Microsoft Offers A Peek At New Search Engine

ObsessiveMathsFreak writes "The Inquirer is reporting that Microsoft is offering a preview of its new search technology. The search engine preview has a minimalist interface, similar to Google. Microsoft claims over one billion web pages searched, but admits the fact that searching is a little slow. This technology hasn't yet been incorporated into MSN Search, though the site claims it eventually will be. In related news, the Financial Times is reporting that Microsoft are to improve the regular MSN Search site by removing paid advertisements from regular internet searches, a move that will cost them 'tens of millions of dollars.' Are the Search Engine Wars finally upon us?"

Accuracy

[jmays]

What is important is that a search for litigious bastards [sco.com] still returns the SCO Group.

"Miserable Failure"

[viper21]

Hey, at least microsoft did one thing right. [msn.com]

-S

xfree86

[SealTit]

Looks like it still thinks that xfree86 is "adult content"

http://techpreview.search.msn.com/results.aspx?q =x free86&FORM=SMCRT

Wonder if...

[bje2]

...they'll have a "Microooooooosoft" graphic at the bottom of the screen to allow you navigate between pages of results...

First experience...

[SammysIsland]

Search Error

MSN Search is temporarily unable to process your request.

Please try again in a few minutes.

EID: f:2114719238 - 1041:1041:10004:1059

HC: 71d61b16

And the most popular search is now...

[Mr. Smoove]

Linux just to p*ss off Bill, courtesy of all his friends at /.

Re:Search for Linux

[mledet]

Search Error
MSN Search is temporarily unable to process your request.

Please try again in a few minutes.

EID: f:618926422 - 1041:1041:10004:1059

HC: 71d61b13

Re:First experience...

[bje2]

i just got that too...was working fine a few mins ago...ha, microsoft has been /.'d...

Search Error.. Slashdotted?

[Ba3r]

Search ErrorMSN Search is temporarily unable to process your request. Please try again in a few minutes. EID: f:1658889542 - 1041:1041:10004:1059 HC: 71d61b14

slow

[Anonymous Coward]

It took nearly 30 seconds to return results for "gates balmer anal".

Yea, a billion sites...

[slashrogue]

Sorry, no results were found containing "microsoft fud"

Re:"Miserable Failure"

[strictnein]

with Jimmy Carter #4 and Michael Moore #3
Oh... and Hillary Clinton #5 and Howard Dean #7
And Michael Moore at #9 and #12
Rummy at #8
Slick Will at #14

Re:xfree86

[Bricklets]

Looks like it still thinks that xfree86 is "adult content"

More importantly xfree85 is not considered "adult content." I can understand someone having trouble with "69," but "86"??? Come on. What position do two people have to be in to form that shape.

Re:xfree86

[Anonymous Coward]

given the new licensing agreement, many /.ers might tend to agree with Microsoft on this one.

Re:"fisherman"

[sould]

Okay, random test. Search for "fisherman":

Sorry, no results were found containing "fishermen"

C'mon...I mean copying and pasting isn't that hard now is it?

Re:Wonder if...

[Zorilla]

And directly to the right of the "Search" button will be a button that says, "I'm Feeling Retarded"

Re:Search for Linux

[scotch]

Sorry, no results were found containing "wikipedia"

Ha ha.

Works really well

[mcgroarty]

My first search on http://www.search.msn.com/ was "Google rip off" and it worked pretty well.

Try it! The best result is in the blue box at the top!

Re:Playing catch up

[strictnein]

3 [threedegrees.com] = I'm thinking this is just like Orkut

And quite possibly uses the same code...

Next thing you know....

[garfield1979]

.... Microsoft will be going on "tour" to say how much better their search engine is compared to google.

"Windows detected that you just entered..

[BigGerman]

.. a search term. Please reboot to see your results."

quick comparison to google

[pohl]

The query "windows sucks" in Google:

Results 1 - 10 of about 577,000 for windows sucks. (0.26 seconds)

...and in MSN Search preview...

Sorry, no results were found containing "windows sucks" Can they really claim to have indexed so many pages? :-)

Re:Search for Linux

[vk2]

So much for 100 millions. Instead they would have given the same money to google to remove the paid sidebar ads and iframe the results.

Re:First experience...

[blinder]

A brand new algorithmic search engine -- built from the ground up -- on Microsoft technology

Yeah, no kidding.

Re:xfree86

[jred]

I can understand someone having trouble with "69," but "86"??? Come on. What position do two people have to be in to form that shape.

Well, first you have the chick facing away from you, standing on her head. Then you bring in the siamese twins...

Monty Python is very angry...

[JAgostoni]

They don't even have search results for:
"what is the average airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?"

Geeze ... even Google does ...

Re:"fisherman"

[L. VeGas]

My guess would be incorrect use of a static/global variable.

Much thanks! I've been trying for weeks to figure our what's wrong.
----------
Bill Gates

Re:Search for Linux

[Hellburner]

On the MSFT engine:

"bill gates asshole" = no results

On Google:

"bill gates asshole" = 29,000 results.

Odd.

I tried a different tactic..

[radish]

It asked what I was looking for, but wasn't able to help:

Sorry, no results were found containing "something better than windows"

Re:Search for Whatever

[denthijs]

Owww, Now i get it, ..
Microsoft doesn't want to be incompliant with all the rfc's
they just can't find 'm;
Sorry, no results were found containing "http rfc"

Explains a LOT

Re:"Miserable Failure"

[EvilTwinSkippy]

In Soviet Russia, Bush bashes YOU!

Re:Search for Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, typical microsoft error message. no explanation, just a meaningful hex number.

my favorite microsoft error of all time is:

"Not enough memory or disk space to complete the"

Re:Search for Whatever

[aldousd666]

I tried Litigious Bastards, and it came up with no results. Maybe SCO is giving up!

At least they're not biased:

[saintp]

Had to do it(obligatory sucks search)

[Sir_Dill]

Sorry, no results were found containing "microsoft sucks"

SEARCH TIPS

1) Check your spelling. Are the words in your query spelled correctly?

2) Try using synonyms. Maybe the site you're looking for uses slightly different words, like "film" instead of "movie".

3) Make your search more general. For example, instead of using specific product names, try using the generic product category.

Re:Search for Linux

[Anonymous Writer]

Okay, it worked on the third go. I guess you have to repeatedly ask it the same question before you get an answer, kind of like cross-examining a Microsoft executive in court.

No comment needed

[spacefight]

for this [msn.com] search, err 2nd searchresult.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Doesn't work in Mozilla Firefox.

[jhenager]

Real men are brave enough to use insecure browsers.

Re:xfree86

[th1nk]

Well, first you have the chick...

You apparently forgot where you are. You just lost 99.6% of your audience.

Re:Search for Linux

[dinojemr]

Is this the first time that a Microsoft site has been Slashdotted? What is the world coming to?

Building the Engine with our Queries?

[Filmwatcher888]

With all these people claiming that their first hit doesn't work, but subsequent hits do, could Microsoft be building their search with our queries? Tha more you make a request for a specific topic, the more results it feels that ineeds to find. The less important (queried) results don't show any results initially. So if we keep this up, Linux, Suse, and Porn wil be the most archived things the search engine knows how to find.

Dateline, Redmond

[phyruxus]

Dateline, Redmond Wa.

Uber-corporation Microsoft (c) announced a new search service today. Microsoft bigwig Steve Ballmer had this to say:

"Our new search engine is the ultimate in modern search technology. It indexes the entire internet and stores it in a Microsoft Access (tm) database. Users querying the engine for a given term (such as "linux") are given links to a random assortment of possibly-related sites."

(interviewer) Google's search is lauded as highly relevant and lightening fast. Yet you've innovated and taken a different course, returning random results. Why is this better than Google's method?

(S.B.) "Well, you have to keep in mind that our concern is the average windows user. We have discovered a flaw in Google's technology; the heavy reliance on research, strong programming and intelligence, while novel, has resulted in a system where relevant, useful results are returned very quickly."

(interviewer) ..and your method is better than this because...

(S.B.) "Ok. When someone searches on Google, they are limited to only relevant items, because that's what Google has latched onto. The weakness in Google's method is that most pages are not returned, because a machine has decided they are irrelevant. The new Microsoft (c) paradigm is that we let the USER decide what's relevant and what's not; the machine makes no determination of what is or is not relevant. See how it's better? Look, 99% of all computers in the world run Windows. And people don't mind rebooting, not at all. We've added value to this model, someone's got to do the work, why not just dump it on the user, let them take the blame? My porsche won't go any slower because someone else had to do extra work. That's the beauty of the Microsoft way (tm)! We let other people do all the work, then we take the credit."

(interviewer) But most people say they like Google specifically *because* it returns relevant terms so quickly.. aren't you just dumping all the work of searching back on the user's lap?

(S.B.) "You clearly are an enemy of innovation. Look, People are smarter than machines. Therefore, since a person can only view one page at a time, a person must view every existing web page to know whether or not their guess of which page is most relevant, is in fact true. And so, our search engine is better, because we don't prevent the user--"

(interviewer) Isn't this all just a semantic argument against your economic competitor and technological superior, Google?

(S.B.) "This interview is over."

A Microsoft Public Relations Representative did note that search terms pertaining to the purchase of goods and services did in fact not return random results, and in point of fact return only a single link, to www.microsoft.com.

Re:hmm...

[knodi]

Sure, there's another source. They also get a lot from people logging out of hotmail. :-)

OOPS

[gwoodrow]

I just ran a search on Microsoft's new search engine and I accidentally crashed the internet. My bad.