Is the real-time web a threat to Google search?

Is the Real-Time Web a threat to Google? Rackspace executive Lew Moorman sure thinks so.

He’s right. Fewer and fewer of my search behaviors have been on Google lately.

And last week friendfeed did something very important: made it a lot more possible to do powerful real-time web searches.

First, the problem with friendfeed is it is too geeky. But ignore that problem for a moment, because if they don’t get it right, or make it something that the mainstream wants, well, you’ll see the same kind of search show up on Facebook (which has been making moves lately to be much more open) or Twitter.

So, why is this stuff working?

Well, because it’s with your friends and THEIR behaviors. Your friends are a lot more trustworthy than anyone else. How do I know that? Because while I was in Davos George Colony, CEO of Forrester handed me the results of a report they did on Trust and they found that people you know are the most trusted. Far more than corporate or personal blogs. Yes, I know you don’t trust me that much. That’s OK. I don’t trust your blog much either. :-)

But, if I know you (thanks to Twitter, Facebook, and friendfeed I have gotten to know thousands of you) I can build a much better recommendation engine.

Oh, and even more troubling for Google is that Facebook and friendfeed have a lot more metadata to study.

What is metadata? It is data about data. Well, in Google’s case, the metadata is the linking behavior of people in the web.

But look just on friendfeed. What’s the metadata there? Everytime I click “like,” something I’ve done more than 16,000 times now, I’m adding metadata. Everytime I add a comment, something I’ve done more than 8,000 times now, I’m adding metadata.

What other metadata is there? Well, they still can study linking behavior. I can link to my discussion of how cloud computing will change programmer behavior, for instance.

What else? Well, friendfeed knows how many of my friends also liked that item. They also know how many people clicked on that item (although they haven’t surfaced that information yet).

So, now, let’s look at search.

First, if I need to know who the best retailer is to buy, say, a Canon 5D Mark II, is it better to ask the people I know, like I did here on friendfeed, or go to Google and deal with the SEOs? Try doing that search over on Google. I did. Do you find a single retailer? I didn’t.

So, now, let’s get to friendfeed’s search.

Let’s do a search for anyone who has written about the Canon 5D MK II but lets constrain that to posts that have at least one like and at least four comments. Here’s the search. Note that the post I wrote just one minute ago is already in the results page. This is the real-time web.

Google won’t see that friendfeed item for hours and, even if Google’s spiders index it Google does not have enough metadata to study to let it do this kind of search.

Let’s keep going.

How is this for searching news? Well, right now Australia is burning. So, let’s search for “Australia fires” but lets constrain that search to anything that has five or more likes and five or more comments. Note the quality of the conversation that comes back.

How am I doing this? With friendfeed’s advanced search.

But it gets better than that.

How about we search for all Tweets that talk about the Australian Fires? We can do that.

“But can’t search.twitter.com do that better?” Well, yes, but can it also just show you all the Google Reader items people have shared? Like friendfeed can? No.

Can Google search show you all the Upcoming.org events that mention SXSW? No, but friendfeed search can.

Can you easily see all the YouTube videos that have the word Grammy in them? Probably over on YouTube you could do that. But can you now constrain the videos to the ones that have gotten some comments? With friendfeed you can.

But try doing THIS with Google: try finding everytime Dave Winer has commented on an item about netbooks. On friendfeed that’s easy. On Google? They don’t have the metadata to study.

Now, keep in mind that there aren’t many people on friendfeed yet. The numbers of comments there are not even close to enough to make all searches satisfying. But, look at friendfeed’s competitor Facebook. They have more than 150 million users already. What if Facebook were to get a search like friendfeeds?

Now do you start to see why I’m using Google less and less?

Lew Moorman is right.

Oh, and I got lots of answers to my Camera question before I was even done with writing this post.

UPDATE: you can search for “threats to Google” on friendfeed with this search. Fun to watch the comments come in!

Comments

  1. So basically you’re back in time when there was no internet: got a question – call a friend? :-)

    But that aside, Robert, you miss the WHOLE point (and the greatest value) of internet search – to receive information OUTSIDE your friends circle…

  2. So basically you’re back in time when there was no internet: got a question – call a friend? :-)

    But that aside, Robert, you miss the WHOLE point (and the greatest value) of internet search – to receive information OUTSIDE your friends circle…

  3. Hi,

    I have just added support for the new FriendFeed searches into FriendDeck. I have also added in support for “user discovery”, it allows you to find people who like what you like in FriendFeed.

    Paul.

  4. I think you are under-estimating the flexibility of Google search. You can do most (if not all) of the searches you’ve mentioned using Google. You just need to know the query syntax. It’s probably even in Google’s advanced search.

    >> How about we search for all Tweets that talk about the Australian Fires?
    You can do this with Google too:
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:twitter.com+Australian+Fires

    >> Can Google search show you all the Upcoming.org events that mention SXSW?
    Yes you can:
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:yahoo.com+upcoming.org+SXSW

    What they don’t do, as you correctly point out, is pick up the results as quickly as friendfeed or twitter. But how many users to friendfeed or twitter have and how many do google have? google is indexing new pages as well as new tweet status pages.

    Anyway, interesting article and I’m enjoying being part of the real-time web.

  5. I think you are under-estimating the flexibility of Google search. You can do most (if not all) of the searches you’ve mentioned using Google. You just need to know the query syntax. It’s probably even in Google’s advanced search.

    >> How about we search for all Tweets that talk about the Australian Fires?
    You can do this with Google too:
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:twitter.com+Australian+Fires

    >> Can Google search show you all the Upcoming.org events that mention SXSW?
    Yes you can:
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:yahoo.com+upcoming.org+SXSW

    What they don’t do, as you correctly point out, is pick up the results as quickly as friendfeed or twitter. But how many users to friendfeed or twitter have and how many do google have? google is indexing new pages as well as new tweet status pages.

    Anyway, interesting article and I’m enjoying being part of the real-time web.

  6. Hi,

    I have just added support for the new FriendFeed searches into FriendDeck. I have also added in support for “user discovery”, it allows you to find people who like what you like in FriendFeed.

    Paul.

  7. Robert – I am surprised you don’t know how to search Google – your search
    “what’s the best retailer to buy a Canon 5D MK II at” vs my search “buy Canon 5D MK11″ very different results – retailers with pricing -

  8. Robert – I am surprised you don’t know how to search Google – your search
    “what’s the best retailer to buy a Canon 5D MK II at” vs my search “buy Canon 5D MK11″ very different results – retailers with pricing -

  9. a good point well made. however, i checked the google search and got retailers, including Jessops, the uk’s leading photography store. however… no opinions / reviews from real people, which is I suppose your principal point.

  10. a good point well made. however, i checked the google search and got retailers, including Jessops, the uk’s leading photography store. however… no opinions / reviews from real people, which is I suppose your principal point.

  11. hmm. very interesting. I still use google but have searched twitteer too. recently tried to find out why I get script errors in yahoo messenger.
    I made a new friend but no solution.
    you can find me on twitter as car4dave.

  12. hmm. very interesting. I still use google but have searched twitteer too. recently tried to find out why I get script errors in yahoo messenger.
    I made a new friend but no solution.
    you can find me on twitter as car4dave.

  13. Yo Robert,
    Why would you search google like this “what’s the best retailer to buy a Canon 5D MK II at” when you could quickly type “retailer Canon 5D MK II” and get better results? Most people when searching google only use 2 or 3 words and it looks like you have 7 or 8 then your product, what do you think? BTW, first time commenter, long time fan. Thanks.

  14. Yo Robert,
    Why would you search google like this “what’s the best retailer to buy a Canon 5D MK II at” when you could quickly type “retailer Canon 5D MK II” and get better results? Most people when searching google only use 2 or 3 words and it looks like you have 7 or 8 then your product, what do you think? BTW, first time commenter, long time fan. Thanks.

  15. No, Robert, thank YOU for playing. At this point, Friendfeed and, to a lesser extent Twitter, are still “your circle” – early adopters and tech nerds and the like. Let’s see how well all of these techniques work when (if) these services ever get to be used by tens and hundreds of millions of people, and “likes” and comments become manipulated by SEOs just as much as links do now.

    At that point, in order to sort through the clutter, you’ll require some mechanism that uses “your circle” or “people you trust” to help filter out the crap. And we’ll be right back to Peter’s comment.

    Not to mention, that was a pretty bizarre Google query, rather atypical of what normal users do (why do you really care what the “best retailer” of a commodity product like a digital camera is? what does that even mean?)

  16. No, Robert, thank YOU for playing. At this point, Friendfeed and, to a lesser extent Twitter, are still “your circle” – early adopters and tech nerds and the like. Let’s see how well all of these techniques work when (if) these services ever get to be used by tens and hundreds of millions of people, and “likes” and comments become manipulated by SEOs just as much as links do now.

    At that point, in order to sort through the clutter, you’ll require some mechanism that uses “your circle” or “people you trust” to help filter out the crap. And we’ll be right back to Peter’s comment.

    Not to mention, that was a pretty bizarre Google query, rather atypical of what normal users do (why do you really care what the “best retailer” of a commodity product like a digital camera is? what does that even mean?)

  17. One problem, FriendFeed search results are more of an aggregation of the “wisdom of the crowd”. Unfortunately, the “crowd” is actually one big idiot, not the least bit wise…

    You would be better off using Google as a tool to research the retailers in your area… their history, their business practices, charitable contributions, # of jobs they add to your community, etc. Then you can purchase the device you have already chosen from a retailer with the most positive impact in your community. You can use social media tools like Twitter and FriendFeed to get a *single dimension* of this research (public feedback about the Co. Generally negative of course, because a happy customer is a quiet customer). The bigger point here is that anyone can pull up a generic product search and show how Google is a valueless pile of crap when it comes to product search results… but it’s been that way for years… the SEO’s have been picking at Google’s bone since long before FriendFeed even existed… FriendFeed is not adding any value to people’s product search…

    You have to see how posts like these feel contrived to us little folk… why? Because people like me never get so much as a single response to anything we ever leave anywhere… FriendFeed should really be called “select your favorite ego and do exactly what everyone else following them does” cuz that’s what goes on there. And Twitter may just as well be called “talk to a wall because nobody listens to a thing you have to say.”

    So, because of that, these examples of how *you* can turn to FriendFeed or Twitter to get “instant” feedback and “smart” answers to *your* questions do nothing to prove your underlying point to *regular people*… the point is, I think, this: A simple Google search is a *bad* way to get information, specifically product information on the web because some people are paid a lot of money to place high in those results, meaning the content of their results is not always free of bias/commercial interest (something they make no effort whatsoever to inform the user of) … where as social places like FriendFeed and Twitter are much more current with something that was *just said* and has been opined off-the-cuff (typically unrehearsed) by a real person… not an SEO. That, however, would change overnight if these social services ever reached the critical mass enjoyed by Google. So it’s not about one being better than the other at search, or even conceptually by the type of data and meta-content they glean/have access to, it’s about one being the target of commercial abuse and the other being the spewing randomness of the idiot crowd…. somewhere in between, actual information may be available.

  18. One problem, FriendFeed search results are more of an aggregation of the “wisdom of the crowd”. Unfortunately, the “crowd” is actually one big idiot, not the least bit wise…

    You would be better off using Google as a tool to research the retailers in your area… their history, their business practices, charitable contributions, # of jobs they add to your community, etc. Then you can purchase the device you have already chosen from a retailer with the most positive impact in your community. You can use social media tools like Twitter and FriendFeed to get a *single dimension* of this research (public feedback about the Co. Generally negative of course, because a happy customer is a quiet customer). The bigger point here is that anyone can pull up a generic product search and show how Google is a valueless pile of crap when it comes to product search results… but it’s been that way for years… the SEO’s have been picking at Google’s bone since long before FriendFeed even existed… FriendFeed is not adding any value to people’s product search…

    You have to see how posts like these feel contrived to us little folk… why? Because people like me never get so much as a single response to anything we ever leave anywhere… FriendFeed should really be called “select your favorite ego and do exactly what everyone else following them does” cuz that’s what goes on there. And Twitter may just as well be called “talk to a wall because nobody listens to a thing you have to say.”

    So, because of that, these examples of how *you* can turn to FriendFeed or Twitter to get “instant” feedback and “smart” answers to *your* questions do nothing to prove your underlying point to *regular people*… the point is, I think, this: A simple Google search is a *bad* way to get information, specifically product information on the web because some people are paid a lot of money to place high in those results, meaning the content of their results is not always free of bias/commercial interest (something they make no effort whatsoever to inform the user of) … where as social places like FriendFeed and Twitter are much more current with something that was *just said* and has been opined off-the-cuff (typically unrehearsed) by a real person… not an SEO. That, however, would change overnight if these social services ever reached the critical mass enjoyed by Google. So it’s not about one being better than the other at search, or even conceptually by the type of data and meta-content they glean/have access to, it’s about one being the target of commercial abuse and the other being the spewing randomness of the idiot crowd…. somewhere in between, actual information may be available.

  19. Robert,

    What about marketing? What happens when the customers of a business are the ones selling it, and not the marketers? Google has one thing still going for it – it’s got search marketing which enables businesses to pay for traffic. What is real-time marketing going to look like, when the only way to reach a customer is to be one?

  20. Robert,

    What about marketing? What happens when the customers of a business are the ones selling it, and not the marketers? Google has one thing still going for it – it’s got search marketing which enables businesses to pay for traffic. What is real-time marketing going to look like, when the only way to reach a customer is to be one?

  21. I can try how the search feature works at Twitter and Friendfeed even if I don’t have (yet) an account there. I appreciated this before joining those services.

    I didn’t join Facebook yet, and I’m not going to do it, for the same reason.

  22. I can try how the search feature works at Twitter and Friendfeed even if I don’t have (yet) an account there. I appreciated this before joining those services.

    I didn’t join Facebook yet, and I’m not going to do it, for the same reason.

  23. I think we’re seeing the emergence of a third paradigm shift in accessing information on the web; the emergence of ‘connectedness’ as a valuable search/discovery method.

    I think of it in this way:
    Directories were the first information search method. I still remember trawling through Yahoo! categories to find useful sites. Took a while, but the pre-selected quality threshold made it worthwhile.

    As Google introduced better indexing approaches and faster web access speeded up results, searching took over – search algorithms could return much better results than trawling library style directories and more quickly too.

    The volume of information available on the web now though is so fast that Googling for results can ultimately be fruitless. Masses of information is returned – but where is the relevance? That can currently best be provided by the kind of personal recommendation engine you outlined above. I think you’re absolutely right, and I would extend the concept beyond the real time web; when I want to see what the latest MacBook really looks like – I don’t look at the PR pictures on Apple’s website I search on Flickr. When I plan a trip to a new city – I ask my Twitter and Dopplr networks (made up of people with similar interests to my own) where to stay and what to see.

    I’m convinced that ‘the connect’ will be the next dominant search approach. Ironic really because that would probably put Yahoo! and their extended social network in a much better than Google.

  24. I think we’re seeing the emergence of a third paradigm shift in accessing information on the web; the emergence of ‘connectedness’ as a valuable search/discovery method.

    I think of it in this way:
    Directories were the first information search method. I still remember trawling through Yahoo! categories to find useful sites. Took a while, but the pre-selected quality threshold made it worthwhile.

    As Google introduced better indexing approaches and faster web access speeded up results, searching took over – search algorithms could return much better results than trawling library style directories and more quickly too.

    The volume of information available on the web now though is so fast that Googling for results can ultimately be fruitless. Masses of information is returned – but where is the relevance? That can currently best be provided by the kind of personal recommendation engine you outlined above. I think you’re absolutely right, and I would extend the concept beyond the real time web; when I want to see what the latest MacBook really looks like – I don’t look at the PR pictures on Apple’s website I search on Flickr. When I plan a trip to a new city – I ask my Twitter and Dopplr networks (made up of people with similar interests to my own) where to stay and what to see.

    I’m convinced that ‘the connect’ will be the next dominant search approach. Ironic really because that would probably put Yahoo! and their extended social network in a much better than Google.

  25. Robert, I think we can start to have our cake and eat it to. I am personally working on search mashing up both “normal” search engine results with data from social networks. To some extent I think we can start to leverage both, and hopefully (sorry, blatant plug alert!!!) my site http://www.re-searchr.com will lead the way.

  26. Robert, I think we can start to have our cake and eat it to. I am personally working on search mashing up both “normal” search engine results with data from social networks. To some extent I think we can start to leverage both, and hopefully (sorry, blatant plug alert!!!) my site http://www.re-searchr.com will lead the way.

  27. Short answer is no. Everybody thinks some new thing will be the end of some current thing (computers will kill off paper, podcasts will end radio, etc.,etc.). Now, it’s Twitter will end search, etc. This is a common trend in thinking about new things and typically results in less of a drastic conclusion. So, in the future, my bet is real time web and search will live peacefully together.

  28. Short answer is no. Everybody thinks some new thing will be the end of some current thing (computers will kill off paper, podcasts will end radio, etc.,etc.). Now, it’s Twitter will end search, etc. This is a common trend in thinking about new things and typically results in less of a drastic conclusion. So, in the future, my bet is real time web and search will live peacefully together.

  29. Google’s Promote feature is a first step for Google to assimilate real-time search.

    So far I’ve seen Google adapt to every new search-related innovation. Why not this one?

  30. Google’s Promote feature is a first step for Google to assimilate real-time search.

    So far I’ve seen Google adapt to every new search-related innovation. Why not this one?

  31. Hey Robert,

    It’s weird, but I see the advent of Twitter / FriendFeed search as an even BIGGER threat to Jason Calacanis over at Mahalo.com

    They promise “human powered search” – which is now being done on a bigger scale via Twitter / FriendFeed.

    What do you think?

  32. Hey Robert,

    It’s weird, but I see the advent of Twitter / FriendFeed search as an even BIGGER threat to Jason Calacanis over at Mahalo.com

    They promise “human powered search” – which is now being done on a bigger scale via Twitter / FriendFeed.

    What do you think?

  33. Google is the past.
    Twitter and Friendfeed are the current.
    Streamers are the future ….
    Eventually every human will stream something (free services will guarantee that), and ultimately smart tools will emerge to create meaning from the streams…
    I agree with Jon
    too much info, changing faster, personal recommendations seem to work, and then the connections will come together…..
    In the future there’ll be no hunger, there will be no greed, and all the children will know how to read.
    In the future there will be no poverty, no disease, no wars, no pollution and all the children will be loved.
    In the future every person will be always connected to someone, noone will be left behind
    In the future will all be connected to everyone..

  34. Google is the past.
    Twitter and Friendfeed are the current.
    Streamers are the future ….
    Eventually every human will stream something (free services will guarantee that), and ultimately smart tools will emerge to create meaning from the streams…
    I agree with Jon
    too much info, changing faster, personal recommendations seem to work, and then the connections will come together…..
    In the future there’ll be no hunger, there will be no greed, and all the children will know how to read.
    In the future there will be no poverty, no disease, no wars, no pollution and all the children will be loved.
    In the future every person will be always connected to someone, noone will be left behind
    In the future will all be connected to everyone..

  35. “Can Google search show you all the Upcoming.org events that mention SXSW? No, but friendfeed search can.”

    class scooby ADD. didn’t even look at the FF results. they are useless.

    try sxsw site:upcoming.yahoo.com in google search and restrict it to past month (use advanced search feature). actually useful.

    he also didn’t use shopping search for canon or google blog search for dave winer. pretty lame.

  36. “Can Google search show you all the Upcoming.org events that mention SXSW? No, but friendfeed search can.”

    class scooby ADD. didn’t even look at the FF results. they are useless.

    try sxsw site:upcoming.yahoo.com in google search and restrict it to past month (use advanced search feature). actually useful.

    he also didn’t use shopping search for canon or google blog search for dave winer. pretty lame.

  37. Google tried to beat Wikipedia with Knol because it got too popular. Knol failed.
    But ss there anyone here who never used wikipedia search instead of google?
    It depends on what you’re looking for, right?

    Google decided to get rid of Google Video because YouTube became everyone’s video search engine.

    I continue to use Google Video to find videos that last longer than 5 minutes.
    I use YouTube to find songs or segments of TV programs.

    I use Twitter search to find feedback on products and I use it to get status updates on world events.

    I use Flickr search to find photos.

    In the future I’m likely to use Mahalo search when I need answers.

    I use LinkedIn to find business info on people.

    I would like to know what search engines others are using and what they are using it for?

    But let’s get real here.
    Most people don’t know about Twitter or LinkedIn or Mahalo but they do know Google.
    Twitter won’t kill Google but there’re vertical markets in the search market and it looks like a lot of us found Twitter’s vertical search market.
    It would be foolish for Twitter not to act on it.

  38. Google tried to beat Wikipedia with Knol because it got too popular. Knol failed.
    But ss there anyone here who never used wikipedia search instead of google?
    It depends on what you’re looking for, right?

    Google decided to get rid of Google Video because YouTube became everyone’s video search engine.

    I continue to use Google Video to find videos that last longer than 5 minutes.
    I use YouTube to find songs or segments of TV programs.

    I use Twitter search to find feedback on products and I use it to get status updates on world events.

    I use Flickr search to find photos.

    In the future I’m likely to use Mahalo search when I need answers.

    I use LinkedIn to find business info on people.

    I would like to know what search engines others are using and what they are using it for?

    But let’s get real here.
    Most people don’t know about Twitter or LinkedIn or Mahalo but they do know Google.
    Twitter won’t kill Google but there’re vertical markets in the search market and it looks like a lot of us found Twitter’s vertical search market.
    It would be foolish for Twitter not to act on it.

  39. hmm, i really didn’t think much of this till i had an idea about advertising in light of the real time web. and google isn’t about search – its about advertising. so they could potentially be impacted big time.

    enter real time advertising.

    i was watching tweetdeck and noticed a story trending – a funny video on the onion – just think if I were an advertiser and was monitoring this and at that instant injected ads into that site – ads I had to pay more for now that the site was getting traffic – in fact it could open a bidding war as other advertisers interested in marketing to those eyeballs caught wind of it.

    i mean if twitter needs a revenue model there it is…

  40. hmm, i really didn’t think much of this till i had an idea about advertising in light of the real time web. and google isn’t about search – its about advertising. so they could potentially be impacted big time.

    enter real time advertising.

    i was watching tweetdeck and noticed a story trending – a funny video on the onion – just think if I were an advertiser and was monitoring this and at that instant injected ads into that site – ads I had to pay more for now that the site was getting traffic – in fact it could open a bidding war as other advertisers interested in marketing to those eyeballs caught wind of it.

    i mean if twitter needs a revenue model there it is…

  41. Not to step on anyone’s toes, but I can’t wait til the day google chokes…No offense..but their poor customer service along with there hypocrisy makes me sick. I still use Google but just out of spite.

    Friendfeed has come along way and they are getting bigger everyday (literally) and still have awesome customer service.

  42. Not to step on anyone’s toes, but I can’t wait til the day google chokes…No offense..but their poor customer service along with there hypocrisy makes me sick. I still use Google but just out of spite.

    Friendfeed has come along way and they are getting bigger everyday (literally) and still have awesome customer service.

  43. I have been thinking. It is always the relative experience that matters.

    == Microsoft vs. Google ==

    Hotmail from Microsoft -7
    Gmail from Google +2

    The Microsoft has to generate +9 imppact in order to match Google for me. The G has surfed on the positive feedback (hot territory) while M has generated lot of negative feedback (cold territory)

    The search provide X has to offer +10 impact relative to the G search. Isn’t it so?

  44. I have been thinking. It is always the relative experience that matters.

    == Microsoft vs. Google ==

    Hotmail from Microsoft -7
    Gmail from Google +2

    The Microsoft has to generate +9 imppact in order to match Google for me. The G has surfed on the positive feedback (hot territory) while M has generated lot of negative feedback (cold territory)

    The search provide X has to offer +10 impact relative to the G search. Isn’t it so?

  45. btw. who is the best retailer to buy a Canon 5D Mark II?

    Sometimes you have to think with your own head. Not to rely too much on the collective intelligence stupidity.

  46. btw. who is the best retailer to buy a Canon 5D Mark II?

    Sometimes you have to think with your own head. Not to rely too much on the collective intelligence stupidity.

  47. Scoble it snot just the metaqdata but Ui change as well..

    what is the most useful Ui change given the first affinity group search occured about 23 months ago at SWSX?

    Think about what piece of metadata ranks it ideally for search user in each affinity group..

    GPS! Thnink of how importnat this becomes on Mobile :)

    Someone is doing it :)

  48. Scoble it snot just the metaqdata but Ui change as well..

    what is the most useful Ui change given the first affinity group search occured about 23 months ago at SWSX?

    Think about what piece of metadata ranks it ideally for search user in each affinity group..

    GPS! Thnink of how importnat this becomes on Mobile :)

    Someone is doing it :)

  49. This is a great feature for aggregating the Social Media segment, and the extent in which social media pulls other content from other places. It’s absolutely needed, but it doesn’t give you a 360 view, if you’re really in need to dive into a particular complex topic (looking for a camera is “fairly” simple). It’s a good starting point.
    We still need an ultimate aggregator that can scoop it all.

  50. This is a great feature for aggregating the Social Media segment, and the extent in which social media pulls other content from other places. It’s absolutely needed, but it doesn’t give you a 360 view, if you’re really in need to dive into a particular complex topic (looking for a camera is “fairly” simple). It’s a good starting point.
    We still need an ultimate aggregator that can scoop it all.

  51. I find this really rings true. I am never impressed with recommended books that amazon puts forth, nor do I ever really consider it unless I have heard about it from other trusted sources. I find what drives my buying decision most is listening and hearing what is being said by those I trust and respect on the Net. Searching on resources such as that would be much more impactful to me!

  52. I find this really rings true. I am never impressed with recommended books that amazon puts forth, nor do I ever really consider it unless I have heard about it from other trusted sources. I find what drives my buying decision most is listening and hearing what is being said by those I trust and respect on the Net. Searching on resources such as that would be much more impactful to me!

  53. So will Google remain the mainstream engine of choice, and Friendfeed (or a successor) take away the geek market? I know as a geek myself, I’ve been looking for something more instant. Google could start by folding blog search into its regular results.

  54. So will Google remain the mainstream engine of choice, and Friendfeed (or a successor) take away the geek market? I know as a geek myself, I’ve been looking for something more instant. Google could start by folding blog search into its regular results.

  55. I tend to agree with K – Google seems mostly likely for now to lose pieces of the search market to vertical search, like Wikipedia, LinkedIn, IMDb – so that Google stops being the default starting point in some cases. And this could be where Twitter / Friendfeed / Facebook come in.

  56. I tend to agree with K – Google seems mostly likely for now to lose pieces of the search market to vertical search, like Wikipedia, LinkedIn, IMDb – so that Google stops being the default starting point in some cases. And this could be where Twitter / Friendfeed / Facebook come in.

  57. [...] Use Twitter? Posted by jarchowk under Uncategorized   I’ve read a few things on Twitter/Friendfeed being the next big thing in search.  I haven’t been the best Friendfeed user, mostly because I have no Friendfeed friends, but [...]

  58. [...] Another Microsoft friend (or competitor?) released a new buzz-creating feature called “Like”. For the people that are not familiar with the social network Facebook (call it the international Hyves), everything you do, is published on your wall. Meaning that if you upload a picture, there will be an entry on your profile page that you added a picture. Well, you can now rate that with “Like” or “Unlike”. Is this important? It’s freakin’ game changing and might be Google’s biggest threat. Google is not able to make “sense” out of data or see relationships. Facebook and FriendFeed can now, since they have a vast amount of meta-data about what people like or not, their social graph (who’s connected to who), your preferences and interests, etc. Read more about this real-time web on Robert Scoble’s (internet celebrity) blog. [...]

  59. You said “Only one of these searches were with MY friends.” If they are not your friends why do you trust them more than “corporate or personal blogs”. Probably because they have nothing to gain..but eventually the whole thing will be over run with corporate and personal business bloggers in disquise. If you build it they will come.

  60. You said “Only one of these searches were with MY friends.” If they are not your friends why do you trust them more than “corporate or personal blogs”. Probably because they have nothing to gain..but eventually the whole thing will be over run with corporate and personal business bloggers in disquise. If you build it they will come.

  61. <h2 align=”center”>Don't Do For Ugg Boots UK</h2>

    –>If you own a pair of Ugg boots, ugg classic short, be sure to take proper care of them and clean them regularly. With the proper care and cleaning, Uggs can last several years or even a lifetime.

    You love sheepskin footwear and ugg classic because they are comfortable and fashionable. How to keep them looking great? The following are a few tips to help you to know what you don't do for your natural beauty and functionality uggs.

    –>Tip one, don't store your cardy boots ugg in a light place. Because they can bleach in extreme sunlight.

    –>Tip two, ugg boots should not be worn in extremely moist or muddy conditions as moisture can cause problems.

    –>Tip three, don't clean the exterior of? your uggs knightsbridge with a hard brush or cloth at first time dirty.

    –>Tip four, trying not to saturate the sheepskin footwear with water, especially warm or hot water. And don't clean them in a washing machine or dryer, this will cause problems with shrinkage and can adversely change the sheepskin.

    –>Tip five, if need, except specially detergent for sheepskin product, just like classic ugg mini, don't use any wool detergent. Also don't use high concentration cleaning solution.

    –>Some suggestions for you to protect your natural beauty and functionality uggs long periods of time. And also hoping to help you solving your hesitation, spending little time to know more information about ugg boots.

    –>All rights reserved, reprint, please specify source comes from http://www.goodugg.co.ukbailey button,ugg knightsbridge boots,cardy boots,ugg tall classic