> I think the concept's ok and I like the interface, which is very minimal, > but the results and the way to search is not quite there yet ;-) >
You're more than charitable. :-) When you aim to topple the planet's most efficient money making apparatus disguised as a search engine (which Cuil unfortunately positioned themselves as, in hopes of generating buzz), the simple logic says you must do what Google does, do it better and then offer stuff Google does not and, more importantly, cannot. IOW, if Google can look at what you do and spend a few months to emulate it, plus add their insurmountable advantages in scale and distribution, you're toast. So the concept is not OK, if you're not running an experimental charity organization. As to results, things get weirder. I've read that the reason why people get different results from Cuil for the same search terms executed at different times is that their architecture is constructed on knowkledge domains. For instance, there is a server just for, say, astrology, where all appropriate search queries go to be processed. But when that server is down, as was the case for many such servers on their launch day, all queries for astrology go to the general server pool which, apparently, doesn't have the same chops to process such requests. So you get inconsistent, unrefined returns contaminating the top results. For some reason, notions such as massively parallel processing, sharding, shared-nothing architectures, etc., escaped the attention of cool folks at Cuil. Fail, written all over. -- Kontra http://counternotions.com ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
