Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft The Internet

MSN Planning to Take on Google? 677

asyn42 writes "CNet is reporting what should be no surprise, Microsoft appears to be readying itself to take on Google for a position as the top search engine. The long range impact on the relationship between MSN and Yahoo/Inktomi is likely at risk."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MSN Planning to Take on Google?

Comments Filter:
  • News flash: (Score:2, Interesting)

    by NightSpots ( 682462 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:40PM (#6245668) Homepage
    Company with many diverse software offerings, including internet services, wants to be the top search engine.

    It's a company, what would you expect?

    The news would be if Microsoft said it didn't want to be compared to google, or any other search engines. This, as it stands, is hardly newsworthy.
  • Good Luck! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by w.p.richardson ( 218394 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:41PM (#6245673) Homepage
    Google is a brand at this point. It's a verb. It's as ingrained at this point as "Band Aid" for adhesive strip.

    That being said, if anyone can compete, it's Microsoft. They have deep pockets, but they don't always win (see UltimateTV, e.g.).

  • too much money (Score:3, Interesting)

    by selderrr ( 523988 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:43PM (#6245720) Journal
    a typical example of microsoft having so much money that they don't know where to spend it first... And in a bizarre result, they tend to spend it on the thoughest oponents !

    Google is good and popular technology, very unlikely they can improve on it, yet they will throw millions at it just *because* it's a 'monopoly'. Very much like the XBox being the dead-end answer to the PS2.

  • Re:Good Luck! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by $$$$$exyKrout ( 682918 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:45PM (#6245766) Homepage Journal
    Of course, MSN is still the default search engine in IE. And I know a LOT of newbies that still look there before they look at Google.
  • by eXtro ( 258933 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:46PM (#6245782) Homepage
    Google has integrity, they at least try to do the right thing. Consider this search search engine [google.com]. Google could easily screw with the results to put themselves on top. They don't.


    Can you see Microsoft showing this level of restraint?

  • by djembe2k ( 604598 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:47PM (#6245802)
    . . . I checked, and it forwards to a soft-porn cam site, and then takes you into pop-up hell. As a courtesy, I won't provide a link here.

    Apparently msnbot.com has been owned by Go Daddy Software since April of 2002, according to the WHOIS entry [internic.net]. Maybe they knew something we didn't?

    I'm sure when MS sues Go Daddy Software over this, it will show up here on /.

  • Re:Good Luck! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:49PM (#6245848)
    Google is a brand at this point. It's a verb. It's as ingrained at this point as "Band Aid" for adhesive strip.

    I'm afraid that the fact that Google is associated with searching at the moment is not a very strong reason for it to remain. I remember when I would talk to people about the World Wide Web and they would say something like, "oh, you mean Netscape? I've got that on my computer!"

    I hate to say it but microsoft are in an extremely strong position to crush Google. Just come up with something that is nearly as good and then integrate it completely into Internet Explorer and the OS. It will be another example of them leveraging their monopoly power, but since they've found they can get away with it, what's to stop them?
  • by Dark Paladin ( 116525 ) * <jhummel.johnhummel@net> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:52PM (#6245882) Homepage
    Who had a Microsoft rep in the office proposing the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars.

    So my friend said "All right - let's have a test. I'm going to have Google look for this search string that deals with Microsoft technical information - and I'll have the Microsoft technical page do the same thing. And we'll see who has the most accurate and fastest results."

    "But - but that's not a fair contest!" the Microsoft rep told him.

    "No," my friend said, "It's not, because Google just returned the results for its entire current storage of the Internet, and the Micorosft Technet search engine is...still looking."

    Should Google be worried? Naturally - always be paranoid about competition. The best thing it can do is keep going to businesses and say "What do you need to look up?" and figure out how to make their system work for them. "You want to search emails super fast? You have tons of documents you need to search through?"

    To be honest, Microsoft has not succeeded very well outside the operating systems - look at handhelds, cable access - MSNBC is doing all right, but I attribute that to the NBC rather than the MS part of it.

    Google has a lot of brand name, it has proven, cheap, realiable technology that is getting better. As long as they keep that edge, keep pushing the envelope, keep talking to businesses/consumers and find out what they want and deliver on it, MS will be left with YAMSP (Yet Another Money Sucking Project).

    Of course, I could be wrong. But based on my Safari and Mozilla browser searching Google and my non-Geek wife actually using the words "I'll just Google that later", I'm not too worried.
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:54PM (#6245929)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by sharlskdy ( 460886 ) <scottman@ t e l u s.net> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:56PM (#6245946) Homepage
    There was a story a few days ago about distributed computing and search engines... Ahh... here [internet.com] it is. You don't suppose that Microsoft hopes to make use of DC software in the updated Messenger client to index pages?

  • Maybe default Apache configurations should disallow MS bots, so that MSN can't find anything?

    Turnabout is fair play? No? :-)
  • by gmezero ( 4448 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:57PM (#6245969) Homepage
    Google is not a selectable default search engine in IE already. The only way to effectively make Google your search page in IE is to make it your homepage.
  • by DeckardJK ( 555299 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:58PM (#6245976)
    I remember playing with msn's search a while ago and it comes back with some funny results. Why is the 3rd result for a search on "Linux" titled "Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP" from www.microsoft.com?
  • by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:58PM (#6245982)
    What does Microsoft think it has going to counter that sort of incredible power?

    Just playing devil's advocate (you did ask) but presuming they can get search accuracy within spitting distance of Google, their big advantage is Windows and Internet Explorer. (Yes I know, illegal bundling, monopoly, yadda, yadda... Who here thinks MS won't tie something into Windows if they can?) They could tie all sorts of interesting search functions into Windows and Office. Why fire up the web browser if you can search without it?

    I agree that it's unlikely MS will supplant Google but never underestimate a monopoly with $40+billion in the bank. Most people get to Google through Microsoft software. That's a perfect opportunity for MS to put itself in the middle. Not easy but definitely possible.
  • Re:tsk tsk tsk... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Lt Razak ( 631189 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @02:59PM (#6245990)
    Right, and now they can rank their own sites and products first.

    Why bother suing those microsoftsucks.org sites when they simply (mysteriously) don't show up on search engines?

  • Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Interesting)

    by wo1verin3 ( 473094 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:00PM (#6245992) Homepage
    >> Don't be cocky.

    Remember Hotmail? A very popular web-mail service? Remember MS coming in and leaving things be for a few months, and then bombarding it with advertising?

    Don't think MS won't take advantage of every bit of white space. Yes Google should take notice, but I couldn't picture them being incredibly concerned.
  • by Steveftoth ( 78419 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:01PM (#6246009) Homepage
    they stop returning good results.

    That's the only reason that I use it. If MS can create a better search engine then Google, that finds better pages with less thinking (less words and tweaking of searches).

    The only problem I have with a search engine is when I go to it and have to try like 10 searches to get what I want, when I can goto Google and get it in 2.

    However, they had better start from scratch because all their previous search engines are really bad. The MSDN one being the worst. Maybe there is a way to have it return better results, but I haven't found it. I want it to be easier to narrow down my choices for APIs. I mean why is a MSCE API ranked higher then a Win32 api call on their results pages? Are there really more users of the WinCE api?
  • by GreenJeepMan ( 398443 ) * <josowskiNO@SPAMtybio.com> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:02PM (#6246013) Homepage Journal
    With Windows installed 99% of all computers, all they have to do is put search right next to the start button. I hate to say it, but people will use what come's easy first.
  • My god (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dpete4552 ( 310481 ) <slashdot@@@tuxcontact...com> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:04PM (#6246030) Homepage

    Microsoft is also developing search technology for the next version of its Windows operating system, code-named Longhorn, that could further its ambitions to take on Google. The search technology, borrowed from the company's SQL Server database, is expected to make it easier to find documents locally, on individual PCs, and across the Internet by linking to MSN's search services.


    Now they're trying to integrate their search engine into the OS? Well if they do MSN's search service will eventually rise to #1 regardless of how poor the quality of it is (It's working for IE). Because most people will just use Windows' search function, and a smaller portion will be aware of that as /the/ way to search the Internet.
  • MSN v. Google (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Shadow Wrought ( 586631 ) <shadow.wroughtNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:07PM (#6246060) Homepage Journal
    I did a web search on MSN for the word "Google" which turned up 184 hits. A search on Google for the word "Google" turned up 18,700,000. For curiosity I repeated the procedure using "MSN." MSN listed 11,357 hits, Google listed 18,500,000. Finally, I went ahead and tried "Slashdot" on both. MSN says it rang up 23! But when click to get to the next page it bumps it up to 864,467 hits. Google has 2,400,000. I just don't see MSN beating out Google unless they tie the search features directly into Explorer such that it takes actual effort on the users part to get to Google. Google greatest strength is that it not only works, but that it works well.

    The other thing to note is that MSN does not have an "I'm Feeling Lucky" button, but it does have an annoyingly fugly butterfly. I think the last two items will be the determining factor in the Search Wars.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:09PM (#6246094)
    If Micro$oft's 'bots are coming from 207.46.0.0/16, they're gonna miss my corner of the web. I've got that entire /16 router-blocked because a dozen or so hosts in it kept doing PTR queries to my server--this despite the fact that my DNS server is clearly not authoritative for the zones in question and doesn't honour recursive queries.

    Had the same problem at both work DNS servers, as well. Only router-blocked port 53 from that /16, tho. Execs and stuff need to get to some of the sites in there :(.

  • by pmz ( 462998 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:11PM (#6246114) Homepage
    They try to control what you read and hear via NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, Newsweek, and Slate. They go after what does and doesn't exist on the WWW by setting up MSN, Expedia, Encarta, Carpoint, etc. They try to control personal communication through Hotmail. They control what software you use via Windows and their aquire-and-crush tactics. Controlling their customers' search results is simply the next logical thing to do.

    There is competition, right now, but that is no guarantee of competition in the future.

    In other markets and industries, people have clearly stated they don't want one company controlling their whole life. Why is it so damn difficult to do the same thing with computers and software???
  • Not Such a Bad Thing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jack Comics ( 631233 ) * <jack_comics@nOSpAm.postxs.org> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:12PM (#6246139) Homepage
    Honestly, this isn't such a bad thing. I use Google as my main search engine as do most geeks, but even after preaching the virtues of Google for years, my 24 year-old sister *insists* on using MSN Search, as she "finds it easier to access and use MSN Search" for some God forsaken reason. I guess because it's just easier to hit the "Search" button on IE's toolbar than it is to go to Favorites and click on Google.

    In any case, if my sister is an example of the standard non-geek masses, getting people to switch from using MSN to Google is difficult at best. If MSN can become more handy and more useful than it currently is, where's the harm in that? It might give Google some competition, which is always good, and increase the productivity of searching the Internet for "the unwashed masses."
  • Re:No worries (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MisterFancypants ( 615129 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:12PM (#6246140)
    good point... its funny because its true.

    No, it's funny because it points out that most Linux-zealot's attitudes about Windows are still stuck in the pre-Windows 2000 days when Microsoft made shit-poor OSes. They don't anymore. The longer it take you to notice this, the dumber you look.

  • bottom line (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LuxFX ( 220822 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:17PM (#6246205) Homepage Journal
    The first thing that attracted me to Google, even before witnessing the quality of the search algorithm, was the sheer bareness of their main page. I heartily applaud any website that keeps their main page under 15Kb. Even more important, I applaud any website that values the goals of the users so much that their main page is essentially a single function with no fluff. I also applaud any website that maintains a zero ad banner and popup rule.

    MS will never be able to compete with this. I would be very surprised if their main page will weigh in under 75Kb. It will be 90% fluff. And there will be ads all over it!

    Google wins.

    .
  • Re:All I can say is (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Cheffo Jeffo ( 556675 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:32PM (#6246393)

    Here is an article on making IE use Google. [logicalexpressions.com]
    Cheers,

    JAKD
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:37PM (#6246463)
    ...I use Google always as my primary search engine, but from the view of someone who runs a few websites, I often see better results to my sites from MSN due to the over-abundance of webs pages in Google, which may top me (legitimately better or not...people can still improve their ranks by sneaky means). Certain searches on MSN for related keywords to my site may have me in the top 5, while the same search on Google may not even have me in the Top 15 or 20.

    Although that also goes to the pro side of Google, there's an over-abundance of information which 99 times out of 100 gives you what you're looking for.
  • by nchip ( 28683 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:44PM (#6246570) Homepage
    MSN search bots definetly are hostile to the internet.

    On my server, I had this experimental php script that just prints new lines in a loop forever.

    Well, a brilliant bot from MS address space (it didn't identyfy itself as anything else than IE) didn't read the robots.txt (which denies everything) and found its way to the script. When I later started wondering what was jamming my ADSL, I realized that the bot had hammered the script a bit over hundred times, each time timing out after downloading about ten megs...
  • Re:No worries (Score:5, Interesting)

    by molarmass192 ( 608071 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:53PM (#6246699) Homepage Journal
    Yeah, 'cause there's no such things as Windows-zealots right?

    Windows has it's selling points, Linux has it's selling points, here's where I draw the lines:

    Server: Linux is fantastic as a server OS, it beats any MS server OS 100% of the time. This due to the customizability of the kernel, hardware specific optimizations, and the fact the it runs headless.

    Home Use Desktop: Microsoft OSes are fantastic as home desktop OSes, they beat Linux in 95% of home use situations. The only exceptions in favor of Linux is non-game, surf and email purposes and people who code as a hobby.

    Corporate Desktop: Linux wins due to security and the homogeneous software environment in corporations. This is not a 100% of the time thing but perhaps in the 75% range due specifically to legacy software availability.

    So what's my stance? Linux is great, Windows is great, but at different things. If you want a highly configurable OS that you can tweak and tune to extract all your hardware has to offer, use Linux and don't expect it to be easy. If you want to play Splinter Cell and don't know the difference between a sea shell and a c shell, then don't even look at Linux 'cause you ARE going to get stumped.

    The other big problem is one of perception. The vast majority of Windows users (not all) are under the impression that they are technically savy because they know where to click their mouses. Throw them into a DOS shell and they choke. Put them in from of a Linux console and you're likely to hear "What is this???". Conversely, the vast majority of Linux users (not all) are quite techically savy and as such they tend to be elitist (and some are just jerks). This makes for an oil-and-water mix that will ALWAYS exist.

    To close back on the post, Windows OSes don't necessarily suck, but low skill Windows-only admins (90%+), give the software the appearance of sucking. It's all in the know-how, and moving a mouse around some neon colored buttons ain't know-how. I also think the majority of Windows-zealots (and there are a buncha them) are specifically from this clueless group of folks.
  • by danrees ( 557289 ) * <dan.dwrees@co@uk> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @03:56PM (#6246748) Homepage
    I love that MSN Search for "linux":

    3. Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP
    Learn about the Microsoft alternatives and how to move to them from open source products.
    www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/migration


    If that's not biased, I don't know what is... ;)
  • my sources say (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tancred ( 3904 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @04:09PM (#6246889)
    Google has been expecting this for a long time and are prepared for it. MS is the only company that has been considered a serious threat, at least for the last year. They've got the name recognition, browser control and financial resources to do it. But do they have the right technical people? Are they committed to buying their way in no matter the cost? How about overcoming some very ingrained company traits and playing fair?

    Then there's the Google motto of "don't be evil" to contend with. Part of Google's success, I believe, is due to not being evil, and more than that, to being good. That covers things like clearly marking ads, keeping their home page simple (I wouldn't use it as my browser home page if it wasn't) and not accepting payments for rank improvement.

    There are a lot of very smart people at Google and my sources say the management is very shrewd and realistic. I'll bet they weather this storm. The drubbing of Netscape was, I think, an easier thing to do. Google already gives away their service for free, and they've got immense mindshare. Netscape had good name recognition at the time, but back then there was a flood of new users that didn't know anything about the net. That was also at a time when there wasn't so much anti-Microsoft sentiment out there (yes, even the general public has had a taste of it due to the court cases).

    Wow, I just about convinced myself to submit my resume!
  • by be-fan ( 61476 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @04:27PM (#6247127)
    There are three parts to the statement:

    1) They're a monopoly
    2) They're leveraging their monopoly
    3) They're doing (1) and (2) to try to dominate another market.

    Until now, Microsoft hadn't been doing 3. MSN search was just a requisite part of any portal site. Now, they're declaring that they've actively decided to actively compete in that market. This is where they cross the line.
  • by IGnatius T Foobar ( 4328 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @04:31PM (#6247201) Homepage Journal
    MSN Search is already integrated into Windows. You can get to it from several places in Explorer, and Internet Explorer. And if IE can't find a page, it offers to find a similar page on MSN Search. And yet, people still type www.google.com in the address bar, to get to a better search engine.

    What, exactly, are they going to change?
  • What's the point? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by JojoLinkyBob ( 110971 ) <joeycato@gmail . c om> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @04:32PM (#6247216) Homepage
    One lovely facet of Google is their sheer abhorrence of advertisements. Just a nice clean interface. Somehow, I just don't see M$ coming up w/ something of that caliber. Even if they divine a more superior search engine, I'd still pick Google over it anyday for the lack of advertisements.

    "Embrace the whitespace!"
  • A good thing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jasonditz ( 597385 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @04:37PM (#6247272) Homepage
    Competition is a good thing, and I hope that MSN makes a nice offering. If its good, I'd use it, but only so long as it works in my browser.

    MSN MoneyCentral has the best free stock screener, bar none, of any on the internet. You wouldn't know it if you don't use IE though, because the link to the deluxe screener doesn't even show up in other browsers.
  • by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @04:58PM (#6247554)
    Mozilla is too and you don't see it running away with the race. MSN can still easily win. Just integrate it into the OS and make it the default search engine. Every one here is talking about how much better results Google gives and how the page is so much cleaner and works so much faster.
    It doesn't matter. The vast majority of people use defaults no matter what, a good portion of the rest will think "Hmm well MS is a super huge company so I'm sure what ever they make will be really good quality and be so much better than the competition". Don't count on them pick up on the search time as they'll probably attribute any difference to the internet being slow. Also sure as heck don't expect them to really notice the differing quality of search results, for one it's a completely subjective category and another you they likely won't even pay close enough attention to notice the difference. It's simple enough, integrate it into the OS, (something similar to Sherlock? been a while since I've used it), and make it the default anything on the windows box, home page too, really the average new user has no desire to change any kind of settings with their computer for the simple reason they don't really understand them. A search engine is obviously a good choice for a home page, make it your search engine and they're likely in your palm forever. Given the resources MS has and the actions they've been willing to take in the past combined with the courts unwillingness to stop them they would be fools if they didn't become #1.
  • by TheAwfulTruth ( 325623 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @05:00PM (#6247573) Homepage
    So you are advocating cracker tactics to sabbotage another persons machine against their own wishes?

    So between that suggestion and MS having MSN the default search engine in IE, which is more evil?

    If you don't behave at a higher moral level than your foe, then you don't deserve to "win". At that point any possible evil thing MS can do to destroy Open Source is perfectly OK because you have no richeous footing to stand on.
  • Google will lose (Score:3, Interesting)

    by cgleba ( 521624 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @05:01PM (#6247588)
    "Google has a lot of brand name, it has proven, cheap, realiable technology that is getting better. As long as they keep that edge, keep pushing the envelope, keep talking to businesses/consumers and find out what they want and deliver on it, MS will be left with YAMSP (Yet Another Money Sucking Project)."

    See, that is the point that most of the tech-savvy miss. The mantra of the tech world is "make a better product and they will come." Problem is that average-joe-user does not have a clue about what is better -- and it is for this reason that Microsoft will win (as they always have -- regardless of how much better or innovative the competition is). This whole article made my heart sink. Imagine this:

    CLIENT SIDE:

    1) MSN search bar in IE, default search to MSN with a bad URL -- no way to change to Google

    2) Search local files -- also kicks back a MSN search if nothing found -- no way to change to Google.

    3) Build MSN search into Office and Outlook without any way to use Google that way.

    With this, Joe average user will find it harder and harder to use Google and easier to use MSN, regardless of which is better. In addtion to this:

    SERVER SIDE:

    1) Build the ability for MSN robots to get metadata from the OS itself in an "undocumented" way that no one else can use with the next release of Windows (who cares if it opens security holes -- no one blames MS for security holes -- they blame "The Internet"). Think of the whole IIS/IE broken-tcp-IE-advantage thing here.

    2) Make it such that IIS breaks other search engines robots

    Overall it will make MSN seem better and Google seem worse in comparison. They have done all this before and they will do it again. Microsoft will win no matter how good Google is.

    I invite anyone to counter my argument that average Joe user will use MSN over Google if MS makes it too tough to use Google through the desktop Monopoly.

    The *really* scary part about this is that if MSN wins Microsoft will control the information that flows on the internet. Imagine all Linux-related web sites no loger getting indexed? The whole "search-for-linux-get-windows instead" points to this.
  • by mnmn ( 145599 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @05:15PM (#6247769) Homepage

    People use many types of access from various ISPS to login, using computers from a wide variety of manufacturers. Most of them use Microsoft operating systems which is a danger to the whole computing world. Microsofts software is increasingly unstable, bloated and generally low-quality. Their monopoly allows them to be lax with testing and quality control.

    The same principle applies to search engines. Almost everyone uses google or yahoo to seach for anything. These two sites have become the very interface to the Internet. This also allows them to alter information (place pro-republican sites above pro-democracy for 'election' search), snoop (with the FBI they might already be doing this), and in the long run suffering the same quality control fate as Microsoft. People build a view of the world around them by exploring and communicating with the other people. The Internet allows people to talk to other people far away and share political and moral opinions which on a larger scale helps tolerance and peace itself. These are not small issues; how many politicians can anyone think of who do NOT get their information from the Internet?

    More search engines will increase the diversity and break the stronghold of google. Google is a single point of failure for the Internet (the only other one is the DNS servers system) for most Internet users. Although I use it and love it, we are giving one company too much control, while knowing what the results of that are. I do doubt Microsoft can cut it as a competitor there since Ive never used MSN, and Ive seen their success with the XBox and other home-media entertainment ventures. Other skilled companies however can bring a fresh search interface to the online world.
  • by ChiefPilot ( 566606 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @05:56PM (#6248181)
    Bottomline: MSFT is not a credible source of information. I don't think that I'm the only one that thinks so.

    The Good News: There are many people like you out there.

    The Bad News: There are even MORE people who don't undrestand what's going on here and will happily accept MSN's results as gospel.

    The Worse News: M$ will spend plenty of advertising money to increase the number of people who fall in the 'Bad News' category.
  • by GunFodder ( 208805 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @07:39PM (#6248949)
    They didn't exactly highlight this information either. The "Featured Sites" font color is light and you have to click twice to get the featured sites definition.
  • by schoett ( 98398 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:33PM (#6249294)
    Search for linux on MSN: 572 hits

    Search for linux on Google: 57.1 million hits

    Does this mean the search space of Google is 100,000 times as big?
  • So that's why... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Drooling_Sheep ( 683079 ) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @11:04PM (#6250263)
    I was wondering why the survey i took on microsoft.com the other day (because i approve of them for the most part unlike most of you) kept asking questions like, "How often do you use Google to search microsoft.com" and "Which Search Engines do you use most often." I would have to say though that microsoft acquiring google could probably not improve google any I appologize if this has already been said, i was not willing to read 500 posts to check.

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Working...