Traditional search uses algos & objective properties to provide results – via links from other pages. The next generation search experience – sometimes dubbed the Google killer - is social search – human assisted search results.
There is little doubt that the human powered search engines have their place, and that the user-content driven interaction with websites, and specifically search is important and it is expanding in popularity.
Nothing new though. In fact, Ask.com started out this way, but it had problems scaling up. Yahoo started in 1994 with their now infamous directory and it was all about human interaction & validation. Microsoft also had human editing of results, but once Google took the world over with their link based system, and it worked so well – other engines were left in the dust.
Today, Google, considered by many as only an algorithmic search engine, has been, and still is using humans to stay close to search results, and looking to add more. They know the combination of both are key to the success of the “Web 2.0″ phenomenon.
Whether the short list below will provide a v1.0 testbed for the “next big search engine model” – beating Google at its own game, still remains to be seen. We all know that Google didn’t get to #1 by slacking off.
Brin & Page, the founders of Google are fiercely competitive, and their top priority has always been to provide the ultimate in search relevancy and user experience, and I don’t see them taken over any time soon.
A brand new human powered search launched by the founder of Wikipedia, was just launched. (http://search.wikia.com/wiki/Search_Wikia). It’s getting lots of press and since it’s based on open source crawling and has a large existing and growing user base, it will be an interesting development to watch.
It’s all about the user community, and unlike the ridiculous editing experience of directories like DMOZ, it’s refreshing to see this open dialogue and debate. The Wikia crawler can be seen at Grub.org, where you can download it for your own use.
Other social search tools that you should check out are:
- http://www.chacha.com/ – human intelligence driven search engine
- http://www.irazoo.com/ – earn points and get rewards based on user recommendations.
- http://www.mahalo.com/ – Jason Calacanis and his human powered search engine.
- http://swicki.eurekster.com/- it was one of the first the field of social search, but I have not seen/heard much lately. Easy to monetize via Adsense.
- http://answers.yahoo.com/ – very popular and a great research tool for marketplace and keyword digging
- http://www.stumbleupon.com/ – recommendation engine – great traffic generator too, free account, and get traffic starting at 5c!
- http://www.sproose.com/- has a similar user experience to digg.com
- http://www.digg.com/- still a favorite – and if you can get dugg, massive traffic can be had
- http://squidoo.com/- although some may say this is not a social search engine, create a lens and watch traffic increase. Seth Godin, Lensmaster.
4 Responses to “Is This The Next ‘Google Killer’?”
Leave a Reply
ULTIMATE Guide to Search Engine Optimization
July 30th, 2007 at 5:19 am
faroo.com goes even a step further: distributed crawling *and* distributed search.
July 31st, 2007 at 6:20 am
“It’s all about the user community, and unlike the ridiculous editing experience of directories like DMOZ”
That’s a bit rough.
All of those sites above pale in comparison to the enormity & quality of the content found at DMOZ. Mahalo? They’re 1/20 the size. Squidoo, riddled with SPAM. ChaCha unable to scale and ensure relevance of guided results.
Good day.
July 31st, 2007 at 7:22 am
Austin,
I think you need to re-read the sentence in question. It states poor editing experience at DMOZ, it did not bring into question the scope or size of DMOZ compared to the others.
Good read!!
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:54 pm
But how accurate is the information that Wikipedia supplies? A set of nerds who think that they know everything but where there is no authoritative reference. i.e to a qualified and highly experienced/respected authority (with 50 years on his or her back at least) et al leaves the information totally open to abuse. This is the greatest danger for the world-at-large, accepting what Wikipedia says without question and where if history is rewritten, future generations will just not know right from wrong. A terrible state of affairs for all future generations to come. The same thing will probably equate to the equivalent of Google. I would steer completely away, for the ramification for the future generations are grave to say the very least.
Dr. David Hill Chief Executive
World Innovation Foundation Charity
Bern, Switzerland Registration no.CH-035.7.035.277-9 – 11th July 2005, in the Canton of Bern http://www.thewif.org.uk