We definitively put to rest the great debate over search engine supremacy. How? We started typing and watched ACTUAL search suggestions appear. It's now obvious to us—women are running Yahoo! See for yourself.
9.
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Google Launches New Ad Marketplace; Display Ads Will Never Be the Same
You’re probably familiar with Google AdSense and AdWords, Google’s (
) flagship advertising products. It’s how Google makes its billion of dollars. Highly targeted text ads appear on Google search and third party websites that are part of the AdSense program. Advertisers buy ads based on keywords, with more popular keywords costing more per click than less popular terms.
) flagship advertising products. It’s how Google makes its billion of dollars. Highly targeted text ads appear on Google search and third party websites that are part of the AdSense program. Advertisers buy ads based on keywords, with more popular keywords costing more per click than less popular terms. This has only applied to text ads though, not banner or display ads. But speculation was rampant that Google would apply its unique and lucrative ad model to display ads after its $3.1 Billion DoubleClick acquisition.
Now that speculation has become reality. Google has just launched the DoubleClick Ad Exchange, and it is just like AdWords and AdSense, except that it is a marketplace for display ads.
First, here is what Google said in its announcement:
“We’ve been working hard to put these principles into practice, and today we’re excited to announce the new DoubleClick Ad Exchange, a step towards creating a more open display advertising ecosystem for everyone. The Ad Exchange is a real-time marketplace that helps large online publishers on one side; and ad networks and agency networks on the other, buy and sell display advertising space.
These publishers and ad networks manage and represent large volumes of ads and ad space from lots of advertisers and websites. By bringing them together in an open marketplace in which prices are set in a real-time auction, the Ad Exchange enables display ads and ad space to be allocated much more efficiently. This improves returns for advertisers and enables publishers to get the most value out of their online content.”
Essentially, the small-time advertiser or business can now buy targeted display ads on thousands of DoubleClick ad-serving websites. This could have some major repercussions on the entire web. Some possibilities:
- It could significantly increase revenue for Google, as a highly targeted ad marketplace means people are paying more for the ads they want to serve.
- It increases Google’s competition with Yahoo, the current leader in display advertising.
- Highly targeted ad campaigns could effectively reach everywhere. This could be a major boon to marketers.
If you want to learn more, Google has a PDF explaining the Ad Exchange, as well as a video overview:
Google Releases Chrome Version 3
Just two weeks after Google Chrome’s birthday, the search engine giant has unleashed Google Chrome version 3. It’s faster, supports HTML5, and still does not run on the Mac OS. 
While the new stable release doesn’t introduce anything groundbreaking (unless you just love custom themes), it does provide some important tweaks. The biggest one focuses on Google’#1 obsession: speed. This is Chrome bread and butter. The search company claims that the new browser is 25% faster at executing JavaScript than Chrome V2, among other speed fixes.
While you may not immediately notice Chrome’s increased speed, it will be tough to pass by the new Chrome Tab page, which now sports a new, cleaner layout of your most recently visited and bookmarked websites. It takes out the right hand sidebar and extends your most visited websites across the entire browser tab.
There are a few other updates of note. First is more HTML5 support, specifically the <>, <>, and the <> tags, which help embed video and audio without the need for Flash (here’s a taste of what’s to come). Another big one is Chrome Themes, which were available in the development and beta releases but now make their official debut.
While we appreciate new releases, we still are waiting for Google Chrome for Macs. It’s surprising it hasn’t come after a full year on Windows OS. Yes, there is a buggy development version, but we want the real thing already.
Google and Microsoft: The Battle Over College E-Mail
College students used to complain about dining-hall mystery meat. Their new gripe? Puny e-mail inboxes
Students have been howling that school e-mail accounts are too small to handle their daily deluge of mail and attachments. To address that problem, a growing number of colleges and universities are outsourcing their e-mail. The companies swooping in to manage student accounts for free? Google and Microsoft. Like search, software and operating systems, campuses are a burgeoning battleground for the tech titans.
Google now manages e-mail for more than 2,000 colleges and universities, enabling students to transform accounts capped at 100 mb into Google-managed inboxes that allow for 70 times as much mail. Microsoft also provides free Web-based mail for thousands of schools, including colleges in 86 countries. Once colleges switch systems, students keep their .edu e-mail address while upgrading from stodgy campus access pages to speedier, sleeker Google (or Microsoft) log-ins.
Kirk Gregersen, senior director for Microsoft's Live@Edu program, says many schools that already rely on Microsoft software and services are comfortable expanding the relationship by letting Microsoft manage Web-based student e-mail.
Early adopters of Google, such as Northwestern, are lately being joined by Cornell, Georgetown and Temple, to name a few. Google's Apps for Education program has gained significant momentum as student tech demands mount and budgetary pressures strain campus IT departments. Handing the e-mail keys over to Google helps schools avoid costly server upgrades while capitalizing on Web-based e-mail's popularity among students. Eric Weil, managing partner for Student Monitor, a national college-focused market research firm, says the average college student has two or three personal e-mail addresses, and Gmail's popularity among students has doubled over the past two years.
In the 2008 national Campus Computing Project (CCP) survey, 42% of schools reported that they had already migrated or were about to migrate to an outsourced student e-mail service. Another 28% said they were considering switching. CCP founding director Kenneth Green says many of today's first-year students like to use the Web-based e-mail they grew accustomed to in high school, just as many stick to an existing cell phone number rather than get a new dorm number.
Brown University is among the legion of schools now testing Google-managed messaging. Brown Junior Sarah Bolling says she hopes her school Googlifies permanently because she gets about 300 e-mails a week and misses important class messages when her tiny 250-mb school inbox overflows. She's not alone. More than 60% of Brown students have already been forwarding their messages to Gmail accounts, says Donald Tom, Brown's IT support director. He says the switch could help reduce a planned multimillion-dollar expenditure to upgrade Brown's tech infrastructure.
Of schools in the 2008 CCP survey that reported having outsourced e-mail already, 57% said they had opted for Google, while 38% had partnered with Microsoft. In addition to e-mail, Google's free Apps for Education offering includes voice- and video-chatting capabilities as well as collaborative word processing, spreadsheet, presentation and website-creation software. Google Apps shed its beta, or trial, label in July, reassuring decision makers. Microsoft, which is refining its own Web-based Office software, grants every student 25 gb of free online storage space.
When Notre Dame hired out their e-mail to Google last year, the school saved $1.5 million in storage and other tech costs, says Katie Rose, Notre Dame's program manager for enterprise initiatives. Student e-mail satisfaction ratings rose 36% after the switch. Arizona State estimated that its savings with Google were $400,000 per year. Washington State University, meanwhile, expects to save about $100,000 by working with Microsoft.
What's in it for Google and Microsoft? Not revenue. Neither company charges for outsourced e-mail. In its contracts with schools, Google forgoes the $50 annual fee per user that it charges companies and promises not to impose ads on students or faculty. Microsoft makes a similar pledge.
Even if it doesn't boost short-term profits, Google hopes serving schools for free will help broaden acceptance for Web-based e-mail and software services, says Jeff Keltner, who heads Google's Apps for Education team. Keltner says administrators appreciate not just cost savings but security benefits. "They walk away saying my data is probably safer in Google's data center than anywhere I would house it myself," he says. "And they appreciate the advantages to having data in the cloud, rather than residing on phones or laptops, which are devices that tend to get lost."
Timothy Chester, chief information officer for Pepperdine University, which recently partnered with Google, says his staff is 20% smaller than it was three years ago. Taking advantage of Google's economies of scale means that his smaller team can focus more on improving the way computers are used for learning on campus. "We want our staff working more with students and faculty and less on the nuts and bolts of delivering technology."
Source : Time Magazine
Google users search more, very loyal: comScore
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Search market leader Google Inc holds greater loyalty among its users, who conduct more searches a month than those on Yahoo! and Microsoft, new data issued on Friday showed, posing a challenge for the new team of rivals to Google.
While Yahoo! Inc and Microsoft Corp lag far behind Google in overall search share, their combined search penetration of 73 percent is not far behind Google, at 84 percent, according to research house comScore, Inc.
Yet Google searchers conduct an average of 54.5 searches a month -- about double the number of searches that Yahoo! and Microsoft users conduct combined. They search on average 26.9 times a month, comScore reported.
ComScore also found that Google searchers have the most loyalty, making nearly 70 percent of their searches on Google sites. People who use Yahoo! and Microsoft sites combined search there about 33 percent of the time and also use Google heavily.
While Yahoo! and Microsoft, which inked a 10-year Web search deal in July to counter Google, still look up to their rival in terms of market share, they have a "real opportunity to make headway given that nearly three-quarters of all searchers conduct at least one search on these engines every month," said comScore analyst Eli Goodman.
"The challenge will be to create a search experience compelling enough to convert lighter searchers into regular searchers which is generally easier than converting new users," Goodman said in a statement.
If they were able to match how many searches their users make with Google's searchers, Yahoo! and Microsoft, which recently launched its new Bing search engine, would command a more than 40 percent market share, Goodman added.
Google dominates the U.S. core search market with a 65 percent share of searches in June, compared to a combined 28 percent for Yahoo! and Microsoft sites.
(Reporting by Laura Isensee; Editing by Richard Chang)
Source: Reuters
Microsoft, Nokia, and Google Take Aim at RIM
Three giant names in mobile technology are making moves to challenge the BlackBerry's dominance among business users of smartphones
Some of the biggest names in mobile technology are girding for battle against BlackBerry maker Research In Motion (RIMM) and iPhone creator Apple (AAPL).
Later this year, Google (GOOG) and partners that include handset maker Motorola (MOT) plan devices and features aimed at business users of mobile phones. Meantime, Nokia (NOK) and Microsoft (MSFT) are joining forces in their effort to take share in the lucrative market for company-friendly smartphones.
The moves are aimed mainly at RIM, the U.S. leader in smartphones for businesses, and defending against a rising threat from Apple and Palm (PALM). In July, RIM accounted for 34% of smartphone sales in the stores of the largest U.S. wireless service providers, and it boasted the most popular smartphone on the market, the BlackBerry Curve, according to research by Avian Securities.
Microsoft and Nokia announced their offensive on Aug. 12, saying that beginning in 2010 they'll unveil features including tight security and syncing with other devices. The companies also said they'll work together to get other applications, such as Microsoft's Office productivity tools, onto cell phones, and that by working together they can make it cheaper for corporations to support smartphones for employees.
"Way Beyond E-Mail"
"This is a move targeted towards RIM," Ed Snyder, principal at Charter Equity Research, wrote in an Aug. 12 research report. The first fruits of the collaboration will debut in Nokia's E-series smartphones next year. "BlackBerry and RIM have taken a very prominent place [in the market] based on e-mail," Robert Andersson, executive vice-president for devices at Nokia, tells BusinessWeek.com. "What we are offering is way beyond e-mail."
Nokia says it will give corporate IT managers ways to support its smartphones for less than it costs to support BlackBerrys, by doing away with the need for some servers. "We are definitely confident we can deliver this in a more cost-effective way," Andersson says. Apples-to-apples comparisons are tough to make because Research In Motion offers a variety of service options, says Ronald Gruia, principal analyst at consultant Frost & Sullivan. RIM didn't respond to requests for comment.
The alliance marks the first time Microsoft will develop applications for phones based on rival mobile software, in this case Nokia's Symbian operating system, instead of its homegrown Windows Mobile. "We know customers want choice in the devices they select," Takeshi Numoto, corporate vice-president for Office at Microsoft, tells BusinessWeek.com. "This shouldn't be taken as in any way a lack of our commitment to Windows Mobile."
At the same time, Google has redoubled its push into the business market, also promising more features at a lower cost. Till now, the so-called Android operating system developed by Google and partners has been aimed mainly at consumers, but that's set to change. "Today, we don't support many enterprise applications, but in the future, I think enterprise will be a good focus for us," Andy Rubin, the executive pushing Android for Google, told news service Reuters on July 31.
Google's Offering Value
Outside developers have long offered business apps for Android devices, but Google plans to adapt existing applications, including e-mail and tools for creating documents and calendars, to Android-based smartphones, Rubin says. Google's offering may be cheaper than RIM's, Gruia says. "They'll have a very compelling value proposition, for sure," he says.
Google's enterprise push coincides with the release of several new Android-based devices from Motorola, Samsung, and HTC that may carry particular appeal to business users. In late 2009 the manufacturers will release the first Android-based devices that have the look and feel of the traditional BlackBerrys, with full Qwerty keyboards convenient for typing long e-mails, according to Avian Securities data. "One of the things we are waiting to see is a truly enterprise-class device that runs Android," says Will Stofega, a program manager at consultant IDC. "That could start a new competitive round. It has a lot of possibility."
Large business-software companies are looking to start supporting Android-based phones as well. Later this year, Good Technology, a rival to BlackBerry's "push" e-mail services, plans to release an Android app that will let IT managers manage Android-based handsets remotely. It will also let mobile users log in to a corporate network using a virtual private network (VPN). "Our goal…is to be able to go to the enterprise and say, 'You can have the same kind of experience with all mobile devices, so you don't have to stay with the BlackBerry,' " says Good Chief Marketing Officer John Herrema III.
Security Risks?
To succeed, Nokia, Google, and others will need to win over skeptical IT managers who have come to trust the BlackBerry and are leery of security risks posed by new systems. "Every time you add another service, you are adding additional complexity and risk," says Morteza Rahimi, chief technology officer at Northwestern University. "However, we don't really have much choice, because the value of these devices when they work right is tremendous. We are going to support all of [the devices]."
And even if they can't convince IT execs, RIM's rivals will certainly want to get the so-called prosumer, or the person who uses purchases for both personal and professional use. Today, fewer corporations are buying smartphones for employees, says Ken Dulaney, a vice-president at consultant Gartner (IT). Instead, consumers buy an increasing proportion of smartphones on their own, for both personal and business use, and ask their companies to support them later. Up to 60% of all smartphones purchased today are used for both personal and business functions, Dulaney estimates.
Consumers evaluate security and capabilities differently from IT managers. Many people have begun using Apple's iPhones for business purposes, for example, long before Apple began winning IT managers over. End-user demand eventually pushed many corporations to support the iPhone. Now, Nokia, Google, and Microsoft hope prosumers will work their magic with rival tools as well.
Source: BusinessWeek
Facebook Finds a Friend in Google Rivalry
The acquisition of startup FriendFeed gives Facebook ammo in a battle not just with Twitter, but Google as well
After failing to acquire Twitter last fall, Facebook went shopping for what may be the next best thing.
On Aug. 10, Facebook said it had acquired FriendFeed, the Mountain View (Calif.) social aggregation service founded by Google (GOOG) alumni Bret Taylor and Jim Norris in 2008. The deal, which The Wall Street Journal reported to be valued at nearly $50 million in cash and stock, gives Facebook top talent and advanced technology in an area many see as the next great frontier on the Web: real-time search.
The deal was seen by many as an assault on Twitter, a site that, like FriendFeed, lets users discover what people on the Web are saying about a certain topic at any given time. (Twitter turned down a $500 million offer from Facebook last November.) But experts say the pickup may be geared just as much toward a showdown with the king of Web search and the former employer of Taylor and Norris: Google. "In one fell swoop, Facebook gets to buy up Google's best-known superstars," says technology blogger Robert Scoble.
Pulling in Real-Time Data
FriendFeed's founders and staff of mostly ex-Googlers earned their stripes building Google Talk, Google Maps, Gmail, and other free Web services. When they launched FriendFeed to the public in February 2008, they designed the service to help users organize their online social lives—everything from Twitter updates to pictures posted on Facebook to Netflix rentals—in one place. To help members scour through all this information, the company developed an advanced search engine that pulls in real-time data from many different sites around the Web. It lets users search keywords that only certain friends have mentioned, or only for posts that have been "liked" by a certain number of people on the site.
This search engine may be a big part of what Facebook is after. Currently the social network has a limited search engine, which only retrieves data from certain types of pages within its own site. "They could plug the [FriendFeed] search engine into Facebook and have a huge win," Scoble says. If the site succeeds in building compelling search, more Web users may turn to Facebook for everyday searches, rather than general search engines like Google.
More effective search of current conversations and popular topics could lead to more profits for Facebook, which has taken criticism for focusing more on growth in the number of its users than in generating revenue. "Being able to get a taste of what consumers are doing on 50 different sites can be very powerful," says David Berkowitz, director of emerging media and client strategy for digital marketing agency 360i, of FriendFeed's search. By contrast, he says Facebook's search tools have not been as effective for marketers.
Beefing Up Search Tools
Buying FriendFeed opens the possibility of more refined search, though Facebook has not commented on what aspects of the site will be integrated into its own. "We haven't had the opportunity to have an in-depth, thoughtful dialogue on what to do over the long term," says Facebook spokesman Larry Yu.
Another reminder that Facebook wants to beef up its search tools came the same day the FriendFeed deal was announced. A new tool will let users search the last 30 days of information posted by their friends. It will also let users search postings even by nonfriends, assuming those people have opted to make their material public.
In recent months, Facebook has introduced a number of features aimed at getting users to share more publicly, and the FriendFeed acquisition shows the company is committed to that goal, says Forrester Research (FORR) analyst Jeremiah Owyang. "FriendFeed is public and Facebook is not. We should expect Facebook to continue this trend to make users public," he says. More public sharing would mean more data that's searchable, which marketers would also appreciate.
While a battle with Google looms, Facebook's acquisition has created a more immediate concern for the company: keeping existing users of FriendFeed from defecting to other sites. No plans to shut down the site have been announced, but many users are nervous. "If Facebook does take FriendFeed down, chances are I'll migrate with many of the other social media and programming pundits to a similar service," says programmer Christopher Charabaruk. "Or if there isn't one, I'll probably help start one."
Douglas MacMillan is a staff writer for BusinessWeek in New York.
Source: Business Week
Why Apple Is More Valuable Than Google
A look at what's behind the Mac and iPhone maker's now firm market-cap edge on the Web-search leader, and how it could one day challenge Microsoft
Now that Apple (AAPL) has once again passed Google (GOOG) in market value, can the consumer-electronics maker maintain its lead?
While Apple's capitalization has risen above that of Google for short bursts in the past, it has remained higher since July 22. As of Aug. 11, Apple was worth $145.87 billion, compared with Google's $143.40 billion. This could be a momentary shift in Wall Street's whims—like when Cisco Systems (CSCO) briefly surpassed Microsoft (MSFT) to become the world's most valuable company in 2000.
More likely, Apple has more solidly unseated Google as tech's No. 2 powerhouse and is now on track to one day challenge Microsoft for the crown. While both Apple and Google are likely to remain highly valuable in the coming years, there's reason to believe that Apple may outshine Google in the eyes of investors.
Dedicated Apple Customers
Google has an incomparably profitable Web-search operation, but it incurs losses in scores of other businesses. Apple, on the other hand, makes money on everything it does—even the music and applications sold in an effort to get people to buy the hardware devices that are its true business.
And Apple has far more room to grow based on its core businesses. While Google gets about 70% of the revenue from the $14 billion online advertising business, Apple has well under 10% of the computer business, and about 8% of cell-phone revenue.
What's more, Apple's profit machine may be more protected from competition than Google's. As Google executives are quick to tell antitrust regulators, consumers are just clicks away from switching search engines. But Apple has its fingers all but sewn into the wallets and purses of the millions of people who have purchased billions of songs and almost 2 billion iPhone applications from the AppStore. More than 75 million people have credit cards on file with Apple, and have invested to build libraries of songs, movies, and applications. The more they spend, the less likely they are to jump ship to other products.
Apple Eyeing Tablet PCs
It's not hard to envision ways for Apple to grab a larger slice of consumer spending. For all of its success in digital music—it long ago passed Wal-Mart (WMT) to become the world's leading distributor of music—still only about 30% of music is sold via iTunes. And with thousands of new apps showing up in the App Store, the reasons to buy an iPhone or iPod Touch—say, to use it as a GPS navigation system, as a level, or for making bank deposits—are expanding. And if rumors pan out that future versions of iTunes will incorporate more social networking, it will be even easier for Facebook and Twitter users to recommend Apps to friends.
Source: Business Week
Facebook in challenge to Google
Facebook has turned up the heat on Google by purchasing content-sharing service FriendFeed, say industry watchers.
Many expected Google or even Twitter to buy the company, which has been praised for its "real-time" search engine.
This type of search is valuable because it lets you know what is happening right now on any given subject.
"Google look out, Facebook knows the real money is in real-time search," said respected blogger Robert Scoble.
"Google is the king of regular search. FriendFeed is the king of real-time search. This makes the coming battle over this issue much more interesting," Mr Scoble told the BBC.
Back in May, Google founder Larry Page admitted that the search giant had fallen behind other services like that of Twitter, which boasts nearly 45 million users worldwide.
"People really want to do stuff real time and I think they (Twitter) have done a great job.
"We've done a relatively poor job of doing things that work on a per second basis," Mr Page said at the time.
'Warning shot'
Many in Silicon Valley agree that this deal has changed the game.
"Facebook was unable to acquire Twitter so this is the next best option," said Ben Parr, associate editor of Mashable, a news blog covering social media.
"FriendFeed is well known for having some powerful and intelligent technology that allows users to aggregate everything they do online and do it all in real time.
"With this acquisition, Facebook is gunning directly not only at Twitter, but at Google. This is a warning shot to those two companies," Mr Parr told BBC News.
Mr Scoble noted that FriendFeed's real-time search could stretch back 18 months compared to a few days for Twitter.
Silicon Valley commentators have long regarded FriendFeed as an inspiration for many of Facebook's features.
These include the ability for users to import activities from third parties services like YouTube and Flickr to letting users comment or say they "like" something in another user's feed.
"FriendFeed has in effect been the R&D (research & development) department for Facebook for some time now," said Mr Scoble, who is one of the service's most popular users with nearly 46,000 subscribers.
"They have the best community technology out there and Facebook should continue to use them to try out new features and test them out before transferring them over to Facebook."
The deal
The purchase caught many in Silicon Valley by surprise, even though the two companies had been talking on and off for the past two years.
"This is an 11th hour deal," admitted FriendFeed co-founder Bret Taylor.
ndustry commentators had expected Google to make a bid for the company, especially given the fact that its founders all used to work there.
"FriendFeed accepts Facebook friend request" is how Mr Taylor described the buyout, in a tongue-in-cheek reference to how Facebook users ask one another to become part of their friend network.
He continued in a similar vein in his blog post.
"As my mom explained to me, when two companies love each other very much, they form a structured investment vehicle.
"Our companies share a common vision. Now we have the opportunity to bring many of the innovations we've developed at FriendFeed to Facebook's 250 million users around the world."
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was equally complimentary.
"Since I first tried FriendFeed, I've admired their team for creating such a simple and elegant service for people to share information.
"As this shows, our culture continues to make Facebook a place where the best engineers come to build things quickly that lots of people will use."
As part of the agreement, all FriendFeed employees will join Facebook and the company's four founders will be given senior roles on the social networking site's engineering and product teams.
FriendFeed will continue as it is for the moment independently.
"Eventually, one way or another, it's hard to see FriendFeed as it stands now, continuing on," said MG Siegler of Silicon Valley news site Tech Crunch.
"Facebook will begin to take up too much of the FriendFeeders' time, and it will languish. It's sad, but that's the web. Not every service can flourish. There simply aren't enough users with enough time to use all of them."
Source: BBC NewsNew Google 'puts Bing in shade'
Google has lifted the lid on its updated search engine, which developers have nicknamed "Caffeine".
Although still in the testing phase, the firm says it is the "first step in improving the speed, accuracy and comprehensiveness of search results".
The new engine will replace Google's current one after tests are complete.
Martin McNulty of search marketing specialist Trafficbroker said the upgrade threatened to put Microsoft's new engine, Bing, "in the shade".
"Google have let Caffeine quietly slip out. It talked about vertical specific searches while quietly doubling the speed and starts introducing real-time results and news feeds," he said.
"Bing was launched with a massive media budget.
"Trouble is, Bing presents itself as an alternative to something that users are still - for now - happy with," he added.
Virtual monopoly
Google is still the dominant search engine. According to market research firm Hitwise, Google accounted for more than 87% of the UK search market in 2008.
However, in recent months, the search engine market has got a little busier. As well as Microsoft's Bing.com - which saw a tie-up between Microsoft and Yahoo - the "computational knowledge engine" Wolfram Alpha and a revamped Ask Jeeves have also entered the fray.
Google is also facing competition from Facebook, which has just acquired FriendFeed, praised for its "real-time" search engine.
This type of search is valuable because it lets you know what is happening right now on any given subject.
Back in May, Google founder Larry Page admitted that the search giant had fallen behind other services like that of Twitter, which boasts nearly 45 million users worldwide.
Fresher content
Google's head of Webspam, Matt Cutts, denied that Caffeine was launched in response to competitive search engines.
"I love competition in search and want lots of it, but this change has been in the works for months," he wrote in his blog.
"I think the best way for Google to do well in search is to continue what we've done for the last decade or so: focus relentlessly on pushing our search quality forward. Nobody cares more about search than Google, and I don't think we'll ever stop trying to improve."
Alex Watson, editor of Custom PC magazine, said Caffeine was reflecting a general trend to what he calls "the real-time web".
"Caffeine now picks up news stories and puts fresher content higher up the search results," he said.
"That said, it's likely that most people won't notice the change. It still looks the same, it's the algorithms that have changed.
"However, it is now doing things that would never be possible a few years ago and knowing Google, this would have been in the works for some time."
Source: BBC News
Google sorry for depicting Arunachal part of China
New Delhi, August 9: Search engine Google admitted its "mistake" of wrong depiction of certain areas of Arunachal Pradesh as parts of China and said its maps would be rectified shortly.
"Earlier, this week, as part of routine update to Google earth, we published new data for the Arunachal Pradesh region that changed the depiction of certain place names in the product. The change was a result of a mistake in our processing of new map data," a spokesperson for the search giant said in a statement.
The spokesperson was reacting after a media report which highlighted that Google map showed certain areas of Arunachal Pradesh as parts of China. The media report had raised suspicion about the search engine being hacked by Chinese considering that Beijing has been laying claim over entire Arunachal Pradesh, which India rejects.
Source: publication.samachar.com
Can Google's myTouch 3G Out-Smartphone the iPhone?
I really wanted to love T-Mobile's myTouch 3G, the latest "Google phone." I truly did.
Not because I don't love my iPhone 3G, but precisely because I do love my iPhone 3G.
I love it more than I should. But it's like dating the captain of the soccer team. Everybody wants him. He's got you tied around his tanned little finger. He doesn't have to try very hard anymore.
I wanted the T-Mobile myTouch 3G with Google, which hit the streets on Aug. 5, to be the smartphone equivalent of the handsome student council president — the smart, sexy guy who sneaks in and steals away the soccer player's girlfriend with his smooth apps and glossy touchscreen. I wanted to be wowed and wooed and swept off my feet.
I wanted my iPhone to have some stiff competition.
But while the myTouch 3G is a major improvement on the first generation G1 Android phone, which was feature-rich but seriously lacking in design savvy, it didn't steal my heart.
Across New York City, both iPhone owners and non-owners gave the myTouch 3G a spin and sounded off on its better attributes and its shortcomings.
At the top of the plus column is attractiveness. My test unit was in "merlot," an appealing burgundy color with a bit of sparkle. The myTouch 3G also comes in white and black, and for a few extra bucks you can trick it out with a colorful skin.
We liked the way it felt in our hands — light, sleek. It is a darn good looking phone, and it doesn't just appeal to chicks, as my editor feared after taking a look at the burgundy phone and surveying the product's Web site.
The myTouch 3G's biggest fan was a male recent college grad in video production who petted it and said, "I want one."
Yet its $200 (with two-year contract) price tag puts it a little out of reach for the starving artist. T-Mobile's monthly plans, however, are more affordable than AT&T's. Its cheapest comes in at $55, while AT&T's will cost you $70. Unlimited data and messaging plus the minimum voice plan bring T-Mobile to $65 and AT&T to $90.
The iPhone 3G S retails for about $200 as well. AT&T offers 3G service in more cities than T-Mobile.
AT&T has promised it will be bringing picture and video-messaging capabilities to the iPhone 3G S this year, but T-Mobile already has that feature.
The 3.2-megapixel camera took decent pictures, and its ability to record videos and immediately post them to YouTube or upload photos via Picasa is a definite plus.
In a sound-off with the iPhone's iPod function, the myTouch 3G gave Apple a run for its money, mostly due to its superior headphones. Apple's ear buds are notoriously uncomfortable, and their sound wasn't as clear. The music interface, however, doesn't compete with the elegance of iTunes and the iPod interface.
It does have a nifty notification bar at the top of the screen that you can drag down to receive notifications of incoming e-mails, calls, voicemails and instant messages. But it's still tiny and getting your aim right takes practice.
When it comes to functionality, however, the myTouch 3G with Google begins to lose its luster.
The myTouch 3G, made by Taiwan's HTC, has a single mini-USB port for both charging the phone and plugging in headphones, requiring an adapter that I can see getting lost easily.
The touch screen is significantly less responsive than the iPhone 3G, the unit against which it was unscientifically tested, and it doesn't have the pinch and scroll capabilities of the iPhone. It also doesn't have the iPhone's rebound capabilities which allow it to scroll quickly.
Its on-screen keyboard is lazy compared to the iPhone's and harder to type on, even for women with delicate hands. The keys are small, and while — like the iPhone — the letters enlarge when you hit them, they often disappear before you can see which you've hit.
I'd like to see significant improvement to the keyboard.
The Android Market — Google's App Store — has several thousand applications that will be available for the myTouch 3G, but it still pales in comparison to the App Store's 65,000 offerings. And its Twitter and Facebook apps were a bit clumsy compared to the iPhone offerings.
Overall, though, for those who don't want to take the iPhone plunge, it's a solid product that will hopefully become even more competitive in its next incarnation.
We liked the way it felt in our hands — light, sleek. It is a darn good looking phone, and it doesn't just appeal to chicks, as my editor feared after taking a look at the burgundy phone and surveying the product's Web site.
The myTouch 3G's biggest fan was a male recent college grad in video production who petted it and said, "I want one."
Yet its $200 (with two-year contract) price tag puts it a little out of reach for the starving artist. T-Mobile's monthly plans, however, are more affordable than AT&T's. Its cheapest comes in at $55, while AT&T's will cost you $70. Unlimited data and messaging plus the minimum voice plan bring T-Mobile to $65 and AT&T to $90.
The iPhone 3G S retails for about $200 as well. AT&T offers 3G service in more cities than T-Mobile.
AT&T has promised it will be bringing picture and video-messaging capabilities to the iPhone 3G S this year, but T-Mobile already has that feature.
The 3.2-megapixel camera took decent pictures, and its ability to record videos and immediately post them to YouTube or upload photos via Picasa is a definite plus.
In a sound-off with the iPhone's iPod function, the myTouch 3G gave Apple a run for its money, mostly due to its superior headphones. Apple's ear buds are notoriously uncomfortable, and their sound wasn't as clear. The music interface, however, doesn't compete with the elegance of iTunes and the iPod interface.
It does have a nifty notification bar at the top of the screen that you can drag down to receive notifications of incoming e-mails, calls, voicemails and instant messages. But it's still tiny and getting your aim right takes practice.
When it comes to functionality, however, the myTouch 3G with Google begins to lose its luster.
The myTouch 3G, made by Taiwan's HTC, has a single mini-USB port for both charging the phone and plugging in headphones, requiring an adapter that I can see getting lost easily.
The touch screen is significantly less responsive than the iPhone 3G, the unit against which it was unscientifically tested, and it doesn't have the pinch and scroll capabilities of the iPhone. It also doesn't have the iPhone's rebound capabilities which allow it to scroll quickly.
Its on-screen keyboard is lazy compared to the iPhone's and harder to type on, even for women with delicate hands. The keys are small, and while — like the iPhone — the letters enlarge when you hit them, they often disappear before you can see which you've hit.
I'd like to see significant improvement to the keyboard.
The Android Market — Google's App Store — has several thousand applications that will be available for the myTouch 3G, but it still pales in comparison to the App Store's 65,000 offerings. And its Twitter and Facebook apps were a bit clumsy compared to the iPhone offerings.
Overall, though, for those who don't want to take the iPhone plunge, it's a solid product that will hopefully become even more competitive in its next incarnation.
Scource: Foxnews.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)