What is Digg?170 Comments
- DariusMonsef, on 10/11/2007, -3/+275I'm always up for a better product... but I don't think "Hold on, let me mylivesearch it" has quite the same zing.
- z00k, on 10/11/2007, -2/+182Blah, the name reminds me to much of that damn spyware called "MyWebSearch"...
- GirthAgain, on 10/11/2007, -11/+166And then along came Firefox.
- DeskFlyer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+94"A Search Engine, Better Than Google"
Does. Not. Compute. - GerryBot, on 10/11/2007, -8/+94I have to stifle a yawn when I hear about the next "Google killer" that comes along. With the Google toolbar and integration into browsers, Big G has the kind of monopoly on the search market that Internet Explorer had on the browser market a few years ago.
- msaleem, on 10/11/2007, -6/+90Whatever works man, if it's as good as they say it is, the people will make a verb out of it one way or another.
- snakesonasam, on 10/11/2007, -2/+79well if it really is better than i am sure that google will buy it within a few hours of it getting onto Digg
- ACrazyGerman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5190% of the people that are like "Yeah no more Google YEAH!" are going to be using Google 5 days after starting using this because Google is simple to spell and its short plus it's burnt into your mind. Google has become a verb, to look up. I doubt this or any thing else will be taking any noticeable about of traffic from Google. Just look at ASK.com they had TV commercials and ads everywhere but I don't know a single person that uses it more then Google.
- TimDigg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+47"Better Search" is such a generic and empty claim
- Mongolai, on 10/11/2007, -1/+38Google is far from just being a brand of search engine though. The phrase "google it" is becoming a "Genericized Trademark" for online search. In the future, when Google is obsolete, people will probably still say "google it".
- ggidster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+37I don't quite understand his business model. On the one hand, he anticipates hitting Google in the pocket (that may be naive, but let's just assume he does for the moment) and on the other, he actually uses Googles search results pages as his starting point for the live searching. Those two don't quite sit well together for me.
Ignoring that, as to whether or not his product is any good will completely revolve around the quality of his software that goes out live crawling the Google search results. This is what we basically all do manually, but as humans we can detect rubbish from gems pretty quickly. Getting a piece of software to do that is a really complex task.
I'll be really interested to see how good it is when it goes live, but I can't really see it working as a long term proposition. - msaleem, on 10/11/2007, -9/+46Like girthagain said, someone is bound to do it. Firefox did it to IE, Apple did it to Sony, Sony did it to SEGA, Nintendo is doing it to everyone. A great product takes you only so far. If a greater product comes along, well so be it.
- DarthBagel, on 10/11/2007, -2/+35Better than google?
Blasphemy - mindstyle1, on 10/11/2007, -3/+34The fundamental problem with all these so-called "Google killers" is that they have ***** names. You can credit all of Google's success to their superior results, the brand plays a big part of it. Until one of these Google killers comes along with a decent brandable name I will ignore any notion that it can take on the giant.
- ubuwalker31, on 10/11/2007, -1/+28@ggidster (#6915433)
His business model is being bought out by Google or one of its competitors -- which isn't a bad plan, really. - OpenFuture, on 10/11/2007, -1/+23This doesn't seem all that practical. While it's a clever idea, the fact that it relies on people to install a browser plug-in for it to operate to its potential seems too unreliable. Not to mention the search engine is piggybacking off of other search engines to help build its index. Also the service is called MyLiveSearch, doesn't it seem like Microsoft will be somewhat unhappy about that name considering they have a search engine called Live Search.
- Jammie, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22OK, admit it, how many of you went googled mylivesearch.
- rompom7, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2450% of the posts above me a retarded. No one said anywhere in the article that MyLiveSearch is going to take over Google, Yahoo! or Microsoft. The article was about which of the major search engines are going to snap up this new technology. Stop ripping into MyLiveSearch when you haven't read the article.
We all know there is no room for anymore search engines. The guy that made it isn't even looking to try and compete with the big guys, he wants to sell this technology (which, imo, could easily be added functionality from the Google Toolbar).
Read the article before criticizing in the future. - Mongolai, on 10/11/2007, -2/+21,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Happy, Birthday, To, You!! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19Looks like it was active two years ago, and just recently came down for a redesign. They made the same claim back then, and it wasn't successful... why should that now change?
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.mylivesearch.com - spect3r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Live Search is something that Google has *probably* already started developing.
The amount of webcrawling that would be required for such a feature would be enormous. That being said, I never believed I could navigate the world using a program like Google Earth... - hbweb500, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Like Gerrybot says, Google already has the Google toolbar in millions of browsers. Seeing as all "MyLiveSearch" is is a browser plug-in, Google could simply add this functionality into their own toolbar and already have an established user base.
- toucci, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17The way it searches "live" seems like it would carry a hefty bandwidth overhead for marginal benefit. I think they're going where others have wisely avoided before.
- SPThom, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15I second the impracticality. In general, I just don't see a client-side search spider as a good idea. You're right... it's impractical to expect a user to install a browser plugin. It would also seem extremely inefficient... First of all, an average workstation isn't going to have a fraction of the power that the Googlebot system has. Second, it sounds like there's no cumulative effect here... i.e. if you search for "red cars" on MyLiveSearch, then I search for "red cars", isn't my computer doing all the same work that yours did, over and over again?
This could also have a brutal effect on web servers. Back in the early days of RSS, my site got slammed for a few weeks because of a new client-side RSS aggregator. It seemed like a few hundred thousand users were grabbing my RSS feed every five minutes or so. It nearly maxed out my bandwidth allotment, and yet I didn't see the slightest improvment in traffic. I'm afraid a client-side search engine like this would be even worse. - DeusNova, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Burried for blasphemy! How dare you think you're better than Google. Hmph.
- MrRockabilly, on 10/11/2007, -9/+22Wake me up when 'MyLiveSearch' offers over 2GB of e-mail storage, Mobile Maps for smart phone, 100MB of free personal webpage storage, and online word processing solution.
- plncrzy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13... or necessary periods.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14MyLiveSearch? You'd think that they would come up with a better name if they're trying to beat one of the biggest web companies.
- cr4ft, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14That guy has a small resemblance to Sergey brin
- popothebright, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13WTF is with this obsession with the word "Live". Microsoft has been dubbing everything "Live" ever since IE4.0. It means nothing.
Lose the "Live", and go with MySearch.com for a better name.
Or how about any letter in the alphabet preceding the word "Search".
And don't say "the domain wasn't available", because if you're in the game to topple (friggin) Google, you can pony up the $20k for a stupid domain name.
Newsflash: this is a CONSUMER PRODUCT. Branding matters. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16There's nothing I like more than an unecessary comma
- LaSepultura, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13If it gains popularity and is truly better, than Google will just buy them out.
- rwallen, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11The logo is ugly, I wont use it because of that.
- killthelight, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8There's an article about it on TechCrunch also: http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/05/29/look-out-google-here-come-the-aussies/
If you have a trawl around the guy's site, it looks pretty amateur to me, eg. http://www.mylivesearch.com/preapproved/preapinfo.php
I don't think anything noteworthy will come from this guy at all. - ruz322, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11No thanks, I prefer google.
- zdiggler, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=google&word2=mylivesearch
- hfactor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Or necessary 'n's.
- bgii2000, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Did anyone actually read the article?
From the guy who invented mylivesearch: "...The search terms are put through Google..."
mylivesearch is nothing more than a filter plugin for Google. It basically does a google search for the search terms, browses the results with its own crawler in real-time, then re-ranks the results and passes them on to the searcher.
Calling this a Google-killer is a oxymoron. 1. It uses Google to generate results. Therefore, any "market-share" they garner is actually Google's market-share. 2. It'd be insanely simple for Google to add this to their algorithm, canceling any novelty the start-up might have. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7brutal name.. absolutely brutal. My this, My that.. sounds like a bloody tween convention.
- ShepherdBook, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Right, I love the comment 'Google can't index every page everyday', then goes on to say that every client will index a ton of pages with every search (and then throw that work away?)
The Internet is not a truck! You can't just dump Billions of spiders on the tubes everyday. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5This is what I think of this so-called "live" search:
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/3059/lolliveserachlv1.png
Dugg down as another stupid site that will most likely turn into a placeholder page "courtesy of GoDaddy.com" in less than a year. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Sounds like bull to me.
- kevinisnthere, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Buried as Inaccurate.
- mchriste, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Buried as blasphemy.
- watermelongunn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Ditto. This seems incredibly impractical. Also, was this article written by the developer? It would seem so, as his name is under the headline. Yet he writes "Mr Gabriel, 35, says his search engine gives better, more relevant results than the search king because..." Strange. My guess is that he *wants* Google to buy him out. For example, he writes "This technology could be snapped onto any of the major search engines and improve them."
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6That guy's pic looks like he wants to take over the world.... weirdo.
- resta6, on 01/12/2009, -0/+5its all hype...where is the PRODUCT?
- johnvbrennan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Yeah but did you know that Google's original name was "BackRub" named "for its unique ability to analyze the "back links" pointing to a given website." See: http://www.google.com/corporate/history.html
BackRub it...I mean Google it :-) - Rhevher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Completely agree. Contrary to the assuptions of many people who love forwarding "funny" emails to all their friends - the Internet is not free. There are resource costs with every Internet transaction, including spiders.
- Joeymad, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5@ snakesonasam
FTFA: "A Google business development representative has met with the MyLiveSearch team at least twice - once when the technology was at a very early stage, and again last week after Next made inquiries about Google's interest in the project."
... looks like they are ahead of the game. -
Show 51 - 100 of 167 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 