Phillip --
First, the interface and instructions are clear, with likely search
categories popping to the top. The instructions page is also clear
and straightforward.
A clear differentiator from other engines is the "Comments' or
feedback area. I think that you should elevate it in visibility on
the results pages to encourage the wide range of feedback that would
develop a superior product (or even a product for a specific market
segment). It would also be wise to let users know what you do with
comments, whether simply using them to identify spam or to generate
comments on future searches that math.
That said, the pages are flat, text-oriented results -- much like
Google itself. Some companies in the industry have been experimenting
with presentation of information in 3 dimensions as a way of showing
proximity or branches of research.
COMPARISONS
=============
I compared the search results for FindForward with the following three sites:
* Google
* MSN's beta search version
* Alltheweb
To do so, I used a search for "Mooney Aircraft" -- being very familiar
with the category and because I run several owners' sites, including a
web ring. Though this is only one narrow example of search, it's one
where I have a high level of familiarity with the types of information
that exists across the web.
One would expect the manufacturer in Kerrville, TX to come out at the
top of every search -- and it does for all four searches. The number
of pages found by each are:
FindForward: 3,130
Google: 7,480
MSN: 2,447
Alltheweb: 16,938
There's a spam site called MetaTiki that the latest Google revision
has elevated to #2. It uses a page redirect to a poor yellow
pages-type directory. You also rank it second. MSN has it fourth;
Alltheweb doesn't list it in the top 10.
Probably the 2nd ranked Mooney-related site should be the Mooney
Aircraft Pilots Association (MAPA), the leading owners' group. Here's
where it ranks:
FindForward: #3
Google: #3
MSN: #2
Allthweb: #2
Note that researchers doing intensive searches may prefer to have
20-50 results listed for a quicker view of the "landscape" of a search
-- something that you're not offering.
As for the ads, Alltheweb highlights "aircraft for sale" at the top in
a way that's pretty intrusive. However, Alltheweb has an interesting
news insert. Your ads are for a couple of popular books on Mooneys --
though not the most-recent one published by Larry Ball. Google has a
little wider range of related products in ads, including trade
publications.
As you might imagine, I have a pretty good idea where some of the
in-depth content is regarding these airplanes on the web. All four of
the search engines do a pretty good job of identifying the major
Mooney maintenance and repair shops (Dugosh, LASAR, Midwest Mooney and
Top Gun Aviation).
However, these sites are the most content-rich. An indicator below
shows how they score:
Mooney Caravan (not that this isn't in the DMOZ directory)
FindForward: not in top 100
Google: not in top 100
MSN: 44
Alltheweb: not in top 100
Mooney Aircraft Owner Events
FindForward: 19
Google: 18
MSN: 4
Alltheweb: 3
Mooney Junction
FindForward: 38 (sub-page)
Google: 19 (sub-page)
MSN: 18 (sub-page)
Alltheweb: 13 (sub-page)
Mooney Mite Site (also not in DMOZ)
FindForward: 44 (sub-page)
Google: 54 (sub-page)
MSN: 57
Alltheweb: 30 (sub-page)
Several things also come up in this comparative search:
* Though Google Answers researchers often run across sub-pages and
use them to get relevant data, a normal user is confused by why a link
to a PDF of an owners manual should be ranked higher than a home page,
as in the example from the Mooney Mite Site.
* Alltheweb has pages of separate links to an aircraft-for-sale site
that do nothing for a user. All of the other search engines avoided
that.
IMAGE SEARCH
==============
An image search is another way to look at the reach of the search engines.
FindForward: nothing found. Even just using "Mooney" only finds 23
images -- and of course many of these are people with the same last
name as aircraft designer Al Mooney. The different sizing of pictures
is an awkward way to display images, which could easily be thumbnailed
for efficient scanning.
Google: 115 pictures
MSN: Microsoft keeps the image search well hidden (under Advanced
Search) and for good reason. It doesn't work very well. Checking the
"image" box brings up a list of pages with aircraft pictures -- but I
think most users expect to see image thumbnails.
Alltheweb: 101 pictures
When a similar search is done for video (MPEGs), the results are:
FindForward: no option for selecting video
Google: no option for selecting video (not even using MPEG extension
under the Image search)
MSN: finds pages with relevant videos, though it doesn't elevate their
visibility on the search results page.
Alltheweb: finds nothing
SOME OTHER COMMENTS
======================
The availability of a toolbar for people involved in intensive search
is a key. I can't praise the Google toolbar highly enough -- for
giving me the ability to quickly do a site search; for highlighting
without going to the cache; for its very effective popup blocker.
Google does a poor job with framed pages in the cache; since you're
using Google's facility there you obviously do too. Cached pages have
become very important to researchers; you might consider offering
links to past images from The Wayback Machine.
I'm surprised that you have Blogs and RSS Newsfeeds together. The
ability to search news feeds is very important, particularly when
you're seeking a topical update (say, the details of the Alex
Rodriguez deal with the Yankees -- rather than ancient history on the
baseball team). Also, it really doesn't seem to be picking up any
news -- only Blogs.
I hope that this helps in your evaluation of the search facility and
I'd be glad to answer questions or clarify anything that is unclear in
this Google Answer.
Best regards,
Omnivorous-GA |
Clarification of Answer by
omnivorous-ga
on
21 Feb 2004 05:48 PST
Phillip --
After sleeping on it for a couple of nights, I thought that a couple
of additional comments might be appropriate:
* the "I'm feeling lucky" option is really not very useful. People
starting a search can be grouped more effectively for what they're
seeking. After all, that's why we use "news" or "image" searches.
I'd describe the most-likely search types to be for:
-- a home page
-- information on a topic
-- items to buy/sell
-- news or information posted recently
The other thing that GA researchers commonly see is someone seeking
information about a person: phone number, address, obituary,
biographical information.
It might be helpful to structure search to get to these topics more effectively.
* Google doesn't "see" the entire Google Answers database (though
search within the answers.google.com domain does find everything).
You might consider how to expand the range of what's found there and
perhaps in other instances.
Best regards,
Omnivorous-GA
|
