Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 16:15 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Google "It's quite a challenge really: how does the Number 1 search engine on the web rewrite its search algorithm and test its effectiveness without hurting its current results and user-experience during the testing process? Sergey Brin and Larry Page seem to have figured it out: create a new search engine, and do your testing there! SearchMash.com is the evolution of Google, and should things go right, what Google will (soon enough) become. It tests a range of new features and methods of bringing information to the users' fingertips in more ways than immediately obvious to the eyes."
Order by: Score:
yeah
by SK8T on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 17:03 UTC
SK8T
Member since:
2006-06-01

mh i like it

makes an easy and lightweight impression. But I like Googles version of clicking a image more than this.

Reply Score: 2

Very...
by xiaokj on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 18:14 UTC
xiaokj
Member since:
2005-06-30

...Web 2.0-ish...

Its interface is one of those clear and forturistic looks. Whats the problem with that look these days? Its popping up everywhere! Are we all going to turn into habbro hotel customers or what?

Otherwise, its nice.

Reply Score: 2

intuitive
by netpython on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 18:28 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06

Nice and intitutive.If directory listing is denied one click on the FQDN gives all occurrences with FQDN in combination with any search querry.

Reply Score: 1

fall-back for non-javascript-browsers?
by panzi on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 18:44 UTC
panzi
Member since:
2006-01-22

A fall-back modus without javascript would be good. So that I'm still able to search in my text bases terminal for "how to fix x11". This IS possible while keeping the AJAX functionality for those who can use it.

Reply Score: 4

Nice
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 19:06 UTC
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

I really like this engine. Google is too familiar to just drop after three queries, but who knows, in time...

Reply Score: 1

Search pane
by Buck on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 19:19 UTC
Buck
Member since:
2005-06-29

I like how the search text field is now smooth and rounded in Safari as opposed to a rectangular block on Google. Never quite got to finding out what code on a webpage triggers that.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Search pane
by optimusg4 on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 21:17 UTC in reply to "Search pane"
optimusg4 Member since:
2005-07-06

[input type="search"] is the code you need.

Reply Score: 2

news again
by l3v1 on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 21:11 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

The real news in this for me is that from time to time I can have repeatedly fun reading how users rediscover searchmash again and again and report it as novelty over again. Thing is, it probably hasn't changed much recently since these reports seem to be kind of the same for a time now.

Edited 2006-12-03 21:11

Reply Score: 1

RE: news again
by jaylaa on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 22:40 UTC in reply to "news again"
jaylaa Member since:
2006-01-17

...rediscover searchmash again and again and report it as novelty over again

It was news to me, not that that means anything. How long has searchsmash been around?

Edit: By reading TFA I see that it's a few months old. If the article is right, that is.

Anyway, I like it. Especially the wikipedia side tab. I've tried the googlepedia firefox extension but didn't like how it slowed down all searches while waiting for the wiki info to load.

Edited 2006-12-03 22:42

Reply Score: 1

Where's the cache?
by DonQ on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 21:30 UTC
DonQ
Member since:
2005-06-29

Is it just me or what, but I don't see links to cached pages ;) Often these pages are worth more then search results itself.

Otherwise nice - but somewhat too nice; google original layout seems more usable and informative to me. (Probably I'm getting old ;) )

Edited 2006-12-03 21:31

Reply Score: 4

Image search details
by MechR on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 21:31 UTC
MechR
Member since:
2006-01-11

I prefer being able to see dimensions and filesizes in the image search results. Sometimes the Google image search delivers a page that shows image details only on mouseovers, and I don't quite like that, either. Better than not showing it at all, though...

Reply Score: 1

Google 2.0
by Ford Prefect on Sun 3rd Dec 2006 22:02 UTC
Ford Prefect
Member since:
2006-01-16

The interface is great. This is how searching makes fun.

Most people here are right, there should be more details to the results, like image proportions, ore useful links, like to the cache.

On the other side, there are many killer features. For example, one click to get more search results just where you are on the page, without a whole page reloading.

They clearly show how AJAX can be used right on a webpage. The whole page is about dynamic content, so the whole page also uses the mighty XML fetch..

Reply Score: 1

Not impressed ...
by poohgee on Mon 4th Dec 2006 00:58 UTC
poohgee
Member since:
2005-08-13

The interface ?

Its just a box - it doesnt let me narrow my search down ....... .

searchengines.net gives a nice overview of whats possible ... well lots of searchengines ;)

What Id like is that the results are split up into categories - or presented sexy & interesting in a web which colur codes all results according to .. somethin - the software is out there .

A beagle style engine IMO would be cool .

"web2" online programs would be great for this - a proper search application with maybe sharing like mailing P2P integrating with youtube myspace .. anything .. options ?


Something which lets the user actually handle the 200million or so results one can get better .

EDIT : discovered the side panels once the search is done - nice - IMO should always be avtivated by default - to give an instant view of whats available .

It must be somehow possible to make all results scrollable but only transmit the visable results & anything else when needed ... propably useless idea

Edited 2006-12-04 01:08

Reply Score: 1

Clusty?
by milatchi on Mon 4th Dec 2006 04:28 UTC
milatchi
Member since:
2005-08-29

Anyone else try Clusty?

http://www.clusty.com

Reply Score: 2

RE: Clusty?
by csousa on Mon 4th Dec 2006 08:50 UTC in reply to "Clusty?"
csousa Member since:
2006-02-04

really nice!

I recommend also http://www.snap.com , from the man that think first in something like "adwords".

In "snap" humans vote to ranking pages (not some unknown algorithm or spammed pages), and not too many pages of the same website.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Clusty?
by RawMustard on Mon 4th Dec 2006 10:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Clusty?"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

I like Snap, thanks for the tip. Much better than the others. I've been loosing faith in google of late, too commercial now, just wants to promote its paying corporate customers by the looks of things. This is just my impression mind you, it may be different for others?

Edited 2006-12-04 10:26

Reply Score: 1