{"id":295,"date":"2006-12-02T20:20:39","date_gmt":"2006-12-02T20:20:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/neosmart.net\/blog\/archives\/295"},"modified":"2013-08-26T18:14:10","modified_gmt":"2013-08-26T23:14:10","slug":"searchmash-google-reborn","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/neosmart.net\/blog\/searchmash-google-reborn\/","title":{"rendered":"SearchMash: Google Reborn"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

Move over Google<\/strong>, there’s a new search engine in town! What’s that? SearchMash is<\/strong> Google? Never mind then, scratch that…<\/em>
\n
It doesn’t make a difference really, stop going to Google.com because that’s not<\/em> the place to get answers nowadays. SearchMash<\/a> is, both literally and figuratively speaking, the new Google<\/a>.\n<\/p>\n

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<\/strong> 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!\n<\/p>\n

SearchMash.com is the evolution of Google, [[GOOG]] 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.\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

SearchMash<\/a> was born a couple of months ago, and at first, it was Google.com with a new face. The results were identical, and for those that thought it was a hoax or a scam, the whois results<\/a> proved otherwise. Since then it has constantly changed, with features and improvements being added and dropped. There is no guarantee that what we review here will make the final product, if such a thing even exists.\n<\/p>\n

Several of the new-found SearchMash qualities are reviewed here, and their impact\/accuracy\/perfection is analyzed in context with Google, Microsoft, and the web today.\n<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Improved Algorithm<\/a><\/strong>
    \n
    We’re geeks, this is what matters to people like us. And indeed, SearchMash does feature a new and improved search algorithm to back its results. <\/li>\n
  2. Overhauled Search Interface<\/a><\/strong>
    \n
    Some people don’t like Google’s “too-plain” look – which suits others just fine. SearchMash has a different interface and attempts to compromise between style and simplicity. <\/li>\n
  3. (Really) Related Links
    \n
    <\/a><\/strong>Instead of AdWords on the side, SearchMash features a series of iframes that provide added results and value to your search. <\/li>\n
  4. Conclusion<\/a><\/strong>
    \n
    It’s new, it’s cool, but is it worth changing your default search engine or even homepage over to? <\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    <\/p>\n

    Improved Search Algorithm
    \n<\/h4>\n

    SearchMash may have started out as Google with a makeover, but now it’s radically different on the inside. Whereas SearchMash used to have identical results as your normal old Google, the results list now varies not only in order & ranking, but even in the links available.\n<\/p>\n

    SearchMash doesn’t use its own page index – that<\/em> would be taking reinventing the wheel to a whole new level. But SearchMash does analyze the contents (and especially the relevance) of websites differently; bringing links to the first page of results that would have been missed entirely otherwise. To date, no one really knows how Google’s search engine algorithm works (obviously), except that it prioritizes back-links over content most of the time.\n<\/p>\n

    The first glance at the SearchMash search results are much of the same. For instance, the infamous “miserable failure” search<\/a> brings up the same result as Google does. But that’s just the tip of the ice-berg. One of Google’s shortcomings, the higher rankings of news aggregation sites, is a direct result of backlink prioritization. When sites like Slashdot and Digg link to a relatively small website, it is not uncommon for the aggregated links<\/em> to rank higher on Google than the actual article itself1<\/a><\/sup>.\n<\/p>\n

    In our subjective testing (seeing as there doesn’t exist a truly random way to search Google and SearchMash for links to small sites that appeared on Slashdot and Digg), SearchMash seems to do better. It appears that SearchMash has either defined the list of user-submitted news aggregation sites (and the URI patterns) or (hopefully!) that it dynamically analyzes the content of such pages for excerpts from linked pages. Either way, what this means is, no more<\/del> less Google bloat.\n<\/p>\n

    Less Google Spam. That may sound impossible, but whether its placebo or the real deal, it seems to us that SearchMash has a bit more relevant content and that much less spam listings. Especially when we tried to search for the traditionally much-spammed \u201cmedia converter\u201d topics (and its variations), we saw fewer \u201cmedia-converter.myspamdomain.com\u201d listings and more truly Google-worthy listings. Again though, it might just be placebo, but that\u2019s our take.\n<\/p>\n

    Honestly though, it’s too early to tell. SearchMash has only been out for 2 months or so, and until a couple of weeks ago, its results were identical with Google’s. Even today, the difference isn’t that dramatic. All of the above was slightly exaggerated: basically forecasting the graph. SearchMash seems to be the beginning of something new and totally overhauled as far the algorithm goes, but only time can tell whether the improved results are a) placebo b) coincidence or c) here to stay. In the end, we can only hope, and revisit this topic at a later time to find out.\n<\/p>\n

    <\/p>\n

    Overhauled User Interface
    \n<\/h4>\n

    Google’s look has become synonymous with its results. Giving someone Google’s results without the famous rainbow-colored logo and the plain, white background is like giving a kid brown Orange Juice. Sure, the results are the same, but psychologically, we’re not as comfortable with brown orange juice2<\/a><\/sup> It’s the same with SearchMash. Until we got used to it (and had incentive to use it over Google – read the rest of the review for more on that though), SearchMash was just simply unnatural. That doesn’t mean ugly; just radically and unnaturally different.\n<\/p>\n

    Where the majority of search engines out there are busy playing catch-up-to-Google as far as search results go; it seems that the tables are flipped when it comes to the interface. In short, for SearchMash Google has taken interface ideas from everywhere on the web but Google itself<\/strong>. You can’t really blame them for wanting to change the Google results page though, can you?\n<\/p>\n

    Infinite (Page-Less) Scrolling<\/strong>\n<\/p>\n

    This was Microsoft’s brainchild with the Live Search<\/a> prototypes. Basically the idea is to do away with pages. On Microsoft’s Live Search, the more you scroll down, the more results that appear. Just like Excel: keep hitting the down button and new rows just keep on coming! SearchMash incorporates pretty much the same idea, but with a minor difference. Instead of detecting when the browser reaches the “bottom”3<\/a><\/sup> of the browser page and then dynamically displaying more data, SearchMash provides a “more” link which adds on the next 20 results to the page.\n<\/p>\n

    Who\u2019s right, what’s better? It all depends. Live Search’s method is certainly flashier and much more natural, but it relies on some advanced AJAX scroll-detection techniques that break in several browsers (basically anything except the latest versions of Opera, Mozilla, Internet Explorer, and Firefox). By contrast, SearchMash’s method is much more robust and simple, albeit a bit less intuitive and so much less natural to use.\n<\/p>\n

    The Purple Effect<\/strong>\n<\/p>\n

    We\u2019re not sure why Google picked purple as their theme of choice for SearchMash, but whether it has something to do with the \u201croyal\u201d connotations or something else, the effect is the same. It seems that the current design is more about concepts than aesthetic appeal, because between the squished-up logo and the pale-ish purple hues, it\u2019s certainly far from being the color of choice for the next-gen web interface to the greatest search engine on the web.\n<\/p>\n

    Useful Content on the Side<\/strong>\n<\/p>\n

    Several times we\u2019ve brought up the topic of Wikipedia in Google search results. Basically, if you search for any noun or term, Wikipedia is one of the top ten results. We suggested a link on the side to the Wikipedia page on the content and then removing it from the results, but SearchMash takes that a bit further. Again, this is something else that can be considered \u201cborrowed ideas\u201d from Microsoft\u2019s own Live.com user interface, which for some time did the same.\n<\/p>\n

    <\/p>\n

    (Really) Related Links
    \n<\/h4>\n

    Everyone\u2019s grown accustomed to (and tunes out as well) the links on the right in a typical Google search. They\u2019re ads. Paid, useless, irrelevant, money-making links. Not any more they\u2019re not, read on below!\n<\/p>\n