Google Launches Dictionary, Drops Answers.com 180
ObsessiveMathsFreak writes "Google has expanded its remit once again with the quiet launch of Google Dictionary. Google word search definitions now redirect to Google Dictionary instead of to Google's long term thesaurus goto site, Answers.com, which is expected to take a serious hit in traffic as a result. Dictionary pages are noticeably more plain and faster loading than their Answers.com equivalents, and unusually feature web citations for the definitions of each word. This means that, unlike most dictionaries, Google considers ginormous a word."
Urban Dictionary and so on (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder why I haven't actually seen the snippets of definitions lately. I remember seeing them a few years ago. Not that it would had actually changed a lot - there's always lots of different sites linking to dictionaries on the first page of results.
Urban Dictionary has actually been the most useful one of those.
User ratings, definitions of almost all the weird (and stupid) words teens come up with and usually fun descriptions too.
Now get off my lawn.
But... (Score:5, Interesting)
why? (Score:5, Interesting)
By doing this, Google may have wrested control over third parties, but has significantly degraded the user experience. Prior to this, each word would have a hyperlink to a definition. Now it appears that one has a link to "definition" for one word. Furthermore, in my sampling the definitions are very basic and not of competitive quality. For instance, the word cricket has for the first definition the sport, the second a slang use, and then finally a first grade definition as an insect. No etymology. No context.
I can only imagine they are doing this to in some way differentiate themselves from Bing, which could also use freeonlinedictionary or the like. Unfortunately for Google, MS has encata, which tends to not have slightly more sophisticated definitions.
Re:For English definitions ... (Score:3, Interesting)
How much better can the OED really be?
Re:why? (Score:4, Interesting)
With webmail combining mail into the web, the web became the Internet. ... --, other websites are left without clicks.
With increasing importance of online/cloud/Live applications and ChromeOS combining applications into the web, the OS becomes just the medium of accessing the Internet.
With Google being the starting point for many people to do their Internet stuff, and Google incorporating more and more steps of that clickpath -- you don't have to leave google for shopping, mail, document editing, site-specific searches, weather information, stock information,
Is Google trying to become the Web? Google is leveraging their, not monopoly, but well-established position.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:When google finally presses the evil button... (Score:3, Interesting)
Another word not in there is "poop", synonymous with poo, bot unlisted as another word for faeces.
Compare Google Dictionary's result: http://www.google.co.uk/dictionary?aq=f&langpair=en [google.co.uk]|en&hl=en&q=poop
which merely lists poop deck, with Answes.com's: http://www.answers.com/topic/poop [answers.com]
which is comprehensive and exactly what you'd expect from a dictionary.
I'd say Google fails pretty badly on this (relatively childish) example and isn't up to the job (or should that be jobbie).
Wiktionary.org? (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems no one yet mentioned Wiktionary.org [wiktionary.org]. Over 1 536 000 + in French, a similar number in English. While there's obvious room for improvement, it's generally usable and often useful.
So here's my question, why does Google dives into a new initiative instead of jumping on existing trains? I guess the answers has something to do with control. Google wants to keep the control (which is understandable and not necessarily a bad thing). This Wiktionary-Google Dictionary is not the only example, Google Map Maker [google.com] and OpenStreetMap.org [openstreetmap.org] is another one (both crowdsourcing map data, and yes, OSM was there much before).
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)