-
Website
http://www.scobleizer.com/ -
Original page
http://scobleizer.com/2006/05/10/radio-userland-developer-joins-microsofts-livecom-team/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
danja
44 comments · 4 points
-
polizeros
52 comments · 1 points
-
AndyBeard
69 comments · 4 points
-
Zachary Adam Cohen
35 comments · 8 points
-
dbarefoot
40 comments · 3 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
World-brand-building mistakes France’s entrepreneurs make
2 weeks ago · 181 comments
-
The best and worst thing Twitter did in 2009: RT
3 days ago · 24 comments
-
2010: the year SEO isn’t important anymore
1 week ago · 67 comments
-
iPhone developers abandoning app model for HTML5?
1 week ago · 52 comments
-
A new addition here: the Meebo bar
2 days ago · 8 comments
-
World-brand-building mistakes France’s entrepreneurs make
;-)
tqii
The live one didn't have this automatic link, and when I clicked on "Local" it changed the search to "Jake s" in "Billing, MT" which doesn't work. "Jakes" doesn't work either, and on my third try jake's (without the quotes) finally returned me the result. Then click took me to a details page which finally had the website linked on it.
Not brilliant :)
In comparison, Google's page navigation looks rather stupid. Why, when I get the first page of results am I given the option to navigate to other than the next page? Who in their right mind would say "I don't see what I want on the first page, let me skip to page 7 and see what's there?" :-|
Speaking of stupid -- is the slider control at the top right of the Live results really necessary? Or is this just another case of engineers running the show with a "let's do it because we can" attitude?
Also, what's the purpose of the "+add to live.com"? I thought I was already on live.com. Oh, you mean add it to my personalized home page on live.com. Why didn't you say so? This still begs the question as to why I would want search results on my home page. I guess it's because the engineers could do it. :-)
For some previous reactions I've had to live.com, check out: http://wymanator.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_wymana...
Kalu
Another thing that is a minor annoyance is the "offset" argument in the URL @ live.com. I scrolled down for a little while, not realizing I was incrementing the offset all the way to 18. So I would have had to hit the Back button 18 times to get back to your post. Yikes.
The Google search worked great, map, phone number etc.
The 'smooth' scroll wasn't that smooth, and I can imagine the effect would be more pronounced on slower computers.
Still it looked quite slick.
People complaining about long load times: on one side I feel your pain, but on the other hand: when have you known MS to care about slow net users and slow hardware? EVERY iteration of its OS was designed to take advantage of and run most comfortable on the latest and greatest hardware. Vista pushes this to new limits. And why should it be surprising that MSs approach to the web is no different?
And I think the search market can bear both: the clean no-frills for the purists, and the bells-and-whistles for, well, other people :)
Was the food good, did you go there?
Improve search quality -- then you wouldn't need to serve an infinite number of results for people to find what they are after.
Funny enough though doing this same search on search.msn.com brought quick results exactly like google, top spot with all relevant info like google and clicking on msn local also provides the map and a link to Local.live
So as far as presentation search.msn seems just as good as google with that respect
When you search images in live it is very well implemented, if you click on a image it shows it to you on the right side with all the relevant images list on the left with the infinite scroll, they should do the same with web searching.
click on a link that then renders in the right side box, with all other links to search on the left still with infinite scroll, that would provide a nice clean search workflow and you could even intergrate a similair google onebox feature on the upper left? And have cached page thumbnails like the image search does it.
simply put: make live web searches exactly the way it handles live image searches, which currently is the best handling I think of any image search engine
Bottom line: cool idea, but if it can't be implemented in a better way you are better off not doing it at all.
Actually it is an Ajax page. How do you think they do the scrollbar and other fancy stuff?
Safari doesn't support the necessary standards to work with Live.com. The Live.com team worked with the Mozilla and Opera folks to get everything covered (including improvements to Opera 9). But the Safari team wasn't interested. So maybe you should raise your complaints with them?
However, the concept is good and if it means that more people are delving into the deeper search results then fine. Does this imply though that Live.com search is not as good at finding relevant content than Google? Therefore some way of getting people to look at the extended search results was needed?
And why do I want "infinite" results -- if a search engine can't tell me what I want in 10 (or ideally 3!) results then it's not doing its job.