Sent to you by Sean McBride via Google Reader: Hope dives right into
DeepDyve, should you? via AltSearchEngines by Hope Leman on 11/14/08
Okay, here I am at home today and away from the firewalled,
database-rich environment of my usual medical library setting. That was
also the case a few weeks ago when I reviewed the search engine,

Now the search world is reacting to the press release, “Infovell
Changes Name to DeepDyve, Rolls Out Consumer Search Engine for the Deep

Some of the reaction has been of the pooh-poohing sort, pointing that
most users already possess such search options through the online
offerings of public libraries or free resources such as PubMed or the
free parts of ScienceDirect.

But I would argue for the merits of DeepDyve. There is a huge untapped
market of unaffiliated knowledge workers, such as independent scholars
and consultants, who work out of their homes or travel continually and
who need search tools that are not tied to institutions. And yes,
ScienceDirect has a wealth of material to explore. But as a search
engine? Yeech. Clunky as can be. And much as I love PubMed, I often
have to search it and ScienceDirect and Academic Search Premier (and
one doesn’t have unlimited time to do all in every situation). What
DeepDyve has going for it is an elegant interface and the capacity to
look for a huge chunk of verbiage that ScienceDirect would gag on.

Much of the carping argues the depth of what DeepDyve searches is still
by some lights limited and that what it is touting as results from the
deep Web are often little more gleanings from Wikipedia. Point
taken—for now. But if sci-tech and business publishers want to reach
serious searchers (you know, the kind that might actually shell out $35
for a white paper or $90 for one of Elsevier’s clinics on medical
topics) they would do well to enter into talks with DeepDyve to render
their stuff findable to such potentially lucrative markets. DeepDyve is
good technology. It is not DeepDyve’s fault if the publishers are
clueless about partnering with search companies. I am deeply into
clinical research searching and find it unfathomable why the medical
publishers are so blinkered and act against their own interests when it
comes to leveraging the power of search start-ups. Let us hope that
some savvy marketers at Elsevier, Springer and the specialized trade
publications will come knocking on DeepDyve’s doors.

And who can argue against attempts at innovation in search? DeepDyve
charges less than many academic journals—and that is a single
subscription to a single journal as opposed to the wealth of data that
DeepDyve can search. It is also one of the few search engines that
actually provides items “more like this” when asked for just that.

Power searchers, check out DeepDyve. Free gets you only so far. You can
sign up for a beta version: Give it a spin.

Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to AltSearchEngines using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
favorite sites

Reply via email to