« More Librarian Desk Schlock: A Rex Libris Statue | Main | Many More Image Generators »
September 22, 2006
Ten Reasons Librarians Should Use Ask.com Instead of Google
We've all read the jokes like "I don't remember how I did reference before Google!" (which I'm hoping is a joke and not a serious statement). Google is a tool, and it's only one tool. I think many librarians forget that, and rely on Google as their sole search engine, forgetting other search tools and forgetting the wealth of information that's out there in the invisible web: web content that is not indexed by the big search engines (like Library of Congress content, huge image databases, other gateway sites). But there is one search engine that I've come to rely on in addition to the big G: Ask.com. So, here are my ten reasons that librarians should use Ask.com instead of Google. See what you think.
- Ask.com's Smart Answers rock my world. This is the single biggest reason I use Ask.com more often than ever. Searches for hundreds of commonly sought types of information yield answers--right at the top of the search results. For example: earthquakes california brings back all earthquake activity in the state. Put that into Google and all you get are links to pages that may or may not have that data, and you often have to dig through the site to find it. Other types of smart answers they provide include sports scores, movie times, weather, dictionary definitions, translations, conversions, science and animal information, the list goes on and on. A few more examples to whet your appetite: planet venus, wombat, little miss sunshine, the beatles, winston churchill, nigeria. While Google provides some quick answers like this, it doesn't provide nearly as many and not nearly the same amount of detail and information as Ask.com does. Try the same searches I used above in Google and see what happens. You'll be disappointed, guaranteed. And when a lot of our users want quick factual answers to questions, Ask.com makes so much more sense to use than Google.
- Ask.com clearly identifies their advertising. In Google, sometimes sponsored links are hidden inside the search results and so-called identified with a slightly shaded box behind the text or a dim outline which, unless you have Superman eyes, you may not notice. The delineation between actual and sponsored results is essential for me as a librarian in recommending results to a user.
- Ask.com's Image Search is far superior to Google's in terms of relevancy--I'm finding that in the last year or so, more and more random junk comes up in Google Images, while Ask.com's relevancy ranking seems to keep getting better. And talk about features! Ask.com's image search offers one-click options to expand or narrow your search. It also lets you save images with one-click into a list that you can access later (think "marked records" like in our subscription databases). Here's an image search for "fire" in Google and Ask.com. Compare for yourself.
- For all types of searches, Ask.com offers one-click links to narrow your search, expand your search, and provides links to results for related terms. For example, look at these results for Patrick Stewart. I can narrow to things like biography, expand to things like Star Trek, and look up related names like Brent Spiner (go Data!).
- Ask.com provides a binoculars icon with each search result that, when hovered over, will provide a pop-up talk-bubble with a screenshot of what that webpage looks like. This is particularly helpful if you are recreating searches, and you remember what that one good page you found looked like. Saves the time for clicking, loading, and going back to start over.
- Ask.com offers instant white pages searching from their main search box. Just type in "address of FIRSTNAME LASTNAME TOWN STATE" and the top result will be a link to white pages results. Just try that in Google and see that you get a big fat nothing (well, not nothing--you get a sponsored link as your top result).
- Ask.com offers RSS Smart Answers: Searches for popular blog names will bring up the lastest posts from the blog at the top of the results list. Ask is constantly building its database of sites with this feature. Here's the example for Librarian in Black.
- Ask.com has a version specifically designed for kids, Ask for Kids, that users natural language searching and has a kid-friendly interface. A search for "Who is Zeus" brings back these results which can help a kid (or heck, an adult) find the right path to the information they need.
- Ask.com's Maps and Directions Search has some neat features too. A search for my workplace address yields this page. But then I can add a location (say, one of our libraries) and then I get this page, which gives me not only driving directions, but walking directions and all the map view options we've come to expect: areial, physical, and street. I can then add more and more locations to my heart's content. And I get quick links to print, e-mail, or bookmark the map with all the additions I've made.
- Finally, Ask.com has far fewer ads overall. Google often usese the entire right-hand side of the results page for sponsored links. Ask.com uses that to house its narrow/expand search options. Fewer ads show up in Ask.com results overall, as well. Fewer ads means more content, and as content is king, so is Ask.com.
September 22, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c511253ef00e5506530848834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ten Reasons Librarians Should Use Ask.com Instead of Google:
» (recherche) > Dix bonnes raisons d'utiliser Ask au lieu de Google from Brainsfeed
Ask est généralement un peu négligé par les utilisateurs. Et pourtant, les résultats que fournit ce moteur de recherche sont parfois étonnants. Et voici qu'un article trouve dix bonnes raisons qui devraient pousser les bibliothécaires à préférer Ask [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 25, 2006 6:09:47 AM
» Why aren't we using Ask.com more? from LaurietheLibrarian.ca
Do you remember when Ask.com was still AskJeeves.com? [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 25, 2006 9:05:19 AM
» Ask.com vs. Google from Atakans Zeitenläufte
Die Librarian in Black vergleicht Ask.com und Google.com und kommt zu dem Schluß: Ask.com [...] rock my world.
Der ganze Artikel:
[Read More]
Tracked on Sep 26, 2006 8:44:57 AM
» LibrarianInBlack: Ten Reasons Librarians Should Use Ask.com Instead of Google from DrWeb's Domain
LibrarianInBlack: Ten Reasons Librarians Should Use Ask.com Instead of Google. September 22, 2006Ten Reasons Librarians Should Use Ask.com Instead of Google We've all read the jokes like I don't remember how I did reference before Google! (which I'm ho... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 29, 2006 4:09:36 PM
» 10 reasons why librarians should use Exalead. from CILIP members blog landscape
Back in September 2006 my colleague, the Librarian in Black wrote an excellent article entitled Ten Reasons [Read More]
Tracked on Mar 10, 2008 7:37:25 PM
Comments
I still think I'd use google over ask, although those are some pretty great reasons.
Posted by: San Jose Plumber | December 2, 2008
It depends on the kind of information that you are looking for. I haven't used their search in a while because when I last did it didn't seem too relevant. If what you say in this article is true, it looks like they have listened to the public.
All the different search engines have their strengths and weaknesses, as a Search engine marketer, I know a bit about the different search engines, and know which to use for different information.
I tend to use MSN and Dogpile for most searches, with Google being used for searches in 'the biggest of their kind', such as Government sites, the main site for a specific corporation, or the biggest company in a field.
If I am searching for pure information, I tend to look in wikipedia for a starting point, use the links from there.
So, my message - use several search engines, give them all a trial, and see what sort of results each of them returns for specific enquiries, this way you can use the best tools for the right enquiries.
Posted by: Alan Marks | May16, 2007
Just to clarify...rphonebook: still works, but it won't do the statewide searches that phonebook: can.
For example:
(This works) phonebook:aubry ma
(This works) phonebook:smith andover ma
(This works) rphonebook:smith andover ma
(This does not work) rphonebook:aubry ma
Posted by: Reg Aubry | April16, 2007
Heh...so, somehow I'm infiltrating Google unintentionally, eh? Well, maybe it will do some good in the long run. Thanks for letting us know, Ian.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | October16, 2006
I sent a link to this article to a friend who works at Google (not Matt, who left a comment above) and in an IM today, he said:
Mike: BTW, the article you sent me about librarians using ask.com generated a ton of discussion inside the search quality group here.
So I suppose that's a good thing.
Posted by: Ian McKinney | October16, 2006
Let me offer reason #12: Ask's new mobile portal is second-to-none:
You basically get a similar toolset/experience on your phone as you do on the desktop.
Posted by: Kevin Perkins, CEO Greenlight Wireless | October12, 2006
My comment was not intended as a claim about the superiority of Google for any particular purpose, but only to note that (a) Google often returns phonebook information without a label and (b) the phonebook: label [which I consider more intuitive than address for (or is it of?] gets addresses and phone numbers.
I believe that rphonebook still works; bphonebook doesn't work any more -- it strips the b from phonebook and adds it to the query resulting in a null result.
I had forgotten about 411.com; it would be nice if its business search had a begins with option. I often remember the first word or a part of the first word of a businesses I want to find, but the "411" sites that I've tried all return all businesses containing the word.
I suspect that most of us non-librarians don't want to spend a lot of time learning how to use our computers to search the Web. We learn just enough to find some stuff (alas, few of us think to ask a librarian how to find the stuff that a quick and dirty search on our favorite search or directory site doesn't find).
Benjamin Cohen
Posted by: Benjamin Cohen | October 7, 2006
I'm not sure I agree. Many of the same images are coming up in both search engines for the name. Not sure I see why Google's results are better.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | October 4, 2006
This is Fun. Enter"Prophet Muhammed" sans quotes, in Ask.com images. Then Google it. Case Closed. Google Rules. Peace.
Posted by: alan w. olson | October 4, 2006
Sarah-found your site and this article listed in Marylaine Block's "Neat new things..." listserve. Yes, I remember reference work before the Internet, not to mention Google and Jeeves. For quite a while, Yahoo was actually the search engine I would start with, but last year I became increasingly frustrated with some changes made there, so I switched to Google, but was not terribly happy there either. Tried Teoma, Dogpile, Mama, A09, and have found Ask.com to definately be the best. As far as phone number searches go, I still use 411.com, AnyWho.com and Switchboard.com, because I learned years ago that there are two main phone number databases and that some search engines use one and some use the other, but in order to be sure that you have covered all the bases for published numbers, you need to check both databases. So Ben, try 411.com, and just put in Ben, with the "starts with" box checked, and Cohen and IL, and look at the results. Actually you and your brother come up in Switchboard.com and Anywho.com as well. No one search engine or web site is the end-all be-all (sorry Google), and having and using a variety of tools is much better for everyone, for many reasons.
Linda Weight
Librarian I
Siuslaw Public Library District
Posted by: Linda Weight | October 3, 2006
Thanks for the comments Matt (I read your blog religiously). In the publicity I've read about the SmartAnswers for blogs and RSS feeds, I do remember reading that it's a hand-grown list currently that is growing each week. Perhaps all you gotta do is ask. Say, on this blog maybe! :)
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | October 2, 2006
I like Yahoo! and find it to work just fine. I never use Goggle. I think search engines are like Fords and Chevrolets. They all get you there in the end they just have a few different options
Posted by: Rick Elder | October 2, 2006
Hey Sarah, thanks for the feedback! I'm an engineer at Google and if you don't mind I'll pass this feedback around at Google. I'd differ on a few things--I've never really wanted walking directions on my maps--but I appreciate hearing the stuff that you liked on Ask.
Hmm, I don't get an RSS Smart Answer when I search for myself or my blog. Gary, what's a guy gotta do to get their own RSS shortcut? :) Does Ask use a hand-made list of blogs to show a Smart Answer for?
Posted by: Matt Cutts | October 1, 2006
Thanks Reg for clarifying on the phonebook syntax. To me, the point is not that Google has a syntax that works, but that you have to use the syntax at all. Most users (I'm gonna go out on a limb and say 95%) are not going to think to put in "phonebook" much less "rphonebook." And they're not gonna take the time to look up how to do it either. Do those same users have a higher chance of saying "address of" and then the person's info? A little more than slightly. That's why Ask's is better to me.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | September29, 2006
I've been doodling with an application that lets people compare the results from the different, major search engines in a tabbed display. The tool (which is configurable in terms of what search engines are displayed) can be found at http://ouseful.open.ac.uk/searchTabs.php with instruction so n usage (deciding which search engibnes to display etc) at http://blogs.open.ac.uk/Maths/ajh59/007560.html
This app was actually developed to try and encourage students on a new online info skills course (http://ouseful.open.ac.uk/tu120) to start looking beyond google to satisfy their search needs
tony
Posted by: Tony Hirst | September29, 2006
Hi, I'm Reg Aubry, the guy who uncovered the Google phonebook: syntax in 2002 (a computer science prof in the U.K. uncovered the rphonebook/bphonebook syntax). I gave my findings to Tara Calishain, and that's how the word got out, in her first edition of Google Hacks. (It's still the ONE syntax that's not covered in the help section on the Google site - I assume that's because it's not officially "supported"?).
The whole point of using phonebook: - instead of just dropping the name into the regular search field unadorned - is to ensure you get a phonebook result (if one exists on their database). Much of the phonebook functionality and focus has gone to the Google Maps tab (which now combines the former Google Maps/Google Local features)(bphonebook and rphonebook don't seem to be working now). However, the reason for using phonebook: was for the precision. If you entered plumbing 01845, you wouldn't get every plumbing outfit in North Andover, MA, but you would have seen those names in the phonebook (that is to say, whichever phonebook database Google was using for your area) that HAD THE WORD PLUMBING IN THEM. More importantly, what most people don't realize is that, using phonebook:, you can still search STATEWIDE for a name. Entering [aubry ma](no brackets) in Google will give you a lot of garbage. Entering [phonebook:aubry ma] gives you very specific results - all phone directory listings of that last name in the entire state (limited up to 600 entries). So, it's a matter of using the tool correctly for the result you're seeking.
On the other hand, thank you for that great review. As someone who teaches librarians how to do ready reference with Google, I had been a dyed-in-the-wool opponent of AskJeeves. But Ask.com has made such amazing improvements in the past year or so, I'm almost ready to FINALLY believe Google has a rival. Teoma, alltheweb, Clusty...nice, but in terms of speed, reliablity, and quality of results: eh. But Ask is coming up on the inside track. Nicely done.
Posted by: Reg Aubry | September29, 2006
Ben, thank you for the details. I don't think anyone is right or wrong, I just think it proves something that's usually true for all things: the results vary depending on what you search for. In searches for my families, friends, and businesses I had much more luck with Ask.com. No idea why. Mileage varies, I guess.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | September29, 2006
Sarah, you want details, I give details.
(I do my Google searches from the search window in Opera. Ask searches were done from the Ask web site.)
On Google I had only checked Benjamin Cohen Niles IL and Benjamin Cohen Chicago IL; on the latter Google added another Benjamin Cohen's information to mine. I tried my brother; bingo. I tried his oldest son; bingo. My friend John Madden on Cape Cod; nothing -- no surprise, I know he's not listed. (I'm not talking about the football coach, I'm talking about the REAL John Madden!)
Then I went to Ask. My name and home: nothing. My name and office; two listings for other Benjamin Cohens, nothing for my office. My brother's name and home; nothing. My brother's name and office; nothing. His oldest son; bingo. John Madden; nothing.
My brother and I are both listed, but Ask didn't find us. FWIW, each us has been listed at the same residence address for more than thirty years.
Then I made up some names and cities. Here's what I got. I omit test names/cities that resulted in no hits.
Google:
Phonebook results for james smith rockford il
James Smith (815) 961-8172 1417 N Church St, Rockford, IL 61103 Map
James Smith (815) 964-9140 1516 12th Ave, Rockford, IL 61104 Map
James Smith (815) 969-0390 1921 Ridge Ave, Rockford, IL 61103 Map
Phonebook results for herman smith miami fl
Herman L Smith (305) 638-4296 5420 NW 24th Ct, Miami, FL 33142 Map
Phonebook results for james wong san francisco ca
James Wong (415) 586-2974 140 Rae Ave, San Francisco, CA 94112 Map
James Wong (415) 885-1150 1515 Jackson St, San Francisco, CA 94109 Map
James Wong (415) 775-4289 1545 Taylor St, San Francisco, CA 94133 Map
Phonebook results for diego rivera los angeles ca
Diego Rivera (323) 257-2404 257 La Follette Dr, Los Angeles, CA 90042 Map
Diego Rivera (323) 933-1084 614 Hauser Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90036 Map
Ask:
Smith, James - 815-962-8497 - 307 N Henrietta Ave, Rockford, IL
Smith, James - 815-969-0390 - 1921 Ridge Ave, Rockford, IL
Smith, James - 815-961-8172 - 1417 N Church St, Rockford, IL
herman smith miami fl
no results
Wong, James - 415-585-3401 - San Francisco, CA
Wong, James - 415-731-9459 - 2200 Sloat Blvd, San Francisco, CA
Wong, James - 415-668-0867 - San Francisco, CA
Rivera, Diego - 323-933-1084 - 614 Hauser Blvd, Los Angeles, CA
Rivera, Diego - 323-257-2404 - 257 La Follette Dr, Los Angeles, CA
Three times out of four the results are NOT the same. Who's right and who's wrong? I dunno, but Ask couldn't find my brother or me.
Ben
Posted by: Benjamin Cohen | September29, 2006
To the anonymous poster who asked if I actually tried the "SmartAnswer" searches in Google, yes I did. And I think you and I are talking about two different things here. You say a search "works in Google to provide the definition." But it doesn't give you the answer from any kind of trusted source at the top of the page like Ask does...it just points to a whole bunch of web pages -- a regular list of results -- while Ask taps known reliable sources and pulls the answer right there for you. The results are not comparable, and not even remotely similar except in the case of "Little Miss Sunshine," in which the two engines do produce similar results at the top of the page.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | September29, 2006
Benjamin--your claims about Google are interesting. The "rphonebook" and "bphonebook" options do work as you say, but I'm getting nothing like that when I do a regular " firstname lastname city state" search. I've tried over a dozen now in different areas of the country, city/suburban/rural, and have not gotten the results that you say you see. For most of them, I get sponsored links at the top. For others, I get random web results, looking for these words in the text of webpages. Care to share your magical searches with us? Because none that I use work the way you say they do.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | September29, 2006
To the anonymous KidsLibrarian: Fair enough. My observations with kids using Ask.com simply differ from yours. I've also asked a number of children's librarians over the last couple of years how their students/child patrons use Ask.com, and I never heard a single negative. Only positives. Do you have a search engine or research tool for kids that you do use and enjoy? If so, please share it with us.
Posted by: Sarah Houghton (LiB) | September29, 2006
Did you actually try those searches in Google?
planet venus - [what is planet venus] works in Google to provide the definition.
wombat - [what is wombat] works in Google to provide the definition.
little miss sunshine just as you listed returns a way to search for local movie listing.
The beatles shows a music album & profile of the band with a link that takes you here: http://www.google.com/musica?aid=RkjXfVobfdH&sa=X&oi=music&ct=result
winston churchill - [who is winston churchill] works to give you a profile.
nigeria - gives you news, while [about nigeria] works to show you books and a profile of the country.
Posted by: | September28, 2006
Thanks for the great overview of Ask.com. Although I often go to Google for quick searches, I try to follow the advice I give in training sessions and use multiple search engines for research. (I find that yahoo! vs. google: synergy, at http://www.langreiter.com/exec/yahoo-vs-google.html, nicely illustrates the need to consider using more than one engine.) After reading your review, Ask.com will definitely move higher on my search engine list!
I remember Ask.com from the AskJeeves days. I had given up on it, because I had found that it had gone downhill. However, I'm glad your review brought me back to look at it again, as it looks like the folks at Ask.com have made substantial improvements.
Posted by: Freya Anderson | September28, 2006
I like it. But Cohen's Law of the Media says: Everything that you read/see/hear in the Media is true, correct, and complete, except those things within your personal knowledge.
Try
rphonebook: firstname lastname city state
on Google. [bphonebook: for businesses.]
Answers come with a link to a map.
Or just
firstname lastname city state
which yields a white pages listing, link to a map, AND other information.
But I'll try Ask.com....for some of the other things you mention.
Ben
Posted by: Benjamin Cohen | September28, 2006
Regarding Steve's comment on the IMAGE search. As you roll over the info link under the image thumbnails, text comes up including the size and pixel dimensions of the pic.
Posted by: Cathy Outten | September28, 2006
This is an interesting list, and I will consider using Ask more often from now on.
But one major disadvantage of ask.com? It doesn't lend itself to colloquial speech like Google does. "I ask.commed Patrick Stewart..." doesn't have the same ring as "I googled Patrick Stewart..."
"Ask.comming yourself" sounds cumbersome. "Googling yourself" sounds fun!
This Google stonghold on our language makes it an uphill climb for Ask.com. :)
Posted by: hnutsworth | September28, 2006
Thanks for an informative post. I have to disagree about the "sponsored links," though. I find the shaded box easy enough to spot in Google's search results. But on Ask.com, it's a little unclear. Does "sponsored results" refer only to the one link it appears next to, or does it refer to several? Search for "handbags" and you'll see three links repeated when you scroll down the first page of results. The words "sponsored results" appear next to the first of the repeated links, but since there are three repeated, I assume they're all ads. However, it's terribly unclear, and I don't know if I'd have noticed the repeats if I hadn't been looking for them.
Posted by: Andrea | September28, 2006
I disagree a lot with your comments on Ask for Kids. I've watched kids try to figure out where to look if what they are looking for is not the 2 suggestions offered. In your example, one of the sources is Encyclopedia Mythica- which is not written at a child's level.
I also don't like the fact that the kids cannot go to the needed page directly but are always caught within the Ask frame. This means that when they have to write the bibliography, they have no idea of the URL of the website they used.
Posted by: KidsLibrarian | September28, 2006
Thank you, Gary! Thank you, Sarah! I'm delighted to get updated about ask.com .. Jeeves was my teacher for so many years and I do miss him so. Now, at least, there is a Gary behind the scenes. Really appreciated this information. I'll spread the word on Ask.com !
Posted by: Lissa Lord | September27, 2006
Sarah,
Thanks for the wonderful post about Ask.com. We sincerely appreciate the kind words and observations. Before I begin, thank you for allowing me to post this extended comment on LibrarianinBlack.
My name is Gary Price and I'm a librarian.
I've been the Director of Online Information Resources at Ask.com since March. As some LibrarianinBlack readers know, I'm also the founder and editor of ResourceShelf.com, a site to which you often link. Thank you. By the way, ResourceShelf is independent of my work at Ask. We do our best to cover it all.
I also do a lot of public presentations and by no means am I restricted to talking or demonstrating only Ask.com services. Quite the opposite.
I have many responsibilities at Ask and one of them is to work specifically with the library and information communities. Not only to promote Ask.com to the community, but to promote and library services INTERNALLY at Ask. For example, how can a large engine and a library work together? How can we build tools and services that work for all of us, and most especially our users?
I always welcome email from colleagues. My Ask.com address is Gary.Price@ask.com.
We have started this page where we list cool resources (not just from Ask.com) and we plan to make it into a place where librarians can post guest commentaries, cool sites, promote libraries, and the like. Much more to come and I welcome your suggestions.
http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/about/garyprice.shtml
No general web engine is perfect. As a librarian my hope is for professionals to be aware of a wide variety of resources and tools and use the right one at the right time. That's the bottom line.
We hope that Ask.com is one of those tools.
Sarah, you did a great job of summarizing a good portion of what we are up to. Let me add just a few more.
+ Perhaps the most notable change is the home page. Clean and crisp. The search toolbox (right side of page) can be personalized by dragging and dropping or using the edit link. Expect more here soon.
+ Image Searching
Our image database is new in 2006. Before this year our image database, its relevancy system, etc. was from a third party. Now, we crawl the web for images on our own and use our relevancy ranking. You'll notice that we also provide our Zoom related search feature for some image searches. For example:
http://images.ask.com/pictures?q=bono&qsrc=31&o=333&l=dir
You'll even spot Bono's real name in the "related names" section.
+ Not a major deal but we try our best to help the searcher with ambiguities. Two examples:
++ San Jose weather
http://www.ask.com/web?q=san+jose+weather&qsrc=1&o=333&l=dir
Notice the pull-down box allowing a searcher to quickly find other cities (and the current weather) with the same name without having to type.
++ Dogs
http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=2102&o=333&l=dir&q=dogs
I think this is a great example because we all know as librarians that people will start general but want something specific. Here you have basic dog info plus a pull down box that lets the user get specific breed results without having to type or enter any extra text.
+ Blog and Feed Searching
Two facts. One, this is the same database that is in use at Bloglines the other is that you can use the Ask.com interface to quickly click and subscribe to a feed.
Each interface offers different features.
One feature I like (as do others) is when you do a blog/feed search using the Ask.com interface, you'll see two boxes below every entry. These boxes allow the user to quickly subscribe to the feed using one of a VARIETY of services, just not Bloglines/Ask.com. The same goes for sharing. Pull-down to del.icio.us, digg, and others.
http://www.ask.com/blogsearch?q=golden+gate+bridge&t=a&s=p&bql=&qsrc=2104&rpp=10
I know many appreciate the “openness.”
By the way, some have asked what "popularity" means as a sorting option. It looks at several metrics, including how many people have opted-in and subscribed to that feed using Bloglines. It's not perfect but can help reduce the spam in results.
+ One service you didn't mention in your post was Ask Maps.
First, we have enough here for a complete post but let me say two things. We offer both Driving and Walking directions.
Second, we allow the user to change their location by simply dragging the pin. Here's an example, go to this map:
http://tinyurl.com/jv2w3
Now, take the "pin" labeled "1" and drag it to a new location. Watch the new location dynamically appear.
Add more locations (you can have up to 10) by simply placing your cursor (of course you could also type it) on a location, right click, and select "add a location." Now you should have a route and a blue line marking it out. Note how the line changes between walking and driving directions.
Example at:
http://tinyurl.com/foa6x
Finally, we continue to expand both our Smart Answers and Smart RSS programs.
Smart Answers :
http://www.ask.com/web?q=coldplay&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
and Smart RSS programs:
http://www.ask.com/web?q=new+science+books&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
In this case (Smart RSS) we are taking the RSS feed from the new books list from
the National Academies Press and placing it at the top of the results page. Let’s place the content where people might see it. Many people don’t know about RSS yet.
Another example:
FDA Recalls.
http://www.ask.com/web?q=fda+recalls&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
Yes, in both cases you get links but we also try to help with direct links to answers.
Smart Answers combine technology like this one where we mine [?] the IMDB for Oscar winners:
http://www.ask.com/web?q=oscar+best+actor+1980&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
to ones where we have some human editorial involvement such as:
http://www.ask.com/web?q=san+francisco+earthquake&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
One of our first Smart Answers came along in 2003 and last year others began offering it.
If the query suggests the person might want images, we provide them on the web results page.
http://www.ask.com/web?q=pics+golden+gate+bridge&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
That's it for now. Honestly, we have much more in the works. I hope the library community not only gives Ask.com some usage but also lots of feedback to help us create a better product for all.
My Ask.com address is Gary.Price@ask.com.
Cheers,
Gary
p.s. Ask is now allowing for emoticon/smiley searches.
http://www.ask.com/web?q=%3A-%29&qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir
Posted by: gary price | September25, 2006
Oh, I popped over to comment on Ask's blog search and see that Simon has beaten me to it. It's not just better than Google's; it's better, from my experience, than any competitor's blog search (including dedicated sites like Feedster).
Posted by: Greg | September23, 2006
Thanks for that post; I know I need to get out more (i.e., use other search engines more), but I usually don't (kinda like getting out in that regard, come to think of it, as I sit here commenting on a Friday night). A few specific comments:
I really *don't* remember how I did reference before Google, as I never really did. Google came out in 1998; I got my MLS in 2000. :)
Of your listed reasons, Smart Answers and expand/narrow search are the most compelling to me. The binocs are neat, but appear on too few results (in my very limited experience) to be really useful. Ditto the RSS smart answers; it's cool, but they have far too few blogs in there right now. I'm not really sure how I'd use that feature anyway.
As for the image search, it does look good, but I can't believe they don't give the image dimensions! Not supplying that information is a major oversight, as you can't tell from the rows of identical thumbnails which images are 100px square and which will fill your monitor.
Lastly, I have the opposite feeling about the ads. It seems like most searches I do in Google just have the sponsored links on the right rail, while every web search I have done tonight in Ask has sponsored results at the top *and* bottom of every results page. And I guess the Google ads you mention must be very subtle, because I can't remember ever seeing them come up in the middle of a results page. Could it be because I am pretty much always logged in to my Google account?
Anyway, nice post, and I will certainly try turning to Ask more frequently.
Posted by: Steve Lawson | September22, 2006
Good list. If I can add #11: Ask's blog search is much better than Google's.
Posted by: Simon Chamberlain | September22, 2006
