Search on a different search engine… with Google!
So if you’ve been using Google as far back as 2001 (heck, I don’t think I’ve graduated out of Hotmail yet during that time), you might remember seeing links at the bottom of your search results. These links would direct you to other search engines. Basically, clicking on these links would bring you to a different search engine and it’ll process your query there.
The links would say: “Try your query on: AltaVista Excite Google Groups (Deja) HotBot Lycos Yahoo!”
Of course, 2001 was a long time ago, and Google’s search algorithm has improved vastly. And with it, those links to other sites have been removed. Mainly because there isn’t anybody left that can actually compete with Google Search nowadays. No, seriously.
But you might feel a bit retro and you want to bring back those links. Or you just need it for SEO or something like that. Well, you’re in luck.
If you’re on Firefox, you can just easily install the Customize Google add-on, and you’ll not only get the outside links (to Yahoo, Ask.com, MSN and more) back, but you can also remove unwanted information (like ads and spam).
For those who don’t like putting on another add-on, you can just go for the Greasemonkey solution called “Try this search on“, which is described as: providing useful links to search engines based on the page that you’re viewing or the search that you’re performing. Well, it just brings back the old feature, and it works elegantly.
You can also go for Retro Links, a Greasemonkey script by Google engineer Tiffany Lane that lists some alternative search engines at the bottom of the search results page. The list is customizable and you can choose between 42 services: Yahoo, Live Search, Flickr, Wikipedia, Gmail and many others.
What do you think of the old links to other search engines? Do you think Google was right to do that or should they bring it back?
Don't miss another post! Subscribe by RSS feed or by email today!
Share this post! One comment so far, add yours!
Well: those would heave helped competition, therefore increase research on classic search engines — but they also were accused to be unfair game: users knowing they could easily switch when starting by Google would use it by default. Because that argument proved decisive, all engines had to use a similar gimmick (remember?) encouraging cut-throat competition, and leading to the domination, not of the company spending the most in traffic aquisition, but of the most relevant engine. That line forced the area into a principle shift (from a media-like industry obsessed bith traffic into a algorithmic paradigm, vowing a cult to relevance). The consumer won on the short run, but competition rapidly became history.
On the other side, those increases Google’s load time, something that Marissa Mayer has described as very prejudicial (with data on how kbites translates to longer load times and less traffic): that line disappeared, once again to the short-term benefit of users, not competition.
Because of that, search engines have beeen looking at new technology; the suggestion to leverage other services re-appeared, both implicitly & internally with Universal search, and explicitly & externaly with Maholo subletting Google results for the tail. Semantic engines will have to do the same: if they don’t understand your query, a key-word based approach (well: caching Google’s) might be a good enough proxy to allow developpers to collect data on click-through, relevance and meaning — and Google might have to recalibrate its competitor suggesting features in that light.
Lower switching barriers are a strategic asset: using them wisely is the appanage of the data-oriented.