Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

YouTube Passes Yahoo As #2 Search Engine

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the your-safe-search-is-showing dept.

Google 125

Dekortage writes "According to the latest ComScore rankings, YouTube's search traffic for August surpassed Yahoo's. The latter dropped roughly 5% in traffic from July. Among other things, this means that Google now owns both of the top two search engines. AdAge further speculates on Google's experimental 'promoted videos' cost-per-click advertising on YouTube, suggesting the obvious: more money."

cancel ×

125 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yeah, but... (4, Interesting)

InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371353)

But how much of this is RIAA/MPAA-run robots searching for song/movie names?

Re:Yeah, but... (1)

KamuZ (127113) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372521)

Well, it's not like they don't search on other engines either...

Re:Yeah, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376893)

None- comScore gets it's metrics through panel-based measurement, so it reflects human behavior.

AC Passes Gas As He Gets First Post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371359)

frosty

Re:AC Passes Gas As He Gets First Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25373525)

Bad news: you didn't get first post.

Even worse news: that wasn't a fart.

"Search engine"? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371397)

Calling YouTube a "search engine" by comparison to Google and Yahoo is...interesting. I mean, I guess it's technically true, but it's about as relevant as comparing Google with Slashdot site search.

Re:"Search engine"? (4, Interesting)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371419)

A lot of people search the videos for information, talks by Richard Dawkins, car reviews, whatever. I think it's perfectly valid to call Youtube a search engine, even though it's a very specialized one.

Re:"Search engine"? (5, Insightful)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371595)

Would "grep" be considered a search engine, then?

I use it to find stuff at work all the time.

Re:"Search engine"? (3, Informative)

77Punker (673758) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371967)

People use Google or Youtube when they're not sure where to look. grep is for people who have a specific set of data to search through and need a line containing a specific term.

Re:"Search engine"? (2, Interesting)

cream wobbly (1102689) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372419)

No, you tube, I often use grep -r; or find and grep together; or locate and grep; or rpm -qa and grep; or ypcat and grep; or heck, a for loop, wget, and grep.

I think you don't grok grep. I'm not sure where to find the info, and that's why I use grep to pull it out.

My "specific set of data to search through" could be, by way of argument, a database of user-submitted videos. I might use a left join rather than grep, but you get the idea...

Neither grep nor YouTube are search engines, in the accepted sense of the word. YouTube employs a search engine to return results, but it isn't one in its own right.

Otherwise everything Google produces under the Google name which also employs a search engine of its own should be included in its ranking. When I search my Google docs, for instance; or when I search my Gmail account. That would be silly.

Re:"Search engine"? (3, Informative)

HappySmileMan (1088123) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372959)

Neither grep nor YouTube are search engines, in the accepted sense of the word. YouTube employs a search engine to return results, but it isn't one in its own right.

Well then the search engine Youtube employs has overtaken Yahoo.

This argument was a waste of my screen space, moreso than the very debatedly inaccurate summary

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376441)

Well then the search engine Youtube employs has overtaken Yahoo.

Considering who owns YouTube, would this be... Google? ;-)

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Sophira (1364317) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373193)

Have you ever done a grep -r /, grep -r ~, or similar?

Because if not, you're illustrating the GP's point. You know what files you're looking in, but you don't know what file something is in. You're searching a specific set of data, in this case, files that reside in a particular place.

Similarly with locate. Your set of data is a list of pathnames, and not only that, but pathnames that have already been filtered by the locate command. Again, you know you want to look in a specific place - a list of pathnames.

The for/wget/grep is more like the search engine, but even then it's a non-typical use, analogous to using the site: operator in Google [google.com] , which most people don't.

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

cream wobbly (1102689) | more than 5 years ago | (#25375727)

Have you ever done a grep -r /, grep -r ~, or similar?

I'd say that was highly probably, given the other examples I suggested.

[with locate] you know you want to look in a specific place - a list of pathnames

How is using YouTube searching in a non-specific dataset?

I'll agree that using grep on a series of pages fetched with wget is non-typical. But so is searching for (let's say) gifts for alpacas in YouTube. It simply isn't generic enough: you're only going to get videos out, not shopping tips for camelidae.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Sophira (1364317) | more than 5 years ago | (#25376173)

I wasn't personally suggesting that YouTube was a search engine. In fact, I agree with you that it's a specific dataset. I was merely responding to the idea that grep would normally be used in a non-specific dataset. I don't believe many people normally do a grep -r / - since you do, that's a bad assumption on my part, and I apologise. But I think you get the rest of what I was saying.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

whereiswaldo (459052) | more than 5 years ago | (#25378125)

YouTube employs a search engine to return results, but it isn't one in its own right.

Google search also employs a search engine to return results. Is it because YouTube only returns results that it hosts? Perhaps if it also included 3rd party results it would be more of a search engine to you? That sort of makes sense, but it's a gray area IMO.

Ok, following that logic, if grep returned results from other people's computers would it be considered a search engine? Does response time play into the classification as a search engine?

Re:"Search engine"? Totally.. Tu.. (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 5 years ago | (#25375565)

Tubular!

Now, we have some validation of the Internets being full of pipes and tubes!

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

sectionboy (930605) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372827)

Now you know where the "g" in google came from.

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376063)

Grep does not Search It filters a dataset
ls|grep home

slocate package or indexing software is closer to a search engine.
locate home

Re:"Search engine"? (4, Insightful)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371663)

video.google.com might be a search engine, because it can find videos from multiple sites, but mainly its own and youtube, but youtube is just a website with a search facility.

Re:"Search engine"? (2, Funny)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372247)

Google is also a website with a search facility.

Re:"Search engine"? (5, Insightful)

Rary (566291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372363)

youtube is just a website with a search facility.

Google is also a website with a search facility.

YouTube is a website with the ability to search its content. Google is a website with the ability to search other sites' content.

Basically, Google is a search engine, and YouTube has a search engine.

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25372529)

Well, technically you also perform an internal search on Google: it's a website with the ability to search its content, its content being a huge index. Then it presents the search results as links to other websites.

(Not actually making any point, just mocking the GP's overly-literal interpretation ;)

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25372563)

Car analogy please.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Grimbleton (1034446) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372925)

YouTube's search is like looking through the user manual, Google is like browsing at a dealership.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

endymion.nz (1093595) | more than 5 years ago | (#25376079)

fail

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 5 years ago | (#25375399)

Well, Youtube's search feature is like a car, and Google's search feature is like some other, different kind of car...

I always wanted to see what would happen if Gary Numan got into the Car Analogy routine...
in cars...

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

mbarkhau (1137557) | more than 5 years ago | (#25374483)

Basically, Google is a search engine, and YouTube has a search engine.

I've always preferred encapsulation over inheritance.

Re:"Search engine"? (2, Insightful)

trentrez (918830) | more than 5 years ago | (#25376225)

The real deal is this:

Google's search scope is "the internet"

Youtube's search scope is "videos uploaded to it's site"

How you define what 'is' a search engine or what 'has' a search engine is moot if you talk about the 'scope' in which a search is performed and then it's 'method'.

If I created a search "engine" thats scope was the internet and it used the same 'method' as google then it would give me the same results as google. Same argument goes for Youtube.

Youtube just happens to be a special case in that it is a search on a scope of video files which are a subset of it's own website. IE it searches specific conent uploaded to it's site which allows it to get added meta information from an otherwise visual medium, IE how does Google know what's in a video.. Youtube know because it asks you to tag it.

Same with Slashdot's search, It is a search on it's own content, submissions, comments etc.

Just because Google can search "outside of it's internal scope" (however that may be defined) doesn't make it any different or doesn't make Youtube any less of a search engine.

The point thus stands that this is pretty damn spectacular that Youtube which is only searching a small subset of data is being used more than Yahoo which is used to access in theory the same or a similar scope to Google, ie the internet.

How accurate the method on counting how you rate Youtube higher than Yahoo is, is open for debate. However assuming they are using the same metric they always did, according to that metric- Yahoo was above Youtube, and now it isn't. I would therefore say this is significant even if it is (without knowing exact details on how the ranking works) potentially somewhat crude.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Ghubi (1102775) | more than 5 years ago | (#25377355)

The point thus stands that this is pretty damn spectacular that Youtube which is only searching a small subset of data is being used more than Yahoo which is used to access in theory the same or a similar scope to Google, ie the internet.

Well said.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 5 years ago | (#25376639)

What's wild about that is, it seems the best way to create a YouTube object is to create a YouTube class that has a member object that is a Google. So while the object oriented programming Google is a small piece of a YouTube, the real life YouTube is a small piece of Google. It's time for me to get away from the computer.

Re:"Search engine"? (3, Funny)

cream wobbly (1102689) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372567)

Oh you're so coy.

"My mineral growths with chewing ability are aching! Please take me to a monkey with dentistry abilities! In a vehicle with powers of self propulsion!"

"I'm sorry monkey with paying abilities, we're going to have to pull the lot, using a tool with pulling abilities."

Re:"Search engine"? (4, Insightful)

DancesWithBlowTorch (809750) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371597)

It's a rubbish use of the term. I guess Amazon might even be a bigger search engine than YouTube. Some of the big DNS servers are probably pretty big search engines as well.

What a useless way of using words.

Re:"Search engine"? (3, Insightful)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372325)

Only true if Amazon traffic was higher than YouTube traffic :)

Essentially the point is that more people are searching within YouTube for videos than within Yahoo!, for everything. Which says something about marketshare. Even Amazon is listed, and it ranks below Microsoft's Live search site.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372751)

Yahoo! has more people using its search feature.

YouTube has more searches taking place.

There may be some correlation between number of searches and market share, but that's not necessarily so. You could have what the submitter would call the "#1 search engine" by having a script query your servers 24/7, but if you were the only unique visitor your market share would be nil.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Korin43 (881732) | more than 5 years ago | (#25374517)

Actually his market share would be 1/(number of people who use search engines), which is slightly larger than 0.

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25374645)

Actually his market share would be 1/(number of people who use search engines), which is slightly larger than 0.

A script isn't a person. The market share is still nil.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

spectral (158121) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373019)

Except that amazon is listed right there in the article, at the very bottom (168 million). This is a misleading headline anyway, since it's Google, then YouTube/Other Google Sites, then All Yahoo Sites. Who knows, maybe all those searches were on google maps and gmail?

Re:"Search engine"? (4, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371673)

By that standard any site with a search feature is a search engine. A search engine is really something that provides search results from other sites, not its own site.

Re:"Search engine"? (3, Informative)

ravergonemad (512740) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372865)

True, a better comparison to Youtube would be wiki, when you already know where the content is, but need to filter it.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

Arrakiv (1272134) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373051)

Yeah, I have a hard time considering YouTube as a 'search engine', but I must admit that YouTube having more searches traffic through it than Yahoo is somewhat surprising. Even if it is /. and I shouldn't be doing that, the article is pretty interesting.

Re:"Search engine"? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 5 years ago | (#25374437)

Some people would say that it's like comparing apples and oranges. I think it's more like apples and watermelons.

    My apples are round, and juicy.

    But your watermelon is bigger and juicier. It doesn't make your watermelon the better apple.

    Youtube is primarily driven by its searches. That's why it has more search traffic. It's not off-site traffic though. Google and Yahoo (generally) link to offsite resources, not to their own content on their own site 100% of the time.

    Searching for "Microsoft", "Chevrolet", or "Pizza Hut" on Youtube never show me a way to their web sites. You can't order a pizza through the search results on Youtube. :) You can see some almost entertaining ads though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdK9j-J4au4 [youtube.com]

Re:"Search engine"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376533)

Maybe they're thinking about it this way:

I can install YouTube's search as a search engine plugin in my web browser. (I also have one installed for Amazon, for Wikipedia, for the IMDB, and even one for the OED because I'm geeky like that and my workplace has a site license.)

Technically, that could mean that any site with a plugin at http://mycroft.mozdev.org/ could be listed.

YouTube is not a search engine (5, Insightful)

alex_vegas (891476) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371403)

People who search on yahoo are not looking to stay at yahoo. People who search at youtube are looking to stay at youtube. This story is bogus.

Re:YouTube is not a search engine (4, Funny)

ajs (35943) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371497)

I actually search for all of my Web needs on YouTube first. I find that it really reduces the number of Wikipedia links I have to surf past ;-)

Re:YouTube is not a search engine (2, Funny)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373447)

You also can get all that usefull info available at the user comments.

Re:YouTube is not a search engine (1)

gangien (151940) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372241)

And the fact that it might not technically be a search engine, makes exactly what bogus?

Re:YouTube is not a search engine (1)

eihab (823648) | more than 5 years ago | (#25376919)

And the fact that it might not technically be a search engine, makes exactly what bogus?

The claim that "YouTube Passes Yahoo As #2 Search Engine".

(Posted without RTFA because it sounds trollish anyway)

Re:YouTube is not a search engine (5, Insightful)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372283)

The story isn't bogus... If a general purpose search site that searches the whole web, and used to be number one, now gets fewer searches than a single-purpose video search site, it really underscores how low yahoo has fallen!
-Taylor

Re:YouTube is not a search engine (4, Informative)

Rary (566291) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372519)

People who search on yahoo are not looking to stay at yahoo. People who search at youtube are looking to stay at youtube. This story is bogus.

It should be pointed out that the article doesn't call YouTube a search engine. It lists rankings of the 5 major search engines, then it does a separate ranking of "search activity", which includes any kind of searching within a website, and includes such searchable sites as MapQuest, MySpace, and Amazon.

Google Gobles up the .... (1)

zenmaster666 (1285342) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371417)

Looking at the stats there was no significant increase in Youtube's traffic, just a drop in Yahoo's traffic which was obviously due to Google's [double team tag] ever growing hold on the search market.
But is it even fair to compare Youtube and Yahoo?

Re:Google Gobles up the .... (1)

Missing_dc (1074809) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371973)

But is it even fair to compare Youtube and Yahoo?

Well, they both start with "Y" and contain the same vowel sound...

Not a search engine (0, Redundant)

Lost Race (681080) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371423)

Youtube is not a search engine. It is a video hosting site.

Competition (4, Insightful)

Wiarumas (919682) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371435)

But is YouTube in competition with Yahoo? This is apples and oranges. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

Re:Competition (2, Funny)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371503)

Wait, are you saying that youtube is going to start making their own brand of computers called "Oranges" to compete with macs!?!?

Re:Competition (2, Funny)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371679)

No, because France Telecom might object.

Re:Competition (5, Funny)

hansraj (458504) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371565)

But is YouTube in competition with Yahoo? This is apples and oranges.

I say that comparing the comparison of yahoo with youtube to that of apples and oranges is comparing apples with oranges!

-------
I wish I had something useful to say.

Re:Competition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25373937)

And I would say that comparing the comparison of Yahoo with Youtube to that of apples and oranges is comparing Apple and Oranje.

Re:Competition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25372459)

Yes they are in competition. The more time they spend on YouTube, the less time they spend on Yahoo.

That's traffic, trends, internet usage, whatever... and Yahoo better not let these things slip by if it wants to continue to be some type of leader in this industry. I'm not saying that they should produce something similar to YouTube and try to fight it out, but it better do something to attract those customers.

Re:Competition (1)

dontmakemethink (1186169) | more than 5 years ago | (#25374591)

One of the key sources of revenue of search engines is the market indicators collected by recording and indexing the search patterns of consumers. In that regard, YouTube and Yahoo are in direct competition. Advertisers can research and target fertile markets just as precisely with the market info gathered from either site.

I remember reading back in the early 80's that Road & Track magazine made more from selling its subscriber list than from advertising in the magazine itself. I inquired about it when I kept getting gold Mastercard applications when I was 8 years old. And that was over 25 years ago. Air Miles, credit cards, digital TV (they can now watch what you watch), possibly even DNS servers all harvest and sell such information. There's mad money in it.

Without porn?!? HOW??? (5, Funny)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371463)

I'm inclined to doubt this. Youtube doesn't host any porn. That's easily 70% of the internet right there.

You mean to tell me that people are now more interested in videos of people getting hit in the nuts and TV clips that are not SNL or daily show than they are in sex? LIES!

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371513)

Youtube may not host "porn" but with the right search terms you can find some pretty porny stuff.

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (5, Informative)

Wescotte (732385) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371521)

There is a special keyword to use on youtube to get to the porn section. You must not have elite access. Just email them asking for elite access with a hacker resume of sorts and you should be able to gain access. Just keep it on the down low though.

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371703)

Informative? Even the modding is funny!

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (2, Funny)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373481)

It's the best part of the joke. How many resumées would the YouTube admins get if it was modded Funny? And informative?

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25373199)

Um, were the mods asleep at the wheel, here, +4, Informative?

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (0, Redundant)

cong06 (1000177) | more than 5 years ago | (#25376999)

I love how you got modded "Informative" lol

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (0, Redundant)

krakround (1065064) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372065)

"I'm inclined to doubt this. Youtube doesn't host any porn. That's easily 70% of the internet right there.

You mean to tell me that people are now more interested in videos of people getting hit in the nuts and TV clips that are not SNL or daily show than they are in sex? LIES!"

Please don't suggest this. I wake up every day pretending that I don't live in "Idiocracy" and you are making harder and harder to maintain that illusion.

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (5, Informative)

melstav (174456) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372159)

If porn is what you're looking for, there are sites very similar to YouTube where that's all they do.

http://www.youporn.com [youporn.com]
http://www.pornotube.com [pornotube.com]

Just to provide two examples.

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (1)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#25375965)

Not really similar. On youtube anyone can post. On those two sites only paid advertisers post.

Re:Without porn?!? HOW??? (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25377109)

...plus it's PORN! WOOOO!

What? (4, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371509)

When I am on Youtube I typically perform several searches and stay on Youtube the whole time. On the other hand when I go to a search engine I typically perform one search and click on one of the results and leave the search site. As somebody else pointed out the media company bots must be constantly searching Youtube for certain keywords to identify copyright violations. The whole comparison is nonsense.

Last I heard Yahoo still beats both Google and Youtube in total number of unique visitors and that is the stat that matters to advertisers.

Regulatory Problems? (1)

ushering05401 (1086795) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371523)

How did all these people end up on YouTube in the first place? What search engines feed the most people onto the site?

Does a mechanism even exist for gauging the objectivity of search results?

I use Google apps, gmail, etc.. but I am worried about the changes that take place when any company gets too deeply entrenched at the top of their niche. I would feel better about Google if their side projects were doing a little less well.

 

Re:Regulatory Problems? (3, Interesting)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371671)

How did all these people end up on YouTube in the first place? What search engines feed the most people onto the site?

That's a good point. For most google searches these days I tend to get something like this:

1. Wikipedia entry
2,3 youtube videos
4. google news
5.... everything else, still sprinkled with videos, mostly youtube

If google owned Wikipedia then most of their top search results would be leading back to google sites.

Re:Regulatory Problems? (1)

ushering05401 (1086795) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372443)

Just riffing on the concept...

Search is weird because it currently can't work by returning 'objective' results.

Engines get ahead by returning the 'best' results. With 'best' being defined by the wisdom of the crowds, and the wisdom of the crowds being heavily influenced by advertising, and the advertising ultimately paying for the search infrastructure that provides the results...

Who is going to regulate this industry? Not the people in power right now, or in the immediate future from what I can tell (my apologies to Obama).

 

Re:Regulatory Problems? (1)

ushering05401 (1086795) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372503)

*ack* Last line should read "who is capable of regulating this industry? Not the people in power..."

Apologies.

Re:Regulatory Problems? (1)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373651)

Why is it important to regulate the industry at all?

Other than for malicious intent I mean. If people want to find what other people think, what's wrong with this setup?

Email (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 5 years ago | (#25373521)

"How did all these people end up on YouTube in the first place?"

Email

Re:Regulatory Problems? (1)

Mprx (82435) | more than 5 years ago | (#25374621)

Youtube is useful for some types of searches. Eg. I wanted to know if pikes bit humans, and I assumed that if they did somebody would have recorded it and uploaded it to Youtube. Youtube search "pike bite" and there it is, video proof of pikes biting humans. That is much better than trying to interpret all the dubious fish stories you'll get with the same web search.

You just gotta BELIEVE that Ballmer's (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 5 years ago | (#25371587)

throwing chairs like never, EVER before....

(Wait, what's that rumble i hear from up north....SHIT, he's activating various fault lines in California and the West Coast....)

Re:You just gotta BELIEVE that Ballmer's (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376325)

wow, you are the king of wit. either that or a complete bitch. yes. the more i think of it you are a complete bitch. and a retard. and an asshat.

mod dBaown (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371749)

practical purposes, prospects :are TCP/IP stack has

not two search engines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371837)

Among other things, this means that Google now owns both of the top two search engines.

No, they just use their search engine on two websites, in a different configuration. Google gave YouTube the search engine, the original one before the takeover was replaced (see the Google talks).

when is a site indexer a search engine? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371863)

How is a closed environment a comparable search engine?
does Youtube search anything other than youtube?

Just asking for some logic, otherwise I'll start a search engine at my house and have it search itself until it's #1!!!!!!!

In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25371865)

CNN.com announced today that it had proudly claimed the #1 news search engine spot.

Wrong wrong and wrong (3, Informative)

ohtani (154270) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372031)

The article is being read incorrectly. "YouTube/All Other" is surpassing Yahoo!, meaning anything that is part of Google! could be included, such as the book, code and news searches. Or groups. Or Picasa. All combined.

Take a look at Microsoft's stats. It's split into Live and Microsoft.com/All Other

Not beaten by YouTube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25372063)

From TFA:
Search Queries (MM)
Google Sites: 10,158
    Google: 7,594
    YouTube/All Other: 2,564
Yahoo! Sites: 2,427
    Yahoo!: 2,393
    All Other: 34

So Yahoo search got beat by YouTube searches PLUS searches at every other site that Google owns.

Someone needs to learn to read charts.

question (1)

acdc_rules (519822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372237)

if you are in a race and you overtake the guy in second place, what position are u in?

Re:question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25373811)

if you are in a race and you overtake the guy in second place, what position are u in?

Second place.

Although in this case Google owns both websites so they're in first and second.

Re:question (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376629)

if you are in a race and you overtake the guy in second place, what position are u in?

u is the 3rd letter in "you", so 3rd.
 
Type properly, you dweeb.

Youtube isnt a search engine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25372253)

google is a search engine. youtube.com utilizes google as their search engine.

Que? (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372387)

When I search on google, doesn't that automatically pass through to youtube in many cases (and thus count as a search for youtube)?

So that means... (2, Funny)

nog_lorp (896553) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372449)

Google is number 2 to Google? How long till that new upstart 'Google' takes number 3?

Re:So that means... (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372893)

Not long. And neither returns great results these days. Just further proof that Google seriously needs competition. Why has it been 10 years since there was any major breakthrough in "search"?

Re:So that means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25374305)

Why has it been 10 years since there was any major breakthrough in "search"?

What kind of a question is that? Are we due for one? I wasn't aware that there was a schedule for these things!

Not Suprising..... (3, Interesting)

IHC Navistar (967161) | more than 5 years ago | (#25372627)

This is no suprise..... Yahoo has long allowed their service to degrade in favor of profit. The thing that made Google *the* search engine when they came out was that the page consisted of just a logo that said GOOGLE and a field to enter your search into. If you wanted info on other services GOOGLE had to offer, all you did was click a little hyperlink and you would then be taken to another page with the services on it.

Yahoo, on the other hand, crammed their page with every advertisement, product plug, sales pitch, and "junk" shopping service they could possibly fit onto the page.

Google is a simple, easy to use search engine, and it is absolutely no suprise it has become as giant as it is. This is mainly due to the simple, uncluttered sales-pitch free interface. The simple interface ade people want to use it, thus generating more money, thus allowing it to grow bigger.

Yahoo has turned itself into the America Online of serch engines: Nothing but advertisements, sales pitches, product tie-ins, marketing, and "junk" services.

Re:Not Suprising..... (1)

protohiro1 (590732) | more than 5 years ago | (#25374761)

search.yahoo.com. The yahoo home page is not a search engine, its a portal.

Re:Not Suprising..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25375075)

search.yahoo.com is actually quite clean, and would be considered their search portal. Google also has google.com/ig, and it's not exactly clean. It just so happens that yahoo made the mistake of not having their clean search portal on their base page, and having a yahoo.com/ig for all the other crap.

Re:Not Suprising..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25376031)

The thing that made Google *the* search engine when they came out was that the page consisted of just a logo that said GOOGLE and a field to enter your search into.

That's just part of the story. While it's I agree a very important part, another aspect that you're missing is that their results were good. While yahoo may have caught up in the quality of their search results (first by using Google as a backend, and later by buying Inktomi), at the time that Google came out, most other search engines just kind of sucked in what they returned, and Google was way better.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>