Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #27566 > unrolled thread

Safari - Google search deal expires soon. New default for Safari ...

Started by	Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
First post	2015-02-01 10:15 -0500
Last post	2015-02-06 05:57 +1100
Articles	4 on this page of 84 — 21 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

#27692

From	"john james" <jj9801@nospam.com>
Date	2015-02-06 04:35 +1100
Message-ID	<cjho0kFodvjU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#27687


"Lewis" <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote in message 
news:slrnmd6bqn.2r4.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org...
> Okay, so one time? In band camp? john james <jj9801@nospam.com> was all, 
> like:
>
>
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> news:yMOdnSrQAcwqvU_JnZ2dnUU7-SednZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> On 2015.02.03 14:11 , bne9988 wrote:
>>>> On 2015-02-01 19:01:05 +0000, Invid Fan said:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <NLOdnQCjQLGM3lPJnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan 
>>>>> Browne
>>>>> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently the Apple/Google deal on default search for Safari (OS X 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> iOS) will end soon and Yahoo and MS are vying to be the new default
>>>>>> search engine.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It would be funny if Apple went with Duck Duck Go, just to piss the
>>>>> others off (It's already one of the options)
>>>>
>>>> That would be fantastic. Not only would it piss off the others, but it
>>>> would also make a statement that Apple is a company that supports
>>>> privacy... at least it would seem like they do.
>>>
>>> You could always wrap your Google (or other) searches via Tor browser
>>> making you pretty much untrackable.  I tried it recently and its speed 
>>> (I
>>> mean network side) is improving to the point of not being a drag 
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> As to best search engine we assume that Google is the best, or maybe 
>>> Bing
>>> is.  Or perhaps Yahoo (which uses Bing).
>>>
>>> How does one 'certify' (or otherwise measure) the completeness of a 
>>> search
>>> site's content library?
>
>> That isn't necessarily what most want from a search engine,
>> for many it’s getting the hits sorted so the one they want is
>> on the first page and one which works out what you meant
>> rather than what you actually typed, particularly with typos
>> and alternate keywords that are more commonly used.
>
> I read somewhere that more than 80% of google searches either resulted
> in a click on one of the first three results, an ad, or no click at all.
> Less than 5% ever resulted in loading the second page of results.

Yeah, I don’t often need to go past the first page.

> Can't find the source now, so maybe the numbers are off. But I bet not.
> I've certainly told many people that there are multiple pages to the
> search results, to their surprise.
>
> That said, going to page 10 of results on Google can be amusing.
>
> -- 
> http://2blog.kreme.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27709 — Re: Safari - Google search deal expires soon. New default for Safari ...

From	Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid>
Date	2015-02-07 19:20 +0000
Subject	Re: Safari - Google search deal expires soon. New default for Safari ...
Message-ID	<mb5oii$mfc$5@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#27687

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> Okay, so one time? In band camp? john james <jj9801@nospam.com> was all, like:
> 
> 
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message 
>> news:yMOdnSrQAcwqvU_JnZ2dnUU7-SednZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> On 2015.02.03 14:11 , bne9988 wrote:
>>>> On 2015-02-01 19:01:05 +0000, Invid Fan said:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <NLOdnQCjQLGM3lPJnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
>>>>> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Apparently the Apple/Google deal on default search for Safari (OS X and
>>>>>> iOS) will end soon and Yahoo and MS are vying to be the new default
>>>>>> search engine.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> It would be funny if Apple went with Duck Duck Go, just to piss the
>>>>> others off (It's already one of the options)
>>>> 
>>>> That would be fantastic. Not only would it piss off the others, but it
>>>> would also make a statement that Apple is a company that supports
>>>> privacy... at least it would seem like they do.
>>> 
>>> You could always wrap your Google (or other) searches via Tor browser 
>>> making you pretty much untrackable.  I tried it recently and its speed (I 
>>> mean network side) is improving to the point of not being a drag anymore.
>>> 
>>> As to best search engine we assume that Google is the best, or maybe Bing 
>>> is.  Or perhaps Yahoo (which uses Bing).
>>> 
>>> How does one 'certify' (or otherwise measure) the completeness of a search 
>>> site's content library?
> 
>> That isn't necessarily what most want from a search engine,
>> for many it’s getting the hits sorted so the one they want is
>> on the first page and one which works out what you meant
>> rather than what you actually typed, particularly with typos
>> and alternate keywords that are more commonly used.
> 
> I read somewhere that more than 80% of google searches either resulted
> in a click on one of the first three results, an ad, or no click at all.
> Less than 5% ever resulted in loading the second page of results.
> 
> Can't find the source now, so maybe the numbers are off. But I bet not.
> I've certainly told many people that there are multiple pages to the
> search results, to their surprise.
> 
> That said, going to page 10 of results on Google can be amusing.

I,ve never gone that far 8-). Usually I just change my search term.

-- 
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27693

From	Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
Date	2015-02-05 13:11 -0500
Message-ID	<tq2dnS1AIIfLL07JnZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#27679

On 2015.02.04 14:16 , john james wrote:
>
>
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:yMOdnSrQAcwqvU_JnZ2dnUU7-SednZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 2015.02.03 14:11 , bne9988 wrote:
>>> On 2015-02-01 19:01:05 +0000, Invid Fan said:
>>>
>>>> In article <NLOdnQCjQLGM3lPJnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
>>>> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Apparently the Apple/Google deal on default search for Safari (OS X
>>>>> and
>>>>> iOS) will end soon and Yahoo and MS are vying to be the new default
>>>>> search engine.
>>>>>
>>>> It would be funny if Apple went with Duck Duck Go, just to piss the
>>>> others off (It's already one of the options)
>>>
>>> That would be fantastic. Not only would it piss off the others, but it
>>> would also make a statement that Apple is a company that supports
>>> privacy... at least it would seem like they do.
>>
>> You could always wrap your Google (or other) searches via Tor browser
>> making you pretty much untrackable.  I tried it recently and its speed
>> (I mean network side) is improving to the point of not being a drag
>> anymore.
>>
>> As to best search engine we assume that Google is the best, or maybe
>> Bing is.  Or perhaps Yahoo (which uses Bing).
>>
>> How does one 'certify' (or otherwise measure) the completeness of a
>> search site's content library?
>
> That isn't necessarily what most want from a search engine,
> for many it’s getting the hits sorted so the one they want is
> on the first page and one which works out what you meant
> rather than what you actually typed, particularly with typos
> and alternate keywords that are more commonly used.

I don't disagree.  OTOH there has to be some completeness factor as part 
of an overall "rating" of the search engine.

The "easy" searches aren't always the ones one needs done.

>
>> It's crawler's abilities?  Bias?  (Google).
>
>> Likewise the efficiency, completeness, accuracy and
>> context-mindfullness of its search engines and results?
>
> That's closer to what most want from a search engine but also
> includes what I listed as well.


-- 
"Your net worth to the world is usually
  determined by what remains after your
  bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
                                   Benjamin Franklin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27696

From	"john james" <jj9801@nospam.com>
Date	2015-02-06 05:57 +1100
Message-ID	<cjhsqtFpnlhU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#27693


"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message 
news:tq2dnS1AIIfLL07JnZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 2015.02.04 14:16 , john james wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> news:yMOdnSrQAcwqvU_JnZ2dnUU7-SednZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> On 2015.02.03 14:11 , bne9988 wrote:
>>>> On 2015-02-01 19:01:05 +0000, Invid Fan said:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <NLOdnQCjQLGM3lPJnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan 
>>>>> Browne
>>>>> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently the Apple/Google deal on default search for Safari (OS X
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> iOS) will end soon and Yahoo and MS are vying to be the new default
>>>>>> search engine.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It would be funny if Apple went with Duck Duck Go, just to piss the
>>>>> others off (It's already one of the options)
>>>>
>>>> That would be fantastic. Not only would it piss off the others, but it
>>>> would also make a statement that Apple is a company that supports
>>>> privacy... at least it would seem like they do.
>>>
>>> You could always wrap your Google (or other) searches via Tor browser
>>> making you pretty much untrackable.  I tried it recently and its speed
>>> (I mean network side) is improving to the point of not being a drag
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> As to best search engine we assume that Google is the best, or maybe
>>> Bing is.  Or perhaps Yahoo (which uses Bing).
>>>
>>> How does one 'certify' (or otherwise measure) the completeness of a
>>> search site's content library?
>>
>> That isn't necessarily what most want from a search engine,
>> for many it’s getting the hits sorted so the one they want is
>> on the first page and one which works out what you meant
>> rather than what you actually typed, particularly with typos
>> and alternate keywords that are more commonly used.
>
> I don't disagree.  OTOH there has to be some completeness factor as part 
> of an overall "rating" of the search engine.

Sure.

> The "easy" searches aren't always the ones one needs done.

Sure, in fact it’s the harder searches that are what most
consider are what decides which search engine works
best, how well it handles those.

>>> It's crawler's abilities?  Bias?  (Google).
>>
>>> Likewise the efficiency, completeness, accuracy and
>>> context-mindfullness of its search engines and results?
>>
>> That's closer to what most want from a search engine but also
>> includes what I listed as well.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

csiph-web

Safari - Google search deal expires soon. New default for Safari ...

Contents

#27692

#27709 — Re: Safari - Google search deal expires soon. New default for Safari ...

#27693

#27696