buy something that you have to sell. I suspect the reality would be just the opposite of what you say. If I'm do an "research" search, what are the odds that I'm going to go buy something when I click on a link? Pretty rotten right? So, the advertiser doesn't get much value from it. I su
Re:Blend? ... for profit! (Score:2)
Plus, with Yahoo!/Overture's cost model, it's not just positioning that factors into the cost model, but traffic. If you have ads that get clicked-through often -- which is probably more the case with people looking for heavily commercial content and in the mood for market research -- you'll need to pay more to keep your spot, at least if other advertisers are competing with you.
Re:Blend? (Score:2)
Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:4, Insightful)
It also looks like their engine gives a higher weightage to .com sites when the slider is towards "Shopping", and to .org, .edu, .gov sites when it is towards "Researching". For most purposes, I would go with the slider at the extreme end towards "Researching", so I can exclude spam/advertisement sites. But sadly, it looks like that would skip over *many* useful sites which end in .com .
For example, http://howstuffworks.com/ [howstuffworks.com] seems to be categorized as a "Shopping" site, presumably due to it's suffix, and doesn't turn up with the slider at the "Researching" end.
Needs more work, IMHO.
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:1)
Along these lines, why have a slider at all? Definitely a neat idea, but I don't seem myself ever putting the slider anywhere but at either end, or maybe in the middle. I think it would be more useful to have a bunch of checkboxes, one for each type of site you want to search for, and you could just check the different kinds of sites you want
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:2)
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:2)
EDUcational
ORGanization
NETwork
M
GOVernment
INFOrmational
That shouldn't be too hard.
Too bad it isn't accurate.
I have a personal name site and a community site that are both
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:2)
that's nothing - our local hospital took a .xxx.
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:2)
try openoffice: at one end you get the openoffice dev sites, at the other end... staroffice. kinda slick.
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:2)
A search for "EV/EBITDA" brought the page on EV/EBITDA [moneyterms.co.uk] on my .co.uk site up as the first result.
Shifting the slider to "research" pushed it down to sixth place but my page on EBITDA [moneyterms.co.uk] (obviously a less good match) was the third result.
Shifting the slider to shopping lost both my pages from the front page.
The normal Yahoo search brought up the same page at a different (old, now redirected) URL as t
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:1)
One, like you say, there are more than just 2 motivations for searching the net. I would definitely include "entertainment" as a category.
Secondly, they should not be mixing ends of the line/triangle/polygon. You should be able to just check the boxes next to the categories you want. You either want to include a category or you don't.
There is no bloody reason you need exactly 72% info and 28% shopping results. You either want both or you don't. Most results aren't
Re:Fancy sorting my TLDs? (Score:2)
There are tons of motivations for searching the net, but almost everything can be broken down to either shopping or "not shopping" (they call it research, but I'm not sure that name always applies), even Entertainment. If I'm looking for free naked pictures of Vanessa Marcil, star of Las Vegas, I put the slider on Research. If I want to pay for naked pictures I move it to Shopping.
The slider approach is nice because yo
Why, this is whay I think so (Score:2)
And as far as why shopping vs research, ever dry looking up specs on hardware on google, only to find 80% of the first few pages stores? (or reviews of the product on the store)
I think this is a great feature, and might actually get me to use yahoo search because of that feature alone.
Whooo !! (Score:1)
Before everyone freaks out (Score:2)
Only on Slashdot (Score:1, Funny)
User A: Well, it's a nice concept, but can they execute it?
"Google promises the ability to walk on oceans."
User A: I'm sure they'll add features to it too. Google's the best. Wow. I love google. It gives me orgasms. Woww... And I don't even have to download porn. Wowwie
Re:Only on Slashdot (Score:2)
It actually works (Score:5, Informative)
With the setting bar on the research side you get opinions and reviews. With the settings on the shopping side you are directed to the manufacturers site along with their sales channels.
I am impressed and think that Google has been outdone for the first time in a while.
This could become very useful as the web is steadily getting more and more clogged with idiots wanting to sell you stuff all the time but not wanting to give you useful information on it.
Re:It actually works (Score:1)
Re:It actually works (Score:3, Interesting)
There are also very regular posts about how the top ranked results in Google are pointing to other search engines, junk sites, etc. They have been very sluggish in fixing those complaints. This "slider" directly addresses those complaints.
However, I don't think it will take Google very long to respond
Re:It actually works (Score:1)
Re:It actually works (Score:2, Interesting)
A slider is too simple because it implies there are only 2 goals of searching. I beg to differ. The internet is not cleanly divided into 2 ends of a spectrum. (What about entertainment?)
A slider is too complicated because it forces you to balance exactly how much of each category you are looking for. Who really needs that? I'm going to
old news... (Score:1)
Wait for the complete version (Score:1)
It's just a matter of time... (Score:1)
Seems to work well (Score:2)
results of trying "sex" (Score:2)
On the information side you get the encyclopedia entries.
I like it! (Score:1)
Cool but, (Score:1)
Finally, a non-google search innovation! (Score:2)
Blog and forum/wiki slider please? (Score:2)
An overdue feature for all search engines (Score:2)
Perhaps a W3C list of standard site types as well.
For example: "diary", "reference", "archive"
A person doing research on the string "speed boat"
might not be interested in someone's blog site where the word is mentioned.
alternative: clustering (Score:2)
Have a look at Clusty [clusty.com] as one example of a search engine that categorizes your search results along more dimensions, yet seems at least as intuitive and usable as the new Yahoo! interface.
Yahoo!'s interface seems unnecessarily simplistic to me.
Beta is the new black (Score:2)
I know the point of a beta is to get, essentially, free buzz and free testers, but this implies that the product eventually move out of beta. (Google News, GMail, I'm looking in your general direction.)
Strange results... (Score:2)
Slider in the middle: #1 result is apple.com/ipod
- makes sense, being the manufacturer's site, and all.
Move it out of the middle at all and it drops in rank - move it all the way to research, and it's not even on the first page, while the #1 result is "ipodsoft.com, offering a collection of ipod software". Move it to shopping, and again it's not on the first page. Apparently the manufacturer's site is neither shopping nor research, but something else... Still #1 for middle of th
Isn't that Personalized Google Searching (Score:1)
they obviously... (Score:1)
try doing a search on "robot toy."
"directories" (Score:2)
Oops, my bad (Score:2)
Re:No thanks (Score:1)
RTFA. It does work with DHTML.
Re:No thanks (Score:2)
Not quite AJAX (Score:1)
Re:Not quite AJAX (Score:1)
Re:Not quite AJAX (Score:1)
Re:No thanks (Score:2)
If it involves installing 3rd party software locally then I'll stick with the plain web interface.
It doesn't.
Why can't they do this with DHTML?
They have.
We need a new acronym... for people who haven't Tried The Fine Web application ;-)
OT: TTFA (Score:2)
I like.
Re:And this is usefull to who? (Score:1)
Re:And this is usefull to who? (Score:2)
Re:And this is usefull to who? (Score:1)
There is a whole part of it (e.g sites that are not linked by others) that Google's algorithm cannot track.
www.fravia.com
for more info on how search engines work
Re:And this is usefull to who? (Score:2)
Re:Hash (Score:2)
Osho
Re:Does anyone know of (a) search engines that (Score:2)
MSN advanced search allows you to do #3 and #2.
Re:Does anyone know of (a) search engines that (Score:2)
Re:Does anyone know of (a) search engines that (Score:3, Interesting)
Oops.. now with formatting:
Re:No new Services until 100% Firefox Support (Score:1)
Nice troll, go away now. This isn't "creating" a new product or service. It's just R&D stuff, which is why it's labeled as a demo on the Yahoo! research labs page.
It's not a fix, but a constant battle (Score:2)
In 2005, the search engine optimization business must be at its peak. Not only that, but t