Search Is Sick
June 3, 2009
I am on my way to the airport for another luxury-suffused flight. I scanned Boston.com’s story “Microsoft Ads Say Search Is Sick, Bing Is the Cure” here. For years, I have been pointing out that search is not sick; search is dead. My research indicates that people don’t like to type words into a search box in the hopes that their guess will unlock the information riches hidden in the system. I still think search is dead, and the efforts to improve key word search result in modest improvements in usability.
Jessica Mintz’s article this morning is an AP story, so I can’t quote from it. I can offer a couple of comments:
- Microsoft is spending big money to point out that search is much better with Bing.com. My thought is, “Will users in a hurry to get info perceive a substantive difference?” There has to be more on offer than overviews of video content, right?
- Bing.com is a decision engine. I struggle with that notion. I am not sure that most people know what a “decision engine” is, and the idea scrapes against my view of information systems that generate high value intelligence outputs. Cognos and SAS are two examples of companies with systems that come closer to my idea of a decision engine.
- Incremental change may not narrow the 50 or 60 percent market share gap between Google and Microsoft. When Microsoft announced Bing.com, Google announced Wave. One looked backwards to search. The GOOG looked forward to real time information.
I will look for the Microsoft ads, but I am not sure my info habits will change too much.
Stephen Arnold, June 3, 2009
Comments
2 Responses to “Search Is Sick”
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
Excellent article. Interesting and valuable information is available.
Of course you can quote an AP article in your commentary. That is explicitly allowed as fair use. An excerpt for purposes of criticism. US copyright law is already overbroad, so don’t give it even more reach than it really has.