ASK ing Walt Mossberg why he stopped using Google search.


Henry Blodget poses some provocative search questions and gets a thoughtful answer from Walt Mossberg, who has switched from Google to Ask as his primary search tool.  

This is significant as I recall that it was people like Mossberg, with a huge audience, who reported early and favorably on Google, creating the favorable buzz that launched them from obscurity to search stardom in just a few years (also less well known people like me and the thousands of other web savvy folks who helped with the positive Buzz about Google back in the ancient internet times c1998).

I don't think internet habits die all that hard which is why I have Google puts AND admire Google's brilliance at the same time.  Online fortunes, literally and figuratively, can change overnight.  Note that over a decade we saw Alta Vista, then Yahoo, and now Google as the 800 pound gorilla of search.  The new game has Yahoo and Google equal in actual relevance (though not in perceived relevance) with Ask and MSN catching up soon.  

All use different approaches and eventually there will probably be a "breakout application" that will do a much better job.  As Jeremy Zawodny has noted people won't switch because you are a "little better". The next search giant may need to be "great".  It might remain Google but it could also become, for example, IBM who arguably has the best but too-slow-for-prime-time search routine called "WebFountain".

The Best of 25 Tech Voices” vs “The Best 25 Tech Voices”


Read that title again because there is a HUGE difference that's getting lost online.

I hate to bash the neat new tech feed feature of John Battelle's Federated Media because I think John is one of the most sincere fellows out there and really wants to bring quality AND commercial viability to the blogosphere. I'm for both those things.

Also, I like the collection which appears "good". But this is not the *best* collection of posts because it only reflects those in the Federated stable – a very, very small fraction of intelligent commentary.

I'd be a hypocrite to blame Battelle for compromising online quality in favor of business. HOWEVER when does this cross the line? If Battelle had restricted all quoted people in his excellent book "The Search" to those with whom he did business it would not even have made it out of the publisher's office and even John would agree he'd be horrible to show such bias in a printed book.

Yet online we've all started to expect the worst commercialism and then be relieved – or even inspired – if a company simply pushes out quality and announces that it favors people with whom it has a commercial connection.

One's attention only spans a tiny fraction of total content. As Federated, TechCrunch, and all of us choose to read and post more about our internet home boys than those with whom we have no association then how narrow and commercial is this all going to get?

Isn't blogging supposed to destabilize rather than enforce this narrowing focus of our limited attention?

Searching for Myspace with John Battelle


John Battelle is the web's best "search watcher" and he's posted a great summary of recent events in search HERE at Searchblog.

I would note though that he does not address the significance and growth velocity of the Myspace phenomenon, which I'd suggest is the best, and crappiest, website in history.

Myspace proves that much of the Web 2.0 dialog is misguided, still emphasizing technology improvements over human considerations which lie at the heart of the "new" web and at the heart of the ugly but overwhelmingly successful Myspace.

In many ways I'm a big fan of Myspace as I think it's passes many of the tests that other sites fail – easy to join, navigate, and participate. It passed the critical mass of users long ago and continues to grow wildly – now with 66 million online. Myspace is a prime study in "mass appeal". It's ugly because people, on average, aren't very artistic or clever or well-organized. This aspect of the human condition leads to the web's largest collection of junky pages, and to the web's largest community of super active users.

My personal jury is still out on the "evil" side of myspace with the potential for stalking and young people mingling with unsavory or dangerous kids and adults. The user base is now so huge one must be very cautious in the interpretation of recent criminal activity at the site. Whenever you have a collection of 66 million people you'll get crime.

That said, Myspace probably has a greater community responsibility than it currently acknowledges or deals with proactively – this is certainly the case with the web at large where most onliners maintain that companies have few responsibilities outside of policing outrageous abuses of their services.

For the good of the entire online and offline community this must change, and it will change.

Newsweek: Web 2.0 = The Live Web


I enjoyed Newsweek's article about Web 2.0, which they preferred to call "The Live Web". It was fun to see several of the companies and people I've encountered recently mentioned in the article. Mary Hodder from MashupCamp was pictured and quoted as was Tim O'Reilly who I just met at Mix06.

They gave Tim far too short an interview. He is unsurpassed in his understanding of the new web but I'm guessing he was a bit too old (he's about 50?) to meet Newsweek's editorial slant on the story which was young, hip, and cool. (Whoops – they didn't mention how casual – sometimes downright disheveled – most of the new technorati tend to be.)

Newsweek's Cover girl Caterina Fake was supposed to be at Mashup Camp but missed it. I'd hoped to meet her and her husband who pioneered Flickr and then sold it to Yahoo. Caterina's blog is one of the most insightful personal views about 2.0 along with those of her amazing Yahoo tech dev co-workers Jeremy Zawodny and Danah Boyd.

Although I'm always VERY impressed with folks from Google, it's Yahoo that really seems to be aquiring the companies and minds that lie at the heart of the new Web's "social" vs "technological" emphasis.

Yahoo seems to have a better handle than Google (who in turn beats Microsoft) in understanding the implications of the vast social networking that is forming a new internet backbone. A backbone characterized by people far more than by technology. That said, I'm not sure anybody "gets Web 2.0", because it's changing fast, dramatically, and in unstable ways.

What a fun new world!

April TWO


I'm a big fan of setting the clocks BACK in the fall, but I hate this spring forward stuff.  It's robbing us of sleep which is a precious commodity, not to be toyed with in this direction.    Why not just ALWAYS set the clocks back an hour, each night, forever?   Studies show we need a lot more sleep and this would be a way to get it!   

Scobleizer vs Mini-Microsoft


Robert's April Fooling as well. You can never be sure with the new pace of business, but I think the guy who set up the prestigious few who had lunch with Bill Gates last week at MIX06 probably won't be jumping ship anytime soon. I'd be posting a pic here with me and Microsoft's king of Web 2.0, taken at the Myspace party in Las Vegas last week, but it didn't come out well.

Robert's Naked Conversations is intriguing at many levels, one of which has created a stir over at Amazon where the authors were received somewhat .. discourteously.

But Naked Converstation's intriguing points don't make them "right" about blogging. I'd suggest that Israel and Scoble overrate the positive aspects of corporate blogging and fail to note, for example, the significant harm done by bloggers like mini-microsoft , a mystery Microsoft employee with a blog that has become a very prominent whipping post for anti-Microsoft dialog.

I'd suggest blogs are more a reflection of what's up rather than a shaper of what is to come.

Naked Conversations with Robert, Jeremy and Matt


Robert Scoble and Shel Israel's book Naked Conversations probably should have kept it's working title "Blog or Die", but it's an excellent read nonetheless.   The point they hammer home with many good examples is that corporations better jump on the blogging bandwagon or suffer the consequences of missing what many would say may become the biggest communication bandwagon of all time.

As if to emphasize the power of blogs and the freewheeling nature of the new corporation two of my favorite online guys – Matt Cutts of Google and Jeremy Zawodny or Yahoo have traded blogs as what has got to be the top April Fools online event so far today.

Given that these two represent two of the top public faces of their respective companies, it's obvious that the NEW corporate landscape – blogging and otherwise – ain't nothing like the old one.  

I like that.

Yahoo! It’s .community!


Jeremy is always asking the right questions.  He notes in his blog today:

Yahoo Groups can serve as the collaborative (not just communications) platform for bringing people together in interesting ways…

Yes it can, though it needs to take some lessons from Myspace, which I'd argue is by far the world's BEST crappy-looking website and BEST example of a site that understands the simple and often unexpected needs and desires of a .com community.   The remarkable rise of Myspace should demonstrate that people are FAR more important than the application.  Also that MOST people will express themselves in what most savvy web folks would consider to be very unprofessional, sloppy, offensive, obnoxious, rule breaking and bandwidth breaking ways.  

Yahoo wouldn't have to have such a messy environment to succeed, I'd think all they'd need is better integration with the inspired but largely unused Yahoo 360, easier signups, and perhaps most importantly ways for people to import data into their profiles at other services to avoid the tedious chores of uploading pix and rewriting bios.

Yahoo – "If you build it, they will come … if they can get in very easily"

 

Taking Stock of Yahoo


What do you get when you mashup Yahoo’s uber blogmeister with EX uber stockmeister Henry Blodget? A very interesting dialog about what’s up — or what’s NOT up — at Yahoo. The only thing for sure is that in stock terms YHOO is no GOOG, and this is THE key issue for many.

This follow up summarizes that mini-debate. I’m more interested in whether I should be buying YHOO or buying more puts on Google.

Jeremy’s bold stab was probably taken too far out of the intended context, though I think it will generate a good debate about a broader topic — that Yahoo and Google are similar in many broad respects but not even in the same ballpark in total company valuation. 109 billion vs 45 billion. Why is this?

* Search quality roughly equivalent according to objective measures.

* Traffic similar (though not search traffic in which Y lags significantly). I think search will begin to move vertically soon and people will use a different engine for different tasks. A9 recognizes this already. This could shake out in many destabilizing ways.

* Yahoo considered clear leader in Web 2.0 awareness

* MOST IMPORTANTLY, YPN is still in beta and will likely soon take a chunk of Google’s online publisher revenue stream (about 40% of G total revenues) as will MSN’s new publisher programs.

* I do think corporate leadership is VERY different at Google, and probably helps facilitate and motivate people in ways that are well tuned to the fast and flexible needs of the online biz world. I’ve heard that Googlers will be working in the wee hours on a project only to have Sergey Brin walk up behind them to ask them to explain the code they are working on. This level of interaction has got to be a VERY powerful incentive and motivating force.

At MIX06 I spoked with two ex-Microsoft people who noted slow change there frustrated them and inhibited the flexibility needed to compete in the new web environments.

But Yahoo is no Microsoft, and to my knowledge Yahoo was the company that brought the new informal but intense corporate culture to Silicon Valley in the first place. If this style has caused problems for Yahoo it’ll likely cause similar problems for Google in a few years. If not, then why is Yahoo stock languishing despite good fundamentals and huge revenue potential from online ads?

Wait … No free lunches at Yahoo Cafeteria? THAT must be the problem!