MSN Search Relevance Roiling Microsoft

[dutter]

Microsoft asked Keynote Systems not to make a survey of search engine users available to the public.

The numbers didn't look good for the home team in Redmond, the Wall Street Journal reported, and that may have led Microsoft to request the suppression of a search engine study. In the study, MSN Search fell to 5th from 3rd among 2,000 users surveyed in the second quarter of 2005.

Relevance drove the drop, as 27 percent of users found their general search results lacking. 37 percent working with specific geographical locations, ie local search, didn't find the relevance they wanted, WSJ cites the Keynote survey as reporting.

Microsoft says they asked Keynote not to disclose the study, which would have mentioned MSN Search's drop in a press release. A MSN information services group director, Lisa Gurry, claims Microsoft had problems with Keynote's methodology. The results they found didn't match Microsoft's research.

MSN claims that a better assessment of its search performance can be found in its search queries share in the US. WSJ notes comScore's numbers have MSN's percentage at 15.5 percent for July. In comparison, Google had 36.5 percent for the month, and Yahoo had 30.5 percent.

Yahoo figures in the MSN equation, because until February MSN used Yahoo's search to handle its queries. Since the switch to in-house search technology, users have fled for more relevant search engine sites, according to the report.

One of those destinations has been Google, which continues to vex Microsoft with its rollout of products and the much-rumored massive network it is constructing. An internal paper on the Google threat, constructed by MSN execs and seen by the Journal, said "Google threatens Microsoft's position on the Internet, and could potentially lock Microsoft out of its existing distribution channels and reduce the value of Windows."

That document likely led to the recent reorganization of Microsoft's corporate structure, paring seven divisions to three. This morning, Microsoft declared a dividend of 8 cents per share and announced a change to its corporate governance guidelines. Any director on Microsoft's board who has a majority of votes withheld in an uncontested election must resign.

Those directors may be taking another look at the "Google -- The Winner Takes All (And Not Just Search...)" paper, where executives noted the lack of innovative products created by MSN. It could be that an executive or two will be resigning before a director does, if MSN continues to slide, and putting the clamps on negative surveys won't stop that slide from happening.

[khurramali]

I think it is another bad practice that Microsoft did use their weight to suppress the study, but how long can they keep their eyes closed and blind themselves to the reality.

Like an Ostrich who puts his head in the sand thinking that if he can't see the tiger he is safe.

I still remember how Microsoft destroyed Netscape out of their business, now the tables have turned and they will have to eat a piece of the cake that they baked for others.

I guess searchers and users are not the only thing Microsoft stands to loose, its employees will follow.

"You will always find your neighbors grass greener than yours" goes the saying.

[7thDsites]

Personally, I have no beef with MSN Search and though I don't use it all that much I find their relevance when I do use it to be equal to the results of Google, Yahoo, etc... actually in terms of non-related results I've seen a heck of a lot worse things being spewed from Google SERPs than any other SE. Google SERPs are seemingly getting better it would seem but that could change again after the next Google update.

Microsoft has certainly done past 'wrongs' or so many would claim - their products have served my purposes fine and their search is ok.
Google is certainly shooting for absolute domination, and will probably get close to it for search and other apps; but then we'll most likely see or experience more issues with the Google monster we've helped create just as we've all seen with MS over the years.

[Deliguy]

Those directors may be taking another look at the "Google -- The Winner Takes All (And Not Just Search...)" paper, where executives noted the lack of innovative products created by MSN.

I love that quote because it shows a lack of appreciation of a product solely because of the fact that it IS made by Microsoft. Three words, Microsoft-Anti-spyware.

I couldn't care less about google maps, nor could I care less about the convience of froogle. Microsoft anti spyware has saved so many people from some major problems and made many lives so much easier I would be shocked if it continues to be free. I think as far as new product releases MSN took the cake with that one and it's version of image search. Too bad they don't get very much credit when they do finally come out with a solid product; people naturally tend to think Microsoft owes it to them because Microsoft has lots of money and they don't.

Sorry to be ranting, but on the note of operating systems. It doesn't matter what people think is the most stable or what they think is better. The moment one operating system becomes the standard with the world it will be placed onto the public scrutiny chopping block, as well as become the number one target for viruses, bug exploits, and marketing schemes. Granted I love linux, but I understand that most of the reason why I like it is because it isn't the most popular. When a bug is found in linux the media doesn't flip out and start pointing fingers at it, someone just fixes it and people update usally all without a million hacker dorks exploiting it. Lets hope the people driving the rumors of Google OS understand this.

[brian.mark]

Originally Posted by Deliguy

I love that quote because it shows a lack of appreciation of a product solely because of the fact that it IS made by Microsoft. Three words, Microsoft-Anti-spyware.

I couldn't care less about google maps, nor could I care less about the convience of froogle. Microsoft anti spyware has saved so many people from some major problems and made many lives so much easier I would be shocked if it continues to be free. I think as far as new product releases MSN took the cake with that one and it's version of image search. Too bad they don't get very much credit when they do finally come out with a solid product; people naturally tend to think Microsoft owes it to them because Microsoft has lots of money and they don't.

Sorry to be ranting, but on the note of operating systems. It doesn't matter what people think is the most stable or what they think is better. The moment one operating system becomes the standard with the world it will be placed onto the public scrutiny chopping block, as well as become the number one target for viruses, bug exploits, and marketing schemes. Granted I love linux, but I understand that most of the reason why I like it is because it isn't the most popular. When a bug is found in linux the media doesn't flip out and start pointing fingers at it, someone just fixes it and people update usally all without a million hacker dorks exploiting it. Lets hope the people driving the rumors of Google OS understand this.

Ok... a few funny things here.

1) You're praising Microsoft's development of their Anti-spyware product. Well, this product supports the Google claim. It was purchased after another company that already put in all the hard work of creating the engine. That's not innovation.

2) Microsoft's image search isn't done by Microsoft. It is done by Picsearch.com - you can read the email that a WPW forum member got about their image search at this thread.

3) For web servers, Linux hosts more sites. That means it is about as close to a standard as you can find for servers connected to the web. We have hackers trying 1000's of times daily to access our Linux servers, but it just isn't that easy when you have them locked down. Microsoft's servers, on the other hand, have some pretty big holes until you use IIS lockdown, disable some of the Front Page extensions, and put a firewall in front of them.

Microsoft makes some solid products, but nothing innovative recently. Their biggest innovation is buying companies that create some cool software. Sounds like the way the company got its start, and it's still their best source of creativity.

Regardless if you don't find a use for Google Maps, it's fun. If you don't like Froogle and don't use it, those of us with feeds that perform well will just laugh when that becomes the default results for product related searches (Danny Sullivan says this is on the way, and he's usually on the mark for these things.) Google has extended search results well beyond the 10 blue links we used to think were great already, and most of the time we don't even notice it because it is well integrated.

The biggest innovations are yet to come. Google's policy of everyone getting personal time to toy with new ideas (some make it to Google labs, some don't) will keep them on the innovative edge and lead to some cool things down the road. We have yet to see Google's finest hour.

Brian.

[kgun]

with, RSS, Rotating background images, Weather information, News and the MSN toolbar. Nice little tool.

"With the new MSN Screen Saver (Beta) you can:
Personalize with background photos and news and weather information from MSN® or any RSS feeds from websites you choose.
Search the Web and click news headlines directly from the Screen Saver.
Stay connected with MSN Hotmail®, MSN Messenger, and MSN Spaces. Track how many unread Hotmail messages and current Messenger conversations you have, and display blogs and photos from your friends’ MSN Spaces".
http://screensaver.msn.com/

[billkennedy32]

XBOX360 anyone , wow they will soon be in the home and vista\IE7 look out google :: no wonder google is building a network to use as a portal what els :: I must say very smart of them.

Should be fun times ahead

[DMC_34]

I find it amusing with all the talk of Google vs MSN. The truth is Google is a search engine. Microsoft is software GIANT. Lets see how many will put down Google when they get the balls to launch a OS. Oh! Wait til the bugs come out, right? Building a toolbar is hardly evidence of giant.

People dont give Microsoft enough credit. All this praise to Google, most of which is highly deserved, but Microsoft owns the market on new OS operating and browsers. Why is Linux used to host more websites? Its free and much cheaper. Why do people complain about Microsoft? Because they are best and most targeted for criticism, much like Google gets for its own search algo and the sandbox. All you Google lovers come back out when Google does something amazing like produce dominating share of the OS market. Until then its apples to oranges baby.

I have heard all this junk before with SunSoft vs Microsoft. Still waiting to see java take over...waiting....waiting...never gonna happen.

Microsoft has a much broader scope than Google ever will, whether they buy products like visio or not.
1. OS
2. Management software - Office
3. Development software - .Net
4. Server software
5. XBOX - Halo - soon to be XBOX 360
6. AND MUCH MORE

MSN had been using Yahoo(inkTomi) for their search results. Give them a few more years under their belt before the UNFAIR comparisons start. When I see Dell shipping new Xeon Computers with GoogleOS then I will concede but not until then. Microsoft is new to search engines. Google Desktop Search is mediocre at best. Give them both time to enter the others market before comparing either. My money is on Microsoft as they have proven themselves as the leader and were leading when Google was in diapers at Stanford.

BTW MSN earth is just as good as Google maps.


When I

DMC

[brian.mark]

You speak truth, DMC. I agree that Microsoft doesn't get enough props, but innovation just isn't their cup of tea. Their position as a market leader has led to a follow-the-leader approach for new technologies, many times buying someone that has already tackled the problem for them. Taking huge risks just isn't in their best interest at the moment.

MSN's search treats us very well, but most of the time I don't think we deserve it. We have a category with 2 products that we get the #1 ranking for, where sites that only handle that product type (and there are 100's in this category of product) aren't in the top 100. Sure, it helps our sales and our reps love it, but it just doesn't feel right for us to get that traffic.

Google, on the other hand, is still new enough and thought well enough of that they can afford to take some risks and create some innovative programs / technologies. That's how a newer company captures market share.

They don't really dominate as the "Best" in any one category (there are many options for just about everything you can find that they make right now besides OS), but they have enough width to stay on top overall.

Personally, I'd love to see Microsoft come out with some great new innovative items. They do a decent job of everything they tackle, but they're getting rather conservative for my taste. Risks make for a much more interesting company.

Brian.

[kgun]

They don't really dominate as the "Best" in any one category (there are many options for just about everything you can find that they make right now besides OS), but they have enough width to stay on top overall.

1. The Google search engine is as much about harware as algorithms.

2. Microsoft has Hotmail and have recently increased the capacity to 25 Mb (free in Norway.)

3. I think Google will continue to dominate Search.

4. I agree, Microsoft is a sofware company.

Free competition among many SE companies is best for the surfer. The surfer is and should be the boss.

[DMC_34]

Brian,

I agree Microsoft has become somewhat complacent. I cant say I blame them after the mass antitrust suites brought against them of which Google has yet to deal with. Once Google has a few those Google "RISKY" ventures will start disappear just as MS has.

I am all for the competition as it favors the end user in the long run. Google has a much more advanced search than MSN does, that is obviously true but in their defense they are VERY new to it. I say give them time and I sure they will give Google a serious run for their money.

I would say Google's fame is riding popularity contest right now with great marketing and public relations, even the little green bar is great marketing ploy. The secret talk, the IPO margins, etc have been very favorable to Google while Microsoft usually brings about the distasteful dictator of old image for many with lawsuits and the occasional arrogant Gates comment.

From SunSoft to Netscape to Apple, Microsoft has beaten them all. I believe they can and will beat Google as well but they are gaining alot of bad publicity by cursing and throwing a fit over darting employees and such. But then again the media, yes even the writers here, love to talk about it because everyone loves to see a giant fall. MSN must find the media's favor if they are going to beat Google. Its all about perception.

Google's road with the speculation of a new browser and OS will come into the light when Google launches it. The road to domination for Google in all phases is MUCH longer than Microsofts. With the resources available to Microsoft I bet we will all be singing tunes to MSN soon enough.

DMC

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by kgun

3. I think Google will continue to dominate Search.

The same was said for Alta Vista. Dominance is a cycle and changes with perception and public opinion. Perception not new technologies will determine public favor although they do go hand in hand most of time. Only a handful of corporations can claim to have dominated their market place for a LONG period of time, one of them being Microsoft. Google is very new compared to Microsoft and has yet to prove anything beyond a more advanced search or more strict algo. But then again Google doesnt have to right now, they have public favor.

DMC

[kgun]

But then again the media, yes even the writers here, love to talk about it because everyone loves to see a giant fall. MSN must find the media's favor if they are going to beat Google. Its all about perception.

Do you remember when OS/II run multiple versions of windows in the Windows subbox faster then Windows? But the market preferred Windows. Back in 1996 I compiled and run 16 small C programs on an IBM PS/2 simultaneously on the OS/II Presentation Manager. OS/II was very efficient and stable.

In search I personally prefer the Google search box. The market may disagree. Only time will show.

Who loves to see a giant fall? We need both is my subjective view.

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by kgun

But the market preferred Windows.

I think that is point made. Right now the public prefers Google but again the public opinion is fickle and changes consistency. MS will takes its shots and unfair comparisons right now but soon the tables will turn, it always does.

DMC

[kgun]

There must be a reason, Warren Buffett said something like this: "Bill Gates is one of the smartest men I ever met."

But he also said.
We (at http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/ ) do not invest in something that we do not understand.

I don't even with a graduate course in Algorithms and Datastructures and education on the Dr. Scientlevel in Numerical analysis.

It is about much more than Algorithms and Datastructures. It is for example about seeing future trends and seeing the details other overlook. It is about hardware, bandwith and financial strenght. Who had heard about Google 10 years ago? Suddenly Google was on everybody's lips. I think they did not use Yahoo search as their main marketing channel.

It is too early to know the future.

[brian.mark]

Originally Posted by kgun

It is too early to know the future.

I know the future. The sun will come up tomorrow. ;-)

Funny you quoted Warren Buffett. I just drove by his house on my way back from lunch. He's made many statements about not investing until you understand things, but he usually means the business and where they're headed, what their history is, etc. He hasn't, to the best of my knowledge, meant that you need to understand how their products / technology does stuff. That'd be an impossible venture for most every stock on the market today.

I also remember him saying something about "Look for visionaries in the industry" or something similar to that. To me, that's Microsoft, Google, Yahoo - pretty much all of the big names. If they weren't visionary, they wouldn't create / aquire technologies that they see as emerging and put those to use.

Brian.

[kgun]

industry leaders with a strong brand and "monopolistic position" within their industry. Last time I checked, his company owned nearly 10 % of Cocka Cola. The strongest brand in the world.

He also looked for companies with a strong Franchise.

How can Google compete with the financial strenght and cash flow of Microsoft?

How stable are the search marketing cash flow (cow:-) )?

Yes it is too early to discount the future.

I know, he lives in Omaha where you live. His office will not impress you.

I know the future. The sun will come up tomorrow. ;-)

At least over the clouds :-)

[Deliguy]

brian.mark Wrote

Their position as a market leader has led to a follow-the-leader approach for new technologies, many times buying someone that has already tackled the problem for them.

Not to criticize but I disagree. Every large company IBM, EBAY, Sony, and even CNN all are forced to look into other markets for additional revenue once they have reached the top. The only proven way to jump into a new market and innovate it is to buy out a small company thats already attempting it. Look at what microsoft did to email with Hotmail. If you look at the original Hotmail it's easy to see that even though they were a different smaller company at one point; Microsoft still deserves credit for bringing a form of innovation to the industry. All this stands with the fact that large companies such as Microsoft still have to invent products on their own(like xbox mentioned above), it just seems that aquisitions seem to steal all the thunder.

On the note that Google will continue to dominate the search, you may be right but that is impossible to tell. Incase anyone here wasn't around back then to see why Google became so popular; it was because it had an extremely simple page with nothing but a search box and the words Google. People, with their 2400 baud modems, started using a "less sophisticated" search engine in a trade off of having to download pages with tons of words like Yahoo.com. Sometimes it's something just that simple that makes you number 1.

I personally think Alexa is going to someday want to get out of the shaddows.