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!

Google Acquires ITA Software, Regulators May Balk

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the put-me-in-coach dept.

Advertising 72

marino02 tips news that Google has acquired ITA Software, a company who sells travel-related software and information, for $700 million. "Google said it plans to use ITA's technology in its Web search tools and to allow potential passengers to shop for tickets right from Google. Travel search makes up a huge portion of Google searches, but it's a complicated type of search to express in a query box, [said Marissa Mayer]." Analysts expect the deal to come under scrutiny from the FTC. "With this deal, Google will have transformed itself into one of the biggest power brokers in the travel industry. It will control the leading software for powering online airline reservations. It will be able to provide something in its own search results above and beyond what its competitors — who merely license the ITA software — will be able to produce. And it will become the leading online advertising buy for travel-related advertisers (assuming it wasn't already) if it doesn't butcher the rollout of user-friendly airline search tools within Google's already popular interface."

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

Stay good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32777736)

Stay good google! You're the first company that I still rooted for when you were no longer the underdog. Sigh.

Re:Stay good! (2, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777844)

I occasionally find that I enjoy a product, but I don't think I've ever really rooted for a company. They're not people, nor are they moral actors, meaning there is no real good/evil associated with the company. There may be good or evil associated with the corporate leadership, but that's different. Maybe a company like RedHat, which pretty much lives or dies by its support of the community (they pay for a very great deal of kernel development and other high-profile projects) would come close, but wtf do I care if Google stays solvent or not? Another search engine will come along and then that'll be the flavor of the month for a while, and it's no skin off my back either way.

Re:Stay good! (1)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778216)

Where's the -1 Blasphemer mod when I need it?

Re:Stay good! (0, Offtopic)

zolltron (863074) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778342)

They're not people, nor are they moral actors, meaning there is no real good/evil associated with the company.

No [wikipedia.org] evil [wikipedia.org] associated [wikipedia.org] with [wikipedia.org] a company [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:Stay good! (1)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 4 years ago | (#32780424)

Another search engine will come along and then that'll be the flavor of the month for a while, and it's no skin off my back either way.

Looks like a lot of people agree [google.com] with you.

eff the regulators... (1)

garyisabusyguy (732330) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778666)

Just set up a seperate corporation and operate it in a clandestine manner...

Nothing to see here folks, just 'ethical' modern business practices

Why travel? (5, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777782)

With google earth and street view I don't actually need to leave the basement any more.

I am (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32777796)

getting sick of Google EVERYWHERE.

Where is the FTC. Ooooops, I forgot. It's an oligarchy.

Yours In Krasnoyarsk,
Kilgore Trout

Re:I am (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778736)

Getting sick of your asinine posts EVERYWHERE.

Where are the mods? Oooooops, I actually know how to use punctuation.

Kurt Vonnegut

PS - stop pissing all over my characters.

One of ITA's Customers is Bing (5, Funny)

longacre (1090157) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777814)

Hey, Bing, sorry that latest software update caused all your flights to be listed as "Oceanic 815." We'll roll out a fix for that in the next 4-6 months.

Re:One of ITA's Customers is Bing (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32777884)

What's Bing?

Re:One of ITA's Customers is Bing (3, Interesting)

mandelbr0t (1015855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777902)

In all fairness, these are the unwritten rules that the IT market plays by. However, if Google were to start playing these games, it would definitely go against their "Don't be evil" motto. A little regulation would probably go a long way in forcing big business to be reasonable in their competitive practice.

Re:One of ITA's Customers is Bing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32783650)

In all fairness, these are the unwritten rules that the IT market plays by. However, if Google were to start playing these games, it would definitely go against their "Don't be evil" motto. A little regulation would probably go a long way in forcing big business to be reasonable in their competitive practice.

You must be joking if you think they haven't already shattered the don't be evil motto multiple times.

Re:One of ITA's Customers is Bing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32786494)

They've done about 100,000 times better than basically every other large company. You have to give them credit for doing their best. (Most of the "violations" are open to interpretation or are deliberately mis-stated by people with an ulterior motive, too.)

Re:One of ITA's Customers is Bing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32779756)

Hey, Bing, sorry that latest software update caused all your flights to be listed as "Oceanic 815." We'll roll out a fix for that in the next 4-6 months.

And that's the last time I fly Bing Airlines.

This is awesome. (1)

phyrexianshaw.ca (1265320) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777876)

Finally, a company that I have a little faith in might FINALLY get the travel industry sorted out.

Google Maps (5, Insightful)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777926)

I'm anticipating the next time I use Google Maps to have the options of traveling by car, bike, walking, public transit, and by air.

Re:Google Maps (2, Funny)

hemlock00 (1499033) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778006)

Why stop there, I got a bunch of useful ones.

-By Car, but you get stuck in 40 minutes of *#^&)(@# traffic

-By Bike and you get 2 flats from the road liter

-By Air, considering you're going to leave the gate on time so they can classify it as on time but then sit on the tarmac for 4 hours while they feed you some bullshit excuse like your luggage is coming when in reality the engine is on fire and they want a 2-dollar fix so they can keep your money

These would be equally, if not more helpful than the options I currently get from google.

Re:Google Maps (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778042)

To be honest, this would be pretty sweet.

Sort by:
* fastest
* cheapest
* shortest

Re:Google Maps (2, Funny)

bberens (965711) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779802)

Yes, I'd like to go from Orlando to Las Angeles... sort by cheapest: bike, 5283 hrs.

Re:Google Maps (1)

josath (460165) | more than 4 years ago | (#32787452)

Actually I just checked, it's only 224 hours. I assume that's bicycling non-stop though.

Re:Google Maps (3, Funny)

WarJolt (990309) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778078)

I just hope they keep the option to "Swim Across the Atlantic Ocean". My commute isn't complete until I swim 3462 miles.

Re:Google Maps (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779350)

if i remember right they got rid of that a few weeks ago after a lady sued them for telling her to walk down the middle of a highway while following the walk line on her crackberry and was hit by a car.

Re:Google Maps (1)

mandelbr0t (1015855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779610)

Nope, walking directions from my house to the Sydney Opera House includes:

218. Kayak across the Pacific Ocean (Entering Japan)

No wonder it's estimated at 184 days!

API (2, Interesting)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778344)

Definitely. I feel reasonably safe in assuming they'll publish a Flights API along with that. Some nice apps could be built on that in conjunction with voice-search.

Re:Google Maps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32792536)

I'm anticipating the next time I use Google Maps to have the options of traveling by car, bike, walking, public transit, and by air.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Tokyo+to:Sapporo [google.com]

Re:Google Maps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32798542)

Actually you won't, at least not with prices.

I am working on a travel related start-up at the moment and our single largest problem has been sourcing price data. Airline agreements with the various information channels which in turn go in to their agreements with vendors make stipulations regarding how you can use that data and the airlines really really really don't like people offering an overview price comparison without a direct point to point search (IE showing maps with price overviews), this is why you don't see snazzy features like sites offering you $100 discount to go to an alternate airport.

The sites which offer anything like this have to form the data based on purchases (it cost n to fly between these two points yesterday, the same fare rules are in effect today and yesterday the loading was such that there is a degree of confidence the same fare will still be available). This method requires you to have visibility on to the purchases (which google won't), is extremely inaccurate for flights near today or far into the future and will still piss airlines off if you do it in the wrong way. For the $5 a seat we get its simply not worth even fighting with them over it (protip: If you want to support good travel agents, online or otherwise, book car hire or cruises as we make decent commission on those).

What is fairly insane about the whole process is how much revenue gets eaten by the data middlemen, airlines websites often offer better prices because they can save up to 10% of the fare cost avoiding them.

Google Revenue (1)

helix2301 (1105613) | more than 4 years ago | (#32777940)

Google is so smart they think of anyway to make good revenue and them now being the biggest power brokers in the travel industry good for them. I would like see a chrome chrome add on for this. Go Google!

But you'll still only be able to find southwest... (3, Insightful)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778046)

at southwest.com.

I find it amusing that 15 years ago people laughed because all they gave you was a bag of free bag of peanuts and a soda. Today they are a luxury because they don't charge you for bags and still give you a free bag of peanuts and a free soda.

And they are the only airline I fly domestically these days.

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (3, Interesting)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778130)

Too bad they don't offer international flights. Heck, I wish we would let international carriers offer domestic flights. Lufthansa is no wonder carrier but the service made any US carrier look like Hobo-Air.

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778324)

Free peanuts and a soda? Meh. How about an assigned seat?

I personally _love_ to stand 40 minutes to an hour prior to my flights just so I can get a decent seat. I mean what else would I be doing, trolling slashdot? Sheesh.

Cattle call!

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

kidgenius (704962) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778358)

All planes start boarding 30 minutes before takeoff. Everyone does it. All require lining up too. And with Southwest you have assigned numbers so you know how to line-up. What's the big deal? The only reason I end up standing 40 minutes prior toa flight is because all the chairs are taken up by one person who has their bag sitting on the chair next to them....

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778512)

I personally _love_ to stand 40 minutes to an hour prior to my flights just so I can get a decent seat.

You're referring to a system they stopped using a few years ago. Now, they give you a number based on when you check in online (you can also get a low number by flying alot, or paying extra), and you board in that order. You can remain seated right until they board the block of numbers that includes yours. You don't really *need* to be at your computer exactly 24 hours before your flight to check in either; I don't think I've ever failed to get either an aisle or window seat so long as I checked in online before going to the airport.

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

WillDraven (760005) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778632)

How the hell does one "check in" without being.. well.. in.

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778872)

Granted, they are probably abusing the term. But I really like it, since I sometimes have to book fairly soon before a trip, yet I still get a shot at a decent seat so long as I book at least 24 hours in advance. (On the other hand, they'll never give you a free 1st class upgrade like other airlines - since they don't have any such thing!)

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779044)

You're confirming within 24 hours that you will be there, to the best of your ability, and aren't flaking on the flight.

Why should they care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32784954)

You're confirming within 24 hours that you will be there, to the best of your ability, and aren't flaking on the flight.

Don't they already have your money?

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

Hercynium (237328) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778360)

and yet... southwest is an ITA customer, for the functionality on their own site (and possibly other authorized sales channels) though they still don't allow their fares to be used for cross-shopping search.

(former ITA employee who is currently wondering what his shares would be worth right now)

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779014)

still give you a free bag of peanuts and a free soda.

Except last time I flew them peanuts were banned from being passed out on the flight because someone had an allergy. They also scolded people who opened peanuts from previous flights or had brought their own...

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (2, Interesting)

Mortlath (780961) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779322)

I have a daughter with a peanut allergy you insensitive clod!

But seriously, since Southwest doesn't clean up between flights (only once in the morning), we can no longer take Southwest anymore. Even if they ban peanuts on our flight, there is too much old peanuts on the seats, floor, and air. Last time my daughter started getting a bad reaction and we had to douse her with medicine to keep it from getting life-threatening.

People don't realize that just a little bit of peanuts around can cause those with allegeries to stop breathing.

Re:But you'll still only be able to find southwest (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779384)

we have guys flying all the time - and most of them will only fly southwest.. one of the guys would rather, and does, drive 8 hours to a client rather than fly american (the only option for that client's city)

Do they search all airlines? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778080)

There was an interesting article at http://www.resourceshelf.com/2010/07/01/fast-facts-about-ita-software-system-can-handle-more-than-one-million-queries-per-second/

I visited one of the urls listed in the article, http://matrix2.itasoftware.com/, searched for a flight from SJC to LAX and got a lowest price of $139. Southwest wasn't on the list
so I went to www.southwest.com and found a roundtrip for $88.

Re:Do they search all airlines? (2, Informative)

bwintx (813768) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778286)

Southwest's current TV spots are focused on how its site is the only place on the Web where you can find its fares.

Re:Do they search all airlines? (1)

portnoy (16520) | more than 4 years ago | (#32784936)

It's not that ITA doesn't search all airlines, it's that Southwest's agreements with ITA don't allow for cross-carrier comparisons.

Intriguingly, Southwest uses ITA behind the scenes for their flight searches, so you're still giving us money for the $88 flight. :-)

But corporate travel... (3, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778096)

"Google has no plans to sell airline tickets to consumers", they say. However, Google Corporate Travel could be a big moneymaker. Companies will pay for outsourcing services to handle and account for their employee travel.

Re:But corporate travel... (1)

Restil (31903) | more than 4 years ago | (#32782658)

I don't think google WANTS to handle that process. That's not really what they do. They probably just want you to be able to type in a city and links for flights to that city from where you're at will show up in the search results, complete with prices, along with the news, shopping, ads and youtube results, as well as the regular search results. They just want to do the searching. The financial transaction can be handled by someone else.

-Restil

Big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778142)

What's the big deal? I'm the last person to stand in support of a large corporation, but as long as they don't play anti-competition, why is it such a terrible thing that I can Google my flight? I mean, with the horrible experiences people are having with Priceline, and the fact that Google is likely going to do a much better job, they could use some competition. The only real problem I have with Google (so far) is their blatant disregard for privacy and nearly perpetual data retention.

Try it out (4, Informative)

feenberg (201582) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778154)

You can use the ITA engine at http://matrix.itasoftware.com/cvg/dispatch [itasoftware.com] and it is really quite good compared to most airline/agency websites. However, it won't actually sell you a ticket.

Re:Try it out (3, Informative)

tjhayes (517162) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779834)

It's significantly better than "really quite good". It is EXCELLENT. It's very quick, and the searches it executes can be VERY customizable. Let's say you wanted to fly from NYC to LAX, only on United, with exactly 1 stop, and that stop MUST be in Chicago. ITA can perform that exact search for you. It's really quite amazing how well it works.

Search Interface Improvements (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32780044)

The only things missing IMHO are the sub-categories for travelers "As Big as a Refigerator" (who need seating outside the main passenger compartment) and the acknowledgment that infants, of either existing sub-category, should disqualify the parent from having the option of traveling by air, unless they do so under their own power.

Thank god for that (3, Interesting)

JohnnyUK (1847438) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778434)

I'm glad. Airline websites have had forever to get this right and yet, for me, one of the most frustrating things to do on the internet is find a flight in any sensible fashion.

Re:Thank god for that (1)

novex (515891) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778660)

yep, was just talking with a friend the other day about how irritating it is trying to find decent flight info, and how google should clean up the competition.

Re:Thank god for that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32781706)

Ditto. Every single airline ticketing system I've used so far sucks beyond imagination.

I would love to see them implementing a interface like the one suggested in this article [worrydream.com] . That would simply make other sites obsolete.

Ah! The Google monster at it again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778506)

I am just waiting for Google Airlines and Googlebucks, free wifi everywhere! The next step after Google Broadband has taken over the whole world...

so? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32778528)

so what? who cares.

At least it's the right company taking over (1)

sjonke (457707) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778546)

I'm sporting a sassy Google Sportcoat, stylish, ruffled sleeve button down Google shirt, and smart pair of Google slacks, purchased, I might add, on Google. I saw the ad for it on my iPhone. Or at least I did. Now I get some shit about crap I don't want. None of it don't say Google on it. Damn phone is headin for a class action. Shit. Soon I'll by flying Google Air, and at substantial discount, by purchasing tickets via Google - I know because I price checked it there. They've even got Google Snacks for all passengers. Shit's the Google.

700 Million? (1)

sonicmerlin (1505111) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778600)

Didn't Google pay something like twice as much as Apple was willing to pay for the ad company Apple wanted to buy? Now another $700 million for this company? I know it's not true, but sometimes it feels like Google has more money than the government. It's pretty amazing how much they throw around.

Re:700 Million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32779080)

At risk of being a buzzkill, you do realize that the US is currently spending $400 million+ every DAY in Iraq, and has been for the last 7 years, right?

Re:700 Million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32779380)

Didn't Google pay something like twice as much as Apple was willing to pay for the ad company Apple wanted to buy?

Now another $700 million for this company? I know it's not true, but sometimes it feels like Google has more money than the government. It's pretty amazing how much they throw around.

The balance sheets for publicly traded companies are freely available. Go take a look at a few. Once you have this perspective, you will not have factually inaccurate "feelings".

Re:700 Million? (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779594)

more than the government? no

a lot of money? yes

Google has some where between 10-20 billion

MS is ~40 billion

and Apple is catching up with MS.

US government spends ~4.1 billion per DAY above what they earn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Debt_Clock [wikipedia.org]

US government spends ~255 million per day for the war in Iraq
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15377059/ [msn.com]

isn't it fun.. i think instead of paying my 40k i'm liable for - i'll wait till China comes for it and pay them in lead..

Lisp (3, Insightful)

White Flame (1074973) | more than 4 years ago | (#32778746)

ITA's core technology is written in Lisp. It's nice to see more real-world success stories like this, and that using a less popular language for the core IP doesn't prevent sale of a software company.

ITA? Never heard of it (3, Interesting)

CaptainOfSpray (1229754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779698)

>It will control the leading software for powering online airline reservations

Anybody ever heard of Galileo? Amadeus anyone?


Is this ITA something that is only used in the US? BTW, whatever happened to SABRE?

Re:ITA? Never heard of it (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32779948)

fool, just because you have never heard of them doesn't mean they aren't the ones running everything.

Re:ITA? Never heard of it (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32780086)

ITA is to Sabre as Google is to index cards.

One of the founders of ITA examined the rules published by the central authority through which all airlines publish their flight availability data. The ITA founder proved those rules make problems that are NP-complete. He used ITA's search engine to implement a Turing machine using only the rules as defined by the central authority. He used that Turing machine to perform other calculations, all centered around proving certain properties of the data structures defined by the rules. There is a deep art around what ITA does. Sabre was built years ago before anyone suspected that the base of data being searched was anywhere close to as complex as ITA proved it to be. Once ITA understood the true nature of the problem they were trying to solve, they built an engine optimized to search the space. The difference between ITA's results and Sabre's results are .. like Google compared to someone searching index cards.

ITA is the search engine behind Orbitz, Kayak (I believe and am not going to double check), and several other top search engines. ITA doesn't sell tickets, ITA provides data to people who sell tickets.

Re:ITA? Never heard of it (3, Informative)

bunyip (17018) | more than 4 years ago | (#32780484)

I think ITA made a great deal of hype around their NP proof, but the complexity of the search was known by many and was known before ITA published their results. For example, Tom Holloran (United Airlines) published a paper at AGIFORS in the 1980's that showed the equivalence to a set covering / set partitioning problem.

Sabre's fare search engine was rewritten from scratch in C++ & Java starting about the same time ITA started. The search engine runs on a Linux cluster, and independent benchmarks show that it is the leader in finding the lowest fares. In fact, pretty much *all* the major players in fare search run on x86 clusters. You could look this up online too :-)

Re:ITA? Never heard of it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32790534)

Heard of Galileo? Sheesh, I've spent the last six month banging my head against it. The API has so many layers of kludges it belongs in a geology museum. A sane replacement is more than welcome.

Monopoly of monopolies (1)

nawitus (1621237) | more than 4 years ago | (#32779988)

It seems that Google's goal is to be a monopoly in every section of the internet.

Less gov't is best! Where do I get my G-Chip? (1)

socz (1057222) | more than 4 years ago | (#32781094)

So, this is interesting. Good vs. Evil aside, those who like less U.S. Govn't should be like "Screw you FTC! It's a free market and it regulates itself! Google is making it's own earnings and not mooching off of welfare! They should also have to pay less taxes because they generate jobs and revenue for many of previously mentioned moochers. If anything, they deserve a tax break. I mean, I don't make 1/googleth of the money they do, but those are *my* beliefs!" Right?

Then on the other side we have "So, now google will know who we are, what we buy, say, who we talk to (gmail), communicate incognito or otherwise (gvoice), are interested in (google), look to go and where we're at; and where I park my bike in front of my house (gmaps), what we use to do said things (OS version, chrome and phone sets), how our networks are set up (gwifi-spy) and now they want to know ("help") us get to where we want to go?"

Yeah, it might be a little to late to unfriend google at this point. This sort of reminds me of that store in Wall-E, the big mart or something where it's an ALL IN ONE sort of deal.

I guess we'll find out what our true feelings are when it's too late because "they've crossed the line."

On the other hand, the service(s) they provide is still outstanding. What do you guys think?

Oh, and don't forget about dazzal or razzle . Oh yeah it's called Google buzz...


As far as my beliefs go... It's all about the Ying/Yang baby! Oh yeah and don't forget about Socrates...

What's with the blatant LYING in the post??! (1)

Snaller (147050) | more than 4 years ago | (#32782074)

"Google said it plans to use ITA's technology in its Web search tools and to allow potential passengers to shop for tickets right from Google. "

Bullshit! They say the exact opposite:
http://www.google.com/press/ita/faq.html [google.com]

"It's also important to note that our goal will be to refer people quickly to a site where they can actually purchase flights, and that we have no plans to sell flights ourselves. "

They are a search company, they have noticed a lot of people are searching for flights - so they are prepared to give you even better results when you are searching for flight, but they are of course, not going to sell the damn tickets themselves.

Damn those pesky regulators! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32782200)

- what exactly is the problem with a 6,400 pound gorilla, wolfing down every green bud of independent online commerce that lays in it's path? After all, it has asolutely promised not to be evil, leastways, not until it's swallowed everything in sight, then ran out of food.

Maybe we'll have luck, and it will fall in love with Faye Dunaway - meantime, as a (rather good) British rock band once said, "meet the new Boss, same as the old Boss.." - unfortunately, most of /. (who at least, should know better..) seem only too eager to get fooled again.

Bing has a useful Travel Search (1)

gregrah (1605707) | more than 4 years ago | (#32782498)

Bing's "Travel" section is pretty good for finding flights. It's quick, clean, and the results are trustworthy in my experience. They've even got a "price predictor" feature that can save you a couple bucks if you're prepared to check prices every day and pounce when a good deal comes along. In fact - the only time that I'll use Bing over Google is when I'm buying plane tickets.

I know it's not a fashionable thing to say in these parts - but I love Google products. I was happy to hear about this acquisition, and look forward to seeing what Google is able to accomplish in this area of search.

I am happy about this (1)

presidenteloco (659168) | more than 4 years ago | (#32782660)

Google made the transit info in my city usable. The previous system written by the local transit authority was a usability and performance nightmare.

Shopping for flights and hotels online is currently a godawful mess of bad user experience,
including ridiculously useless middlemen (highwaymen) hijacking your searches.

I once went through a 6, 7 or 8 page form sequence to search for and order an airline ticket (departing from my home city) before it told me obliquely that "you can't do that from your country".

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?