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!

Amazon to Take on Google?

michael posted about 11 years ago | from the one-click-searching dept.

The Internet 196

KRck writes "Looks like Amazon is going to jump into the search engine business and try and compete directly with Google, by building a new company A9 which they hope to launch in October."

cancel ×


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

In Soviet Russia (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7067987)

Looks like Amazon is going to jump into the search engine business and try and compete directly with Google, by building a new company A9 which they hope to launch in October.

People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation.

YOU DID IT! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068061)

Excellent first post, fellow AC!


Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068300)



Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068316)

Yep. But I showed him this [] and he stopped for a while. first posts you! (-1, Offtopic)

Eese (647951) | about 11 years ago | (#7067995) sends flowers! first posts you! (-1, Offtopic)

Eese (647951) | about 11 years ago | (#7068027)

Fux0r, I posted that logged in, too. There goes my karma. first posts you! (0)

rela (531062) | about 11 years ago | (#7068089)

Karma on slashdot is like taking a piss in the middle of the desert: No one with any sense cares and it's soon gone anyway.

Competition is always a welcoming news (0)

sujan (464326) | about 11 years ago | (#7067996)

I wish Amazon best of luck.

Re:Competition is always a welcoming news (2, Insightful) (156602) | about 11 years ago | (#7068074)

Competition is always a welcoming news

Unless your name starts with "M" and ends with "icrosoft."

Re:Competition is always a welcoming news (3, Insightful)

KingDaveRa (620784) | about 11 years ago | (#7068109)

Competition is good, but what if that competition is going to bias results? If I go and innocently search A9 for 'php reference' will the first result be's documention, or a link to a book Amazon just so happen to sell? Its a bit of a catch-22 for Amazon. Where do they put links back to their own content without looking biased? It will be interesting to see how this one pans out, but so far (save a few oddities) Google has provided impartial search results. Google just do searches, they don't offer email, e-commerce and everything else all the other portals (MSN, Yahoo, et al) do provide.

Good luck to Amazon, be interested to see how this pans out.

I know that nobody reads the articles, but... (3, Informative)

MikeCapone (693319) | about 11 years ago | (#7068396) can be useful, once in a while.

Unlike Google, A9 isn't trying to develop an all-purpose search engine that indexes billions of Web pages. The startup instead is zeroing on a one of search engines' sweet spots -- e-commerce.

Amazon to compete with Google? BULLSHIT. (2, Informative)

jbottero (585319) | about 11 years ago | (#7068367)

Amazon is not building a search engine like that which most people are familiar at Google. Amazon wants to build a search engine specifically to sell products. So, if you're interested in the ins and outs of rebuilding a '57 Chevy or tracking down some problem with some old Sun SPARC Station you bought on eBay, forget it. It's just going to be a mechanism to point people at Amazon affiliates.

What's next? (4, Funny)

Xerithane (13482) | about 11 years ago | (#7068001)

SCO? RedHat? How many companies really want to be the king of search engines. There can only be one Plow King.. er, Search King.. er wait, he's already sued google, too.

It's all just reminiscent of this. []

Re:What's next? (1)

Keiko Sakaguchi (711261) | about 11 years ago | (#7068071)

It's all about our eyeballs. Searching is probably in the top 5 of Internet activities don't you think? Behind email and im and just browsing. If you can control how people find stuff you can direct their course... like controlling a river. :-)

Re:What's next? (4, Insightful)

Xerithane (13482) | about 11 years ago | (#7068106)

It's all about our eyeballs. Searching is probably in the top 5 of Internet activities don't you think? Behind email and im and just browsing. If you can control how people find stuff you can direct their course... like controlling a river. :-)

I'm actually talking about the hype about everybody, "Taking on Google." It's just silly. The CNN article says that Amazon is specifically not targetting Googles general search market, but to perform niche ecommerce searches. It's just this celebrity death match style coverage that is like beating a dead horse.

Re:What's next? (1)

Keiko Sakaguchi (711261) | about 11 years ago | (#7068204)

Oh yes. Well it's always that way with the media it seems. Like how there can't be a story without it being a huge conflict of some kind.

Disk Space Expansion (1)

capt.Hij (318203) | about 11 years ago | (#7068256)

Sounds like just about everybody wants a piece of google. Considering that all of these companies will also be making complete copies of the web for their own private cache, perhaps it is time to start hoarding disk drives since they will soon be a scarce commodity as companies start buying them up to copy the web.

Hmmm, if amazon starts copying everything google has, and yahoo copies amazon, and google copies MS, and MS copies yahoo... Yikes!

well (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068007)

competition is always good!

Re:well (3, Funny)

Gherald (682277) | about 11 years ago | (#7068100)

competition is always good!

Not against something as holy as Google!

Impudent Amazon Infidels! (0)

eviltypeguy (521224) | about 11 years ago | (#7068008)

Impudent Amazon Infidels! Google alone is the master of the spanish inqusition, right shall prevail!

Re:Impudent Amazon Infidels! (1)

TopShelf (92521) | about 11 years ago | (#7068080)

Hey, it's only fair for Amazon to try and take on Google. After all, Google's [] trying to do the same thing to them!

Froogle: Best way to find the best price (4, Insightful)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | about 11 years ago | (#7068330)

Froogle, [] does NOT compete with Amazon. It tends to put Amazon out of business. Froogle is the best way to find the price and vendor of anything you want to buy. Google makes no money from showing the vendors and prices, only from the ads on the right side.

Amazon is known for tricks like... (2, Funny)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | about 11 years ago | (#7068263)

I, for one, don't see need for our new Amazoogle overlords.

Amazon is known (at least to me) for tricks like charging frequent customers more.

taxed? (2, Funny)

Chuck Bucket (142633) | about 11 years ago | (#7068009)

so will internet searches now be taxed if they cross state lines? :)


oh my god (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068010)

I TOOK HER OUT it was a friday night i wore cologne to get the feeling right blink182 rox00rzz!!!1

fp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068011)


Re:fp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068272)

uhhh... hmmm. [tap-tap] Pardon me sir, but are you aware that taking doggie downers actually reduces your chance of getting fp? Folks, talk to your geeks. Get the word out.
This is your fp:
Yeah FP! I fsckin roxx0r!

...and this is your fp on drugs:
Yeah FP! I fsckin roxx0r!

Thank goodness! (5, Insightful)

RobertB-DC (622190) | about 11 years ago | (#7068012)

From the article:
Unlike Google, A9 isn't trying to develop an all-purpose search engine that indexes billions of Web pages. The startup instead is zeroing on a one of search engines' sweet spots -- e-commerce.

"Sweet spot" for advertisers... "Crap that clutters my search" to me. Google has done a pretty good job of keeping the e-commerce sites out of my listings, and as a result, I really do click on the sponsored links when they're relevant. But they've been slipping... a search on Electric Fencing [] returns mostly people selling the product, but adding keywords (Electric Fencing Installation) helps.

More articley goodness:
As more consumers have become comfortable with the Internet, a growing number are using search engines to review products and compare prices.

Review != Purchase. When I look up a product, I'm usually looking for complaints. Before I signed up for Netflix, I examined the complaints and decided I could live with the reported problems. I decided against GreenCine [] in part because subscribers report low supplies despite an excellent selection. You get the idea.

Hopefully, if Amazon focuses on the e-commerce angle, Google can focus on the information angle. I'll go to Google to find out how to install an electric fence, and perhaps I'll go to Amazon to find an electric fence supplier. But more likely, I'll click on a Google AdWords partner.

Google's biggest problem right now: Crapflooding, which will continue to be a whack-a-mole problem on any search site. When I do a search on Toothpick Bridge [] for my daughter's science class and see a URL of "", I know that the spammer/scammer community has scored again.

Re:Thank goodness! (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | about 11 years ago | (#7068092)

This isn't a Google competitor, it's an Overture competitor (think Google AdWords, but only a search of those sites - and listings are ranked by cost, just like adwords).

Re:Thank goodness! (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 11 years ago | (#7068120)

** I really do click on the sponsored links **

i don't, but that's just because i barely ever make searches that would end me up in using any money because i don't have any!

*also they're been mostly irrelevant for me as the localisation to around here is quite new.

Re:Thank goodness! (1)

tarquin_fim_bim (649994) | about 11 years ago | (#7068231)

"mostly irrelevant for me as the localisation to around here is quite new"

I think everyone will be a lot happier when localisation becomes more global.

Re:Thank goodness! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068136)

you realize you can turn on Google's filters and not see the daughter_incest stuff (in theory).

They need to do better than their own site (4, Interesting)

SamTheButcher (574069) | about 11 years ago | (#7068254)

For instance, I used to go to for all of my music info needs - tracklisting, release dates, etc. I forget the exact details (I've written a previous rant about it), but I searched for either a song or album and the relevant search was 68 results in. Their engine seems to search word for word.

Okay, here you go. Went to, searched for song title "The Ocean". There might be a few, but I'm looking for the Zeppelin song. Out of 4686 results, you can only sort by alpha, A-Z or Z-A. That. Sucks. Result #2 does not have any song called "the ocean", but rather a song called "(More Like An Ocean That A) Bathtub" - I'm assuming they mean "Than" instead of "That" but whatever.

CDNow would return a list with all songs called "The Ocean", then return songs with the word "Ocean" in the title. Amazon's search engine sucks, and I think they're in way over their head on this one, but I could be wrong. I have been before.

Additionally, if they're targeting a narrower audience, then they're not going up against Google, now, are they? :)

Re:Thank goodness! (2, Interesting)

dmeranda (120061) | about 11 years ago | (#7068269)

Well, there perhaps is a little more overlap than you may think. Remember some of Google's appendages such as Froogle [] and Google Catalogs [] . Granted however, Google is generally about finding information, and it seems like Amazon is really positioning themselves to find products/vendors.

But serious competition may be good, even if its not directly the same market. Things like this help keep great companies like Google working hard. As long as it is competition. I really don't want non-competitive devices such as patents or other legalease destructiveness to be raised.

If you think back to how Amazon got started, selling books, what I'd really like to see some day is something more along the lines of a library. And one which was indexed with something like Google's technology. I'd like to be able to search for books on something other than just the title, author, ISBN, etc. Granted Amazon has made some book searching progress, with the introduction of buyer-reviews and linking similar books together based upon who buys what other books. But wouldn't it be great to be able to find books based upon some text in the book? But given the sad state of copyright law, that will probably remain science fiction.

Not my experience (2, Insightful)

harmonica (29841) | about 11 years ago | (#7068283)

Google has done a pretty good job of keeping the e-commerce sites out of my listings,

Recently, I don't think that's true anymore. At least from my experience. If you search for anything remotely similar to a product or service, you may run into special spam link farms for the search terms you looked for in the top ten of the Google results. Sure, you can report these with the 'Dissatisfied?' link at the bottom, but that's tedious, probably not too many people use that, because it doesn't seem to improve the system much. Over all, Google isn't working as well as it used to. Simply because some SEO people have figured how to manipulate it. It's sad, but as with spam, the fight has to continue.

They cleaned that up pretty quick (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 11 years ago | (#7068373)

I'm not sure how you got that link before, but the search you linked to is now pretty much all wooden bridges.

Re:Thank goodness! (1)

Shorty Lugnuts (618651) | about 11 years ago | (#7068399)

I wonder how biased their search results will actually be, especially with an e-commerce angle. I would think the top results from a search would point right back to to buy a product since they now sell everything from housewares to clothes. It seems that otherwise it would be like reading a Wal-Mart advertisement and finding out that I can buy whatever I'm looking for cheaper at K-Mart.

Didn't Amazon already do this. (1)

ron_ivi (607351) | about 11 years ago | (#7068427)

"The startup instead is zeroing on a one of search engines' sweet spots -- e-commerce"

Amazon already bought an e-commerce search company for over $100 Million. []

Feels like a dup from '98. :-)

I wanted to get first post... (3, Funny)

Aliencow (653119) | about 11 years ago | (#7068020)

But I kept wondering if clicking "reply" and "submit" would infringe on Amazon's patents... but I realized that it meant two clicks, not one!

Re:I wanted to get first post... (1)

zBoD (86938) | about 11 years ago | (#7068057)

Interesting article submission, yet it violates my patent on "a method for using ASCII test to simulate a pointy nosed person winking and smiling ." You will be hearing from my lawyers.

Re:I wanted to get first post... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068076)


Look to the left of the article (0)

Unregistered (584479) | about 11 years ago | (#7068028)

And you'll see a powered by google search spot. Amazon's gonna have a tough time gaing market share, imo.

Many Players in Search-Engine Market:Consolidation (1)

reporter (666905) | about 11 years ago | (#7068190)

The market for search engines has a very low barrier to entry. Now, Amazon is creating a search engine and is joining the ranks of Google, Yahoo, Overture Services, AltaVista, Lycos, AskJeeves, Microsoft, etc. Please read "Google and VMWare take Microsoft Very Seriously [] ".

Is the search-engine business of sufficient size to support 8+ players? Given the fact that the search engines of several of the players are very similar, the answer is "probably not". The market for search engines will undergo consolidation, and the main survivor will probably be Microsoft. It has an R&D budget that none of the other competitors can match.

You can be sure that Google is rapidly working towards an initial public offering (IPO) while there is still a chance for an IPO.

... from the desk of the reporter []

dunno about this one... (1)

another misanthrope (688068) | about 11 years ago | (#7068029)

...I know that Amazon used to "experiment" with pricing - I'd worry to much they were doing the same thing with linking. Rather than relevance to my search it'd be listed according to Amazon's fees/whims....

Why it won't work: (5, Insightful)

grasshoppa (657393) | about 11 years ago | (#7068042)

Do we really trust an amazon sponsored search engine when looking for "books on computers"? Do we really believe that they will give us unskewed results?

This is the core of the matter, and why google is so successful. We believe that they are unbiased, and therefore trust their results.

Incidently, this is why msn search will fail as well.

All hail the king of searches: Google.

Re:Why it won't work: (1)

bizcoach (640439) | about 11 years ago | (#7068286)

This is the core of the matter, and why google is so successful. We believe that they are unbiased, and therefore trust their results.

Google is great for finding webpages with worthwhile information related to some keywords.

It seems that the goal of A9 is to solve a closely related, but different problem: Finding worthwhile e-commerce sites related to some keyword. This is somnewhat related to Amazon's core business of empowering people to find and order the books they want, via the internet. So I think Amazon may have some insights on this problems and into which solution strategies are likely to work.

It will be interesting to see what strategy A9 will use for doing the "how worthwhile is this site likely to be" rating of e-commerce sites. If they come up with something that works as well as Google's link popularity concept works for informative websites, then A9 will certainly be successful in their chosen niche.

Re:Why it won't work: (1)

TwistedSquare (650445) | about 11 years ago | (#7068359)

We believe that they are unbiased, and therefore trust their results. This is part of a general trend on the internet. TO quote someone or other "the internet will all become about trust" - whose reviews you trust, whose security you trust, along with more low-level problems like trusting the From field of an e-mail (i.e. you don't). It's all very interesting, and relates to why we buy from/visit certain (often well-known and quite large) firms/sites - because we believe we can trust them more than a dodgy-seeming site offering the same thing... Just thoughts :)

Re:Why it won't work: (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | about 11 years ago | (#7068410)

Mark my words, there will come a day when tcp connections are refused because the server does not trust the chain of trust of the certificate.

And when that day comes, I will be a happy man. :)

Personal opinion here, nothing more (1)

kutuz_off (159540) | about 11 years ago | (#7068043)

Some say it's a good thing, competition is good, etc. I, with Microsoft in mind, prefer different markets to be dominated by different players.

Re:Personal opinion here, nothing more (1)

kaltkalt (620110) | about 11 years ago | (#7068108)

Uhh, Microsoft is a prime example of why letting a single player dominate a given market is a bad thing. We get shitty buggy software and no true alternative (yeh linux is a viable, but not practical alternative).

People who start comments with "Umm..." and "Uhh" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068395)

Are losers.

Well, are you, punk? (5, Insightful)

Quill (238781) | about 11 years ago | (#7068049)

It's a good thing Google already has a "I'm Feeling Lucky" button. A9 would surely patent One-Click Searching.

Speaking of "I'm Feeling Lucky"... (1)

metroid composite (710698) | about 11 years ago | (#7068368)

What does that button do again? I remember seeing this in a 15 minute presentation somewhere, and it sounded useful (something about customizing Google IIRC) but I've never used it. Anyone an expert on Google here?

Conflict of interest? (2, Insightful)

Takara (711260) | about 11 years ago | (#7068053)

Amazon wants to be google, but ...A9 isn't trying to develop an all-purpose search engine that indexes billions of Web pages. The startup instead is zeroing on a one of search engines' sweet spots -- e-commerce. Will Amazon give priority to Amazon pages/products when consumers search A9 for items?

Didn't they up prices for loyal customers? (5, Interesting)

caluml (551744) | about 11 years ago | (#7068058)

I remember reading about Amazon using cookies to raise the prices for returning customers. How do we know they won't monitor searches, and use it to put up prices for things that you might be interested in?
Case in point: I was buying a ticket for a flight, and when I started, there were lots of available seats on a variety of days at 317 each way. By the time I had gone through the process, put in my credit card details to buy it, and hit submit, a message appeared saying "The seating information has changed, please start from the beginning again." Magically, all the seats on all the same days had jumped to 900 each way. My point? I don't know. But Amazon has played dirty before. And I don't trust them.

Anyway, I didn't book my tickets with British Airways. Some other mug will have to pay the inflated prices.

Re:Didn't they up prices for loyal customers? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 11 years ago | (#7068175)

we pretty much know that it would be exactly what they would do, only call it personalised searches that result in relevant results.

though, a real sneaky way would be that for a start it would return really excellent results and then later start mixing in sponsored links..

of course, i'm just talking out of my ass here, but the main point is that those who choose what search engine they use wouldn't easily trust amazon to play fair and square on this and thus wouldn't use it, those that just use the one their isp's starting page has could just as well use it as they could use msn's search.

Didn't happen. (5, Informative)

MushMouth (5650) | about 11 years ago | (#7068308)

No, they didn't do that, they randomly chose prices for some items a while ago.(it was like a multiple choice, you could get price A, B, or C) the cookies, just made sure that once you got A, you still got A, they were testing the market. After it all blew through they charged everyone the lowest price for the item.

But (5, Funny)

Timesprout (579035) | about 11 years ago | (#7068062)

They keep telling me large parts of the Amazon are unexplored. How will they find anything?

QUICK! (0)

greymond (539980) | about 11 years ago | (#7068083)

1) Buy and all the similar domains
2) Amazon offers you money or changes the name
3) PROFIT!!!

Re:QUICK! (1)

rf0 (159958) | about 11 years ago | (#7068290) is gone but I bet the owner is going to be one happy puppy


Huzzah. (1)

Pacer (153176) | about 11 years ago | (#7068093)

Great, a commercial search engine. I wish there were a web service that could NOT show me all that crap.

Singer, Robert Palmer dead at 54. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068105)

LONDON, England -- Rock singer Robert Palmer has died in Paris of a heart attack at the age of 54, his manager said.

The British star, whose chart hits in the 1980s included "Addicted to Love," suffered the attack in the early hours of Friday morning, Mick Cater said.

Palmer, who had lived in Switzerland for 16 years, was staying in the French capital with his partner, Mary Ambrose, after traveling from the United Kingdom where he had been recording a TV show.

"I can't say anything else at this point, I'm just in shock," Cater told CNN.

The singer was born in Batley, Yorkshire, in 1949, but spent the majority of his youth on the island of Malta. At the age of 19, Palmer returned to England where he sang with the Alan Bown Set and a soul group, Vinegar Joe, before beginning a solo career in 1974.

He became known as much for slick videos as for his clever combination of rock, rhythm and blues, and reggae sounds with singles that also included "Simply Irresistible" and "I Didn't Mean to Turn You On."

The "Addicted to Love" video, featuring the sharply dressed Palmer and miniskirted models, became one of MTV's most-played clips and sparked protests from some feminists.

"I'm not going to attach inappropriate significance to it because at the time it meant nothing. It's just happened to become an iconic look," Palmer once said of the video.

He formed the Power Station in 1985 with John Taylor and Andy Taylor from Duran Duran, scoring three U.S. hits, including "Communication" and "Get it On."

Despite his chart success he shunned the rock 'n' roll lifestyle. "I loved the music, but the excesses of rock 'n' roll never really appealed to me at all," The Associated Press quoted him as saying.

"I couldn't see the point of getting up in front of a lot of people when you weren't in control of your wits."

Palmer was noted for his dress sense and respect for his fans. "I don't want to be heavy," he said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

"I can't think of another attitude to have towards an audience than a hopeful and a positive one. And if that includes such unfashionable things as sentimentality, well, I can afford it."

Godzilla vs. Mothra (1)

FreeLinux (555387) | about 11 years ago | (#7068107)

I'm all for competition and I don't have any problem with M$ trying to usurp Google(good luck you M$ twits) but, Amazon is starting to tick me off. Perhaps it is their monthly patent filings that rub me the wrong way. Deep down I fear that they will beat Google by patenting the "Search" button.

Re:Godzilla vs. Mothra (1)

bizcoach (640439) | about 11 years ago | (#7068305)

why do you feel that Microsoft's patent filings are any better than Amazon's?

Remember when... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068116)

yahoo, excite and hotbot were called search engines?
And Amazon sold books, and did it well?

Then somebody said "Portals" and they became "portals".
Then somebody said "Auction" and they all followed e-bay.
Then somebody said "e-commerce" and they all started selling everything.

And books became Amazon's sideline to their patents on everything but the color of money.
And their site became a Navigational Nightmare(TM) (patent pending).

Now everybody wants to be a search engine again.

The reason Google is succesful is because it does it gives people the information they want, and stays the hell out of their way.

[OT] Did anyone notice the picture? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068117)

Look closely at the OS. WHY did they use Windows 3.1?!?!?


Hey, that's my picture! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068168)

It's Windows 3.11 displayed on a Gateway 200 Crystal Scan 13" Monitor.

I felt as though I owned a mainframe, the day I got that PC. Couple of nights later, I did ownZer a mainframe. ;) Memories.

PageRank decides Amazon is the winner! (1)

rookkey (74788) | about 11 years ago | (#7068123)

Has anyone noticed the increasingly uninformative results Google has been returning lately?

Searching for almost any generic term on Google results in a deluge of shopping sites. And (surprise, surprise) Amazon finds its way to the top of the lists nearly everytime.

I wouldn't be surprised that since every page on Amazon prominently features a Google search field that the folks at Google have conveniently avoided trying to find a way to fairly balance its search results.

Needless to say, Google is becoming less and less useful everyday.


Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068158)



Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068180)



Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068281)


That's the way PageRank works (1)

justMichael (606509) | about 11 years ago | (#7068252)

The more quality links you have the better your PageRank the higher up in the results.

If you search for the number of sites that link to google it's ~39,000. I have a feeling a few of those have a page rank above 7, that is going to put them at the top for a lot of searches.

Re:PageRank decides Amazon is the winner! (1)

Westech (710854) | about 11 years ago | (#7068257)

Google's value has always been that it used new and innovative filtering techniques to cut out the crap and return useful results. I agree that Google's results are getting less useful and relevant lately. Up until now, they've always done a good job adapting their technology as search engine spammers change their tactics. Let's hope that they can continue to do so...

Perfect (1)

r_glen (679664) | about 11 years ago | (#7068125)

I just can't get enough of those product-sponsored search results. Watch out, Google!


Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068126)

call your representatives and demand an end to Zionist domination!!!

So they sell books... (2, Insightful)

Jin Wicked (317953) | about 11 years ago | (#7068134)

...and other stuff through different stores, and now they want to be a search engine, too? I don't really get why these sites feel the need to be everything to everyone -- it seems to me to be a recipe for failure. Plus I don't think I'd trust a search engine that was directly connected with profiting from promoting certain brands, products, etc. I haven't used anything but Google in a long time. I've even heard journalists and a (US) government official use the expression "Googling" in interviews/press releases on NPR on numerous occassions. Google is practically ubiquitous with searching now. If I was an shareholder I would be very wary of this.

Not to say that a better search engine won't eventually come along, but I don't see why anyone is going to switch when the incumbent site is about as good as most people will need.

Excuse me, I have to go Amazon... er... A9... for more information, now...

Nope, sorry. Doesn't work. ^^;

Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068142)

Maybe Google can put links to the end of the search results.

Rub the grub with a pub (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068148)

Well, I'm no longer fp, but I will say that Amazon taking on Google is much like MS taking on Google: plenty of blood yields plenty of bathing. Brand precedent is certainly a factor that I think Google will be strong enough to maintain. Amazon = books/music MS = bad software. Now, we all know that MS is going to pull an IE-homepage-set-to-MS-search-engine deal when their service comes out, something that Amazon won't be able to do. On the other hand, Amazon is much more in tune with consumerism on a larger, general scale. They probably know exactly what people want to know when searching for a product to buy. This'll give them an edge over Google if they concentrate solely on products. MS, well it would behoove them to start from scratch with their search algorithms. I use Google to navigate MSDN...that about sums it up. At the very least, these companies are going to pour a lot of money into these systems. How much blood letting they'll do before yielding Google-esque marketshare is anyone's guess.


Natural Biases (2, Interesting)

silverHat (708410) | about 11 years ago | (#7068160)

Maybe it's just me, but I'm pretty sure that I will not be able to count on Amazon to give me back non-biased results whenever I'll do a search. Being a -company- where profit is far more important than anything else, will they try to capitalize on it buy throwing in it's own products before someone else's?

It's probably legal, since it's Amazon's search engine, but if I'm looking for a new blender or whatever, I can bet a million to one the first couple ( if not more ) links will be geared toward

Reminds me of the MSN search engine.

I this why alexa exists? (1)

justMichael (606509) | about 11 years ago | (#7068162)

I guess it only make sense to build a decent front end to the alexa archive, they claim it's huge [] .

Amazon search (1)

Westech (710854) | about 11 years ago | (#7068169)

Will they be charging me state sales tax to search?

A9: Plan 9 from Amazon (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#7068171)

This will make a great scifi b-movie!

typosquatters set scrambling... (2, Insightful)

outsider007 (115534) | about 11 years ago | (#7068172)

as everyone tries to get -,

Re:typosquatters set scrambling... (0)

Delron Da Thugg (708237) | about 11 years ago | (#7068294)

I would think is already taken. Damn that's a good steak sauce.

Advertisers? (1)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | about 11 years ago | (#7068196)

So Amazon will sell advertising space on this search engine, that's the whole point of the search engine. But what concerns me is if they will have negative reviews/information regarding placement that advertisers have paid for.

I know if I was paying for ad space on A9 and found a scathing review showing up right under the link to my product, I would be very pissed at Amazon and want them to take it off, because, hey, I'm paying for it. There is none of this with google...well.....except the whole Scientology deal but thats different. How will we know when Amazon isn't just giving a paid placement for the product, but is also giving false info/concealing the truth about a product?

Wonder when.... (1)

Klev (684090) | about 11 years ago | (#7068225)

Wonder when Amazon will start shipping the book "Going against Google for Dummies"...

The new company's name is 69?!? (0)

Delron Da Thugg (708237) | about 11 years ago | (#7068244)

What the hell...oh, I thought the new company was going to be called 69. Sorry misread it.

Amazon/Alexa has a good spider/crawler.. (2, Interesting)

ron_ivi (607351) | about 11 years ago | (#7068261)

Alexa, the guys who are behind, one of the biggest internet archives [] , is an amazon company.

I've noticed more activity from their spider (useragent ia_archiver) than I have from google on my domains recently; so I tend to believe they have a more up-to-date and possibly larger index.

Patents (3, Funny)

rf0 (159958) | about 11 years ago | (#7068262)

Just wait for them to pantent one click searching..


Let me guess... (1)

vitaflo (20507) | about 11 years ago | (#7068278)

and they'll also try to patent 1-Click searching.

Re:Let me guess... (1)

bj8rn (583532) | about 11 years ago | (#7068335)

Prior art to [] ?!

Re:Let me guess... (1) (264791) | about 11 years ago | (#7068433)

Try prior art to Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" [] button.

Froogle? (3, Interesting)

Adam9 (93947) | about 11 years ago | (#7068317)

What about Froogle [] ?

Taken from this [] page:

Froogle is a new service from Google that makes it easy to find information about products for sale online. By focusing entirely on product search, Froogle applies the power of Google's search technology to a very specific task: locating stores that sell the item you want to find and pointing you directly to the place where you can make a purchase.

I've only tried it a few times awhile back, and it seems to work pretty well. Will this compete with A9?


_ph1ux_ (216706) | about 11 years ago | (#7068318)

Patent this idea! Fast!

not all cheesies and gum (3, Interesting)

poptones (653660) | about 11 years ago | (#7068323)

I admit google is my first pick as well, but don't dismiss ANY latecomers at this point. It's not just the spoofers and spammers who have weasled their way in - I've done many searches where the first several pages were basically useless ecommerce sites and even done searches where no useful information could be found there at all. Google is a great search engine, but it's nothing near the greatness it had as little as a year ago. Give it another year or two and someone is sure to come up with something better - even if it's google itself that is finally forced to do it.

This is futile (2, Insightful)

Ignorant Aardvark (632408) | about 11 years ago | (#7068347)

You can't overtake Google at this point. It's too late. Google has been the undisputed king of search for over two years now, and it's simply too "big" to be overtaken by Microsoft's or Amazon's attempts. The only thing that Google could possibly do to screw up their huge lead in marketshare is to do something incredibly stupid - much like what we need Microsoft to do before it loses the majority of the market (and, let's face it, DRM for Microsoft just might be the thing that kills it).

Will Google even need to adapt? (3, Insightful)

azpenguin (589022) | about 11 years ago | (#7068350)

Google is already a part of the nation's everyday vocabulary. We "google" things when we want to find them. Almost every time internet searching is alluded to in a news story, you'll see "use a search engine, such as" soon after.
No business is bulletproof, but Google right now is one of the strongest internet names. People like Google because there's only as much whiz-bang as you need, and it's as effective as internet searching as been for the last few years. The main page weighs in, IIRC, at under 13K of bandwidth. Far quicker and less obtrusive than MSN or Amazon. Even on a dial-up connection it's almost instantaneous. You don't get any pop-ups on Google, and for those poor souls unfortunate enough to still use IE, Google even offers a tool that will stop pop-ups. The tools that they offer are useful and unobtrusive. They don't take over or alter your sysem, such as pretty much anything from Microsoft. (And I doubt Google DRM Software is going to be among next year's offered downloads. Unlike Windows Media Player...)
And Google has street smarts that you can't get from any boardroom. For example, was a weekend project that a couple of employees threw together. And it got a lot of competitors' attention when they saw just how good a job they did. They're always adapting. I've seen many quotes from discussions long past show up again on message boards, and they're pulled from the Google Groups services.
While Google may not be a utopia, it's got what it needs to stand up to the MS and Amazon assault. A strong base, a smart and adaptable workforce, and great public recognition. The market is adapting to Google, not the other way around. Considering they don't like to sit on their past achievements too much, I think they'll hold up fine.

Your search found... 40 CDs? (2, Interesting)

nanodik (706517) | about 11 years ago | (#7068362)

The problem here is that when people search the net for "Britney Spears", they're not looking to buy her CDs - but that's will be what they get with Amahoo!!!

Hmmm.. (2, Interesting)

adeyadey (678765) | about 11 years ago | (#7068379)

I will wait and see. If you *have* to have a dominant search engine, Google is not such a bad one to have, the adverts (sponsered links) are intelligently placed, and not too intrusive. God, just think we could have Micro$oft as the #1 search engine.. Shudder..

So, I, for one, welcome Google, our current search-engine overlords..

View the upper right corner (1)

Solokron (198043) | about 11 years ago | (#7068425)

But of course if you view the upper right corner of the article page..."Enhanced by Google". Hah!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?