tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33596609.post2320441507707383417..comments2024-03-17T14:11:23.145-05:00Comments on Digital Eccentric: commentary on why google must dieLeslie Johnstonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02214388320207490977noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33596609.post-58535938784869805912008-11-28T11:34:00.000-05:002008-11-28T11:34:00.000-05:00I feel like there's a fallacy here, though, that i...I feel like there's a fallacy here, though, that it's a bit of a zero-sum game: you either do everything like Google (Amazon, etc.) or fail.<BR/><BR/>It's also counter-productive to point out the questionable aspects of any project/company/initiative and make the claim that just because <EM>x does y it invalidates any reason to emulate x</EM>.<BR/><BR/>There's a huge difference between "learn from what Google (Amazon, etc.) does well" and "copy absolutely Google (Amazon, etc.) does".<BR/><BR/>Basically this "Google must die" meme comes across as another example of libraries sticking their heads in the sand while continuing to lose credibility in the public's mind.<BR/><BR/>Of course Google does some evil things, as does Amazon, Microsoft or any organization that needs to have a competitive advantage to keep the lights on (see also: OCLC). I suspect SirsiDynix, in some quarters, has also been accused of "evil".<BR/><BR/>Certainly Stephen's criticisms of Google are valid, but does anybody honestly think that the proponents of a more Amazoogle-like library are calling for the methods pointed out in his bullet points?<BR/><BR/>No, they are merely saying that having a single search box that gets the user pretty much exactly what they want from the uninformed query they used in a simple and intuitive interface is what we should be striving towards.<BR/><BR/>You know, I was going to conclude this with links in Google, Amazon and a Unicorn system for "Mark Twain", but I can't do it, because I don't have any idea how to link to a Unicorn system without it failing due to session stuff in the URL.<BR/><BR/>And this is exactly my point.Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03766301510511289351noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33596609.post-28763203757008297702008-11-25T17:08:00.000-05:002008-11-25T17:08:00.000-05:00Leslie,I couldn't agree more - and disagree at the...Leslie,<BR/><BR/>I couldn't agree more - and disagree at the same time :) I just love when googlefiles, applefiles, etc. imagine that their favorite toolmaker is somehow NOT in the business of making money, and therefore not "evil".<BR/><BR/>Of course Apple, Google, and others are in the business to make money. Just like Microsoft, IBM, Yahoo, and HP are in the business to make money. To brand one vendors money-making methodology over another as "evil" or "good" is a purely subjective and jingoistic approach to business.<BR/><BR/>So that begs the question: if you're building a search engine and you're NOT getting paid for it somehow (see above list for some ways Google makes money) then who IS paying for it. Because the storage, software, development, bandwidth, etc. are all NOT FREE. So you must do SOMETHING to make money with your search engine unless you are going the route of taxpayer funding - and good luck with that :)<BR/><BR/>So the first question I always ask when an entrepreneur comes to me with a search engine idea of one kind or another is - nice idea, how are you going to make it be at least break even, and - if you want funding - VERY profitable.<BR/><BR/>Which derives back down into the "ok so which thing are you doing from the aforementioned list - or is it something entirely different"?<BR/><BR/>I'm certainly not saying that the above methods are the only way to make money from search - but they set the bar. People are apparently willing to tolerate such things if they can get their search for free and it delivers what they consider reasonable results. So if you're offering a different money-making model you have to consider if that model is competitive with how Google (or Live, or Yahoo or whomever) make money.Childish Democrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06064877499609203297noreply@blogger.com