Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 49
- Sphinn It!
Went Hot: July 29, 2008 - 11:23 am
Posted By: gyutae 342 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://searchengineland.com)
Category: Google
24 Comments
Went Hot: July 29, 2008 - 11:23 am
Posted By: gyutae 342 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://searchengineland.com)
Category: Google
24 Comments
Sphinn Sponsors
Be a Sphinn Sponsor - Click HereTop 10 Most Sphunn
In What's New
- Where the European SEO industry rea... (15)
- Mark Prints for Self on Other’s Blo... (11)
- Landing Pages On A SMB Budget (9)
- Bing says relative URLs pass less l... (8)
- Should I Advertise on Bing? (6)
- FriendFeed Joins The Real-Time Sear... (5)
- Leadership Blogging, It’s All About... (5)
- The 3 SEO/SEM Conference Personas (5)
- 3 Important Mistakes that could bri... (4)
- Are You An Internet Marketer? (4)
Latest Comments
- Great tips Kevin. Keep them coming!!!!…
- Great SEO book keep up the great work…
- Another awesome resource from Freelance Folder. If you are in the freelance…
- Great viral idea. It would be good to see how this worked out into actual s…
- plumbers in chel…
- excellent SEO book - not just for beginners its for everyone…
- As a SEO practitioner located in Panama City, Panama I find that local sear…
- Very Nice Read!…
- - read more -
Save the date for:
• SMX Singapore - July 2-3, 2009
• SMX São Paulo - August 4-5
• SMX East - October 5-7, 2009
• SMX Stockholm - 12-13 October, 2009
• SMX Mexico - November 11, 2009
Learn more about search marketing through free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site Search Marketing Now.
Upcoming Webcasts:
- How Large Offline Marketers Drive Superior Search Marketing Results - July 21, 2009
- Trademarks, Brand Terms and PPC Advertising: Updates You Must Know - July 22, 2009
- Attribution Management Buyers Guide - July 28, 2009
Comments
120 Billion webpages it claims to search and yet a simple search for the NHS returns no matches. A little worrying that it can't find any webpages from the worlds 3rd biggest employer. Google came up with just under 24million matches. If they want to rival Google they might need to be a little more impressive
Gotta admit that I am "real skeptical" about their claims of index size, when so many queries return zero (0) results. OK, beyond skeptical. I think they're just lying.
A tip for all would-be search startups: "Don't suck at search and don't lie about your search engine."
Yet another worthless press release for yet another worthless search engine.
man do I agree with you Dan.... that search engine is a piece of ... well worse that Wikipedia's attempt. just really lousy for a search engine.
Dan, I think your experience may be more due to a bug than lack of indexing. I found that for many searches, I got zero results the first time. But if I clicked the search button again on that "no results found" page, I got a full list of results for the query. I don't think they're lying; they just have a bit of work still to do in the execution.
The ranking technology sounds like it's loosly based on the way Ask.com ranks sites, although the UI is vastly different. Is the UI better? Not sure.
Some queries I am familiar with show results very similar in quality (and sites) to Google.
A couple obscure queries I am familiar with return some pretty poor results. Their algorithm seems to fall apart with low volume phrases.
Pages from the same sites seem to be repeated a lot for some queries. Other search engines have the same issue, but with Cuil it is more obvious because the same site images are repeated over and over. It's so bad it actually annoyed me to the point where I started shaking my head in distgust going through some SERPS.
I think they're on to something, but missed the mark on the details. It's too bad, because much of what I didn't like were minor issues that could be resolved. With a media blitz like they did, it will be hard to get many to ever come back for a second look once things improve.
hopefully they will index the (mostly scathing) reviews that are popping up all over the web and
use the feedback to improve. The serps with more text looks interesting, but might take some getting used to.
You totally dodged the issues with privacy. Because of that, reading your article was essentially a waste of my time.
This site is not good at all... and the name is even worse. Great PR department apparently, though.
Here is some good advice...
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/07/marilyn-monroe.html
@Chris1 - thanks for the link! It was a good read.
@vanessafox - thanks for chiming in. It's good to see heavyweights chiming in on stuff like this. I have to agree with Dan on this one. Even if it is a glitch, it's a fairly significant one. Moreover, the press release was simply too over the top and ambitious for my liking. This engine is simply not ready for primetime so it shouldn't have fronted as such.
My underlying issue here is that creating a search engine that bases its results on the on-page content of a page seems like a step backwards, not a step forward. The easiest thing in the world to game is on-page content. Inbound linking algos can also be gamed, as we all know, but to exclude this factor from a search engine seems laughable IMHO.
The relavance stinks. Lots of shopping feed listings. My logo is showing up next to a competitors listing (Cool).
Where are they pulling their images from?
One of my sites is being brought up for a result accompanied by a completely unrelated photo from some other website.
Hmm...not too cuil.
Anyone else having this experience?
Miriam
MiriamEllis @ Your are right .. its a big mess .. check this: http://www.cuil.com/search?q=ankit+rawat My SEO Moz Profile have a pic of a Cricketer .. lol, I know there is one Ankit rawat who is a Cricketer but he don't come on SEOMoz and have nothing to do with that !!
Start-up search engines still don't realize that they don't need to "best Google". They don't need to be more "relevant" in some fancy way (relevance is just an illusion, anyway).
It's enough to provide a viable alternative, so that everyone who is wary of Google (and their numbers are increasing) could have something to promote -- on blogs, to relatives and clients etc.
Lots of people check out Cuil during these days. Will any of them come away impressed? Will any of them change their default search from Google to Cuil? Replace Google as a site search provider with Cuil, presumed king of index size (which should, in theory, give sites a more thorough indexing)? Anybody starting to gush about Cuil to those around him?
No. No. No. No.
I'm with Dan Thies. Cuil's just a three-day PR-wonder (or disaster).
Miriam, I think they are pulling their images from our site. I have found several of our competitors listed with images from our site. In one case we don't even have an image and yet 7 of the top 10 photos are from our site.
Gee...I hope our competitors appreciate the business we're sending them.
Jim
Well, until their servers are actually functioning we will never know will we? I certainly am not going to take all day to do a simple search.
Next, I do not like any deviation from the well accepted 1 to 10 listings on each search listing page. That certainly is a big strike against Cuil, in my book.
Second, claiming to have indexed a web page does not mean that they have indexed more than the first paragraph or two of each page.
man I am already so sick of hearing about Cuil.
The three-column search results are annoying. I need to be able to skim results quickly. If they made it one-column, I think it would do much better.
The site's design looks impressive..I love the colors and design..but their are some major things to do with the results page.
*** Next, I do not like any deviation from the well accepted 1 to 10 listings on each search listing page. ***
So, you'll be hating Google SERPs for the last year or more then, with all the extra universal and one-box results added in for news, blogs, images, maps, etc?
Somebody quoted my comment, ... Yawn. :(
Ditto!
An improvement would be numbering them, like Yahoo did at one time.
Send comment HTML is disabled
What I find interesting and disconcerting at the same time is that many of the images don't relate to the found site/article. It's almost like they did a separate search for images relating to a term and then just randomly added images to the search results.
Also their data is OLD. I did a search on my name which I always do to satisfy my narcissistic ways, and my like-named nemesis, who happens to play professional poker showed up everywhere. Even a Wikipedia posting for him which was deleted at least 30 days ago. When i finally did find a reference to me, it was from a posting I made in 2001 to a forum. Perhaps they need to order their database so that recency of data has greater relevance. And while they are at it, they ought to make certain the image associated with a listing actually relates to that listing.
In other searches I performed I had similar weird results which were certainly not "better" or "more relevant" than Google's results and frankly felt just a bit random. I'll chalk it up to launching too early so may try again in a month or two...or maybe not.
Cuil FAIL, next!
i like the fact that they actually tackle privacy because with the big G, you can type in your home phone number and it will give you your address..... its an open book. Plus google tend to monopolize everything so its good to have a variety..
but cuil has to still prove that a lot of things and for now I think google is still the dominatiing search engines..
Just my can of thoughts
Umm, I don't like the way Cuil lays out its search result. The search result doesn't seem as relavant as others. It looks like a wrapper. Something like the Hakia is also a wrapper, could be a wrapper of big G or Yahoo. I don't think those new launches could have their search database grow so big and fast to be comparable with the big G or yahoo. I also have a wrapper of Yahoo, an ajax-based search engine, http://www.askalexia.com/ajaxsearch/