DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! The Equity Kicker is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

The Equity Kicker

Nic Brisbourne’s view from London on venture capital and exploiting change in technology and media
Jump to original thread »
Author

What a new search engine should be about

Started by brisbourne · 6 months ago

There has been an awful lot of chatter about Cuil in the blogosphere over the last couple of days. The biggest memes have been (not very positive) reviews, the way the launch was bungled because the site is still buggy, and the way the launch was fantastic from a PR point of view.
For ... Continue reading »

11 comments

  • Paul Walsh

    11 months ago

    I wouldn't go up against Google. I'd rather come up with something which either Google uses, or can be exploited via Google. We don't need more search engines. If we did, we'd still have the likes of Excite - the first to introduce strings; handsome + nic + equity + boy
    reply
  • Jens

    11 months ago

    A new search engine makes sense when it does something unique that is of great value to the user. And it better be hard or not interesting for Google to copy this for either technical or business reasons.

    Cuil doesn't (seem to) have anything unique that is of great value to the searcher. Maybe they have something that is of great value to Google, Yahoo or Microsoft. Who knows...

    @ Paul Walsh: Competing with Google is okay. But only if you are significantly better and there is nothing that Google can do about it. That is obviously a pretty difficult combination, as nobody has cracked that, yet. I agree that focusing on other areas is easier.
    reply
  • Paul Walsh

    11 months ago

    @Jens - do you really believe it's possible to come up with something better than Google a_n_d have enough marketing power/budget to out-punch Google? OK, anything is possible. But, is it a wise business decision - I don't think so.
    reply
  • nic

    11 months ago

    Thanks for the comments guys.

    Paul - I would be more than happy to have a go at Google in one of the areas I mentioned. For sure it would be a risky venture, but the upside is huge if you get it right. Plus there are a few companies out there that will see a lot of value in a company in this space that has made even a small amount of progress :).
    reply
  • Jens

    11 months ago

    @ Paul Walsh

    I actually believe that at some point somebody WILL come up with something that is better than Google. Or can you imagine that in 100 years time search will be the same as it is now...? :)

    Would I want to take on Google in their own game? Probably not right now, but who knows what technologies I will have access to in a few years time.
    reply
  • Danvers

    11 months ago

    The auto-generated photos on a Cuil search are bizarre - I searched against my own name and some of the photos it threw up were bordering on offensive - and most of the results were very US (i.e. .com) focussed. Not tempted to convert.
    reply
  • alan p

    11 months ago

    Heck, I thought I was being +ve about Cuil - you should see what others wrote ;-)

    I thought the "Cuil is gaelic for knowledge" bit was silliest, as it is so easy to check.....
    reply
  • Azeem

    11 months ago

    Nic

    There is also always room for an alternative way to solve the IR problem, which is what True Knowledge is doing.

    I think it is tough to pretend to be a Google-killer because there is such depth to their offering and it is dumb to attempt to attack them on exactly the same or similar enough value axes that they excel at.Sometimes sidestepping the competition is also a sensible move (to be played out...)
    aa
    reply
  • Alex Kelleher

    11 months ago

    It does occur to me that Google's fundamental idea (who links to you) can be fragile (I've seen too many SEO hacks that are successful!). Other variables - popularity, social search as you say, relevance and so on may eventually be more important, and less spam-able. My business is all about targeting and relevance, so I am biased, but it's where lots user benefit can potentially be found.

    Google's brand is a real barrier in main-stream search, so I'm intrigued that Cuil doesn't seem to have done anything that special with their branding - or made the design very appealing.
    reply
  • nic

    11 months ago

    Hi Azeem - I agree, the trick is to pick off a corner of the market which Google underserves and then build out from there. Going head to head would be suicide.

    Alex - I agree that links have been heavily gamed - that is what attracts me to social search, as that is inherently game proof (at least as long as you keep good company...)
    reply
  • Hoover

    11 months ago

    I'm sure this will sound childish and off-base, but to my mind the trick to beating Google is simple.

    Bear in mind that Google has invented the wheel. But the gap between inventing the wheel and building the car you drive is immense.

    When I search for something, I want only one page. Only a lunatic could want 15 million pages, so I've no idea why they boast about finding so many results.

    One page, and one page only. It's that simple. The gap between Google's product and a search engine that will offer me that one page is immense.

    Google is primitive. The way to beat it is to imagine the difference between inventing the wheel and building a car.

    Google's competitors get nowhere because they say "Google may give you a blue wheel, but we offer a red one".

    Nobody cares.

    I only want one page. Ever.
    reply

Add New Comment

Returning? Login