July 2, 2001 9:53 AM   Subscribe

Google offers a new service. New for them anyway.
How does everyone think it compares to Yahoo! and other, similar services?
posted by TiggleTaggleTiger (12 comments total)
Double post, my dear. (Maybe even triple.)
posted by jennak at 10:10 AM on July 2, 2001

yahoo doesn't have an image search, do they? I'd assume if they did have one, it'd use google's engine anyway; they use google for their regular searches already.

I know lycos and altavista have image searches - i used to use lycos's when i needed a random picture of something, or when i just needed some sort of inspiration or whatever. Anyhow, I'll be using google from now on - i like its interface a lot more than either of the others, and it seems to come up with better results most of the time.

google is, as far as I'm concerned, the king of the search business. and I couldn't be happier with that, since they seem to do everything right; witness and now, not to mention how incredibly effective their normal search is, and their ultralight straight-to-the-point homepage. (i love the happy canada day header that's up right now, btw). I'm sure there are more examples, but my point is google pretty much kicks ass.
posted by chrisege at 10:11 AM on July 2, 2001

I don't know how it compares, but judging from the number of hits I've had in the last few days from people searching for "rude nude", there's a lot of people beta testing it for them.
posted by ewagoner at 10:17 AM on July 2, 2001

Yahoo! used to have an image search, but I don't think it ever got out of beta. Now, they've got the Gallery, but it's nothing more than a search for Corbis and NBA photos.
posted by hijinx at 10:20 AM on July 2, 2001

I've been testing out the new Google feature for a few days, and I'm liking it a lot. I especially like the way it brings up the image and the context.

So far the results have been relevant. Except an ego search. I happen to know there are frykitty images out there, but when I type in my name, I get Adam Mathes and Paul Mercurio. Sure, they're on my site, but they don't look a thing like me.
posted by frykitty at 10:31 AM on July 2, 2001

lol, that canada day thing is great..
posted by lotsofno at 10:32 AM on July 2, 2001

Hmm, in checking my logs, it sure is popular. In case you ask the question "who do you need to sleep with to get your page listed first when people search for the word fuck" the correct answer is: no one.
posted by jessamyn at 11:23 AM on July 2, 2001

A heads up for those of you who've customized your google preferences - the image search only works with English. The other languages allow you use the images search 'interface' but return only standard google-type results - no images.
posted by TheChump at 12:10 PM on July 2, 2001

So, tell me more about this... "Noah Juan."
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:21 PM on July 2, 2001

Weird...put in a search for "metafilter" and come up with milofilter?
posted by samsara at 5:09 PM on July 2, 2001

Wow, Google is scary/creepy sometimes. I did a search for "wax seal", and it gave me a nice image of a wax seal. Which happened to be located on a German web page that didn't even have the English words on it.
posted by smackfu at 8:26 PM on July 2, 2001

Smackfu, that's because Google indexes based on the links to the site. If any/many of them use the term "wax seal", you'll be able to find it that way.

That's why Google Bombing works.
posted by dhartung at 11:39 PM on July 2, 2001

« Older Judge not; lest ye be judged.   |   You Stupid #@$! Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments