adamyntium

Category: search engines

  • Click-to-call is the next big thing in Web advertising… but with a twist

    I just read on Darren’s Problogger.net site (via Threadwatch) that Google is testing out a pay-per-call feature in its AdWords program.

    The way it works (so far in testing) is that Google places a little phone icon next to specific trial text ads where text AdWords ads are normally placed on the righthand side of Google search results pages.

    When someone clicks on the phone icon, they get a call from Google and Google then connects them to the advertiser free of charge… of course, charging the advertiser an amount up to their max pay-per-call bid price.

    IMHO, though, this is one layer away from being humungously useful to advertisers. As it’s currently implemented, I think a lot of folks (like me!) would be apt to read the small text ad, click through to the site, and then decide whether to call the company from *there* or not.

    And by that point, there’s no easy way for the advertiser to know that I came via AdWords… which means that it’s basically flying under the ROI radar. This may not seem like a horrible problem, but let me tell you… for some advertisers (like one of my clients, who spends over $150,000 a month on AdWords alone!), it’s quite painful to wonder whether that cost-per-lead is unduly inflated because lots of customers are calling in their high-ticket orders rather than placing them on the company’s Web site directly. With the latter, this client can see the conversions via Google’s conversion tracker. With the former, the best the client can do is ask the purchaser “Where did you hear about us?” and 9 times out of 10, the person will say “Um, somewhere on the net” or maybe even “Google” but they’ll hardly know whether they spotted this firm via a natural or AdWords listing!

    * * *

    So here’s my idea: One of these companies… Google, Yahoo!, or Microsoft (with its Ad Center, not yet released in the U.S.) should implement a special javascript code that displays — on the advertiser’s site! — a tailored-per-client toll-free number when the referrer is a ad-click from Google, Y! or Microsoft. If the visitor isn’t from one of their respective PPC programs, then the javascript code would default to simply showing the company’s own default toll-free number.

    And one of the coolest things about this is that it’d be VERY hard to game or click-fraud. If the engine set, for instance, a minimum call length before charging (say, 15 seconds), you’re not going to get random “calling farms” in India making 16 second calls, IMHO :-).

    Of course, really cheap-ass companies participating in the program could say “Oh, hi! Let me quickly get your number and call you back…” but — especially when high-ticket items or subscriptions are at stake — I don’t think such behavior is likely. The annoyance of that would likely offset too much potential revenue from customers.

    * * *

    From at a technical perspective, I think this would be pretty easy to do. I understand that there might be some referrer-acknowledgement issues (e.g., people surfing in high-paranoid mode with referrer stuff turned off), but on the whole, I can imagine that advertisers would be willing to pay a premium for a visit + call… and consumers would be well-served, too.

    What are your thoughts on this? Am I missing a key problem here?

  • Helpful numbers to save in your phone!

    I invite you to go grab your cell phone / mobile phone / home phone whatever and program the following numbers into it:

    – 1-800-555-8355 (“555 TELL” — TellMe)
    – 1-800-373-3411 (“FREE 411” — Free411)
    – 1-888-392-7563 (“EZ ASK ME” — AskMeNow – Initial signup on site required)
    – 46645 (“GOOGL” – Google SMS beta – Google via Text Messaging)

    NOTE: One or more of these numbers may be U.S.-only… sorry 😐

    For details on each service, read on…

    TELLME
    I’ve been using this service for ages, and it’s really gotten me out of some tight jams!

    Via interactive voice menus, callers can easily get weather reports, serious and entertainment news, movie info, and much more. But the butt-saving features I’ve particularly appreciated are TAXI and DRIVING DIRECTIONS. The former will connect you (free of charge) with a local cab company, and the latter gives you step-by-step spoken driving directions between any two points in the U.S. (powered by “Microsoft MapPoint Technologies”)

    Supposedly, TellMe is ad-supported, but I have yet to hear any ads on the service.

    * * *

    FREE 411
    Tired of paying $1.25 and up to your greedy mobile or landline phone company for directory assistance? Then you’ll especially love Free 411! Not only does it find residential and business phone numbers for you, it also connects you free-of-charge (even to long distance numbers!) This service is apparently ad-supported (e.g., ask for Dominos Pizza, get a 15 second ad for a competing pizza place), but I’ve never heard any ads during the 3-4 times I’ve used this service.

    Voice recognition is pretty decent, but the one time I stumped it, I was transferred to a human operator who was able to promptly get me the number I requested.

    Frankly, though, I do wonder how sustainable this is. Will enough companies really pay to have folks redirected to them? If people are asking for Smith Window Washing services, will they really be so easily swayed towards a competitor? I have my doubts. But in the meantime, I’m happy to use this very convenient free 411 service!

    * * *

    ASK ME NOW

    Need to know the capital of Wisconsin? Or find the phone number of a particular Citibank branch? Sure, if you’re near an Internet-connected computer, you could probably quickly and easily find this info yourself. But what if you’re busy or not near a computer? Yes, I have a Web browser on my Treo phone, but it’s slow, the screen is small, and it’s generally just a miserable experience trying to navigate Web sites with it.

    Well, Ask Me Now is indeed a viable alternative. You call their number, leave a message, and 1-3 minutes later, you get back text messages with the right answer. Or at least AN answer. In my minimal testing, Ask Me Now gave me the right answer to “What is the Capital of Wisconsin?” but gave me the wrong answer to “What is the phone number of the Citibank branch located on Diamond Street in San Francisco?” The person (apparently located in the Philippines) who answered my query clearly just quickly googled for the answer and didn’t bother checking on Citibank’s Web site, since the correct answer is available in the latter, not the former.

    This service costs 49 cents per query, billed to your cell phone account. Supposedly you can get free ‘automated’ answers, but it’s not clear to me what qualifies as free and not-free, even after looking on the company’s Web site.

    * * *

    GOOGLE SMS
    Another option is Google’s SMS service. Text message GOOGL (46645) to get driving directions, movie showtimes, weather reports, price comparisons, and more.

    I’ve found this service to be both wonderous and frustrating. For instance, when I asked it [What is the capitol [sic] of wisconsin?] it replied back “Did you mean CAPITAL…” and gave me an appropriate Web page… when I would have preferred for it to actually include the answer, not just a link, in the reply. Additionally, when I asked it [Phone number for Citibank on Diamond St in San Francisco CA] it replied unhelpfully: “Looking for map of [query]? Unfortunately map information is not available through Google SMS.”

    I had better luck with other queries, such as [weather 91360] and [what is the population of belgium].

    * * *

    YAHOO SMS
    Despite multiple attempts, I could not get this service to work. I kept getting an “Invalid…” message, with instructions relating to Y! Messenger, after even using the exact queries listed on this page. Bummer. Any Yahoo people out there wanna help me figure out what’s going on here? I’ve heard good things about Yahoo’s mobile offerings and perhaps there’s just something small / obvious I’m missing?

  • Yahoo! and Google Maps… add more common sense, please

    I don’t know about you, but the vast majority of searches I do on Google Maps and the splendiforous new Y! Maps (beta) are for directions from my apartment in San Francisco to somewhere else in the city. Here’s the sort of search I’d type in by default:

    [{my address} to 16th and valencia]

    But both Google and Yahoo! choke on this search, and choke bad. Yahoo! gives me an error message saying the address could not be found, and then nonetheless gives me directions to Valencia, Arizona. Google performs no better here; it asks me “Did you mean Valencia Road, Bromsgrove, Hereford and Worcester, B60, UK?” Suuuuuure, Google, I’m going to get in my car and drive from San Francisco to the UK. 😉

    Where’s a Common Sense module when you need one?

    For starters, how about assuming that if I don’t add on a city, state or zip code, that I’m intending to travel within my home city. On G, one can already define a default starting point. And I’d assume that, when logged in to one’s Y! account, Yahoo already knows one’s home city, too. Not to mention IP sniffing possibilities, too!

    Or even better yet, if it’s not too computationally resource intense, it’d be great if the engines could assume a 100 mile radius and prioritize by proximity. That means if I type in 123 Mission St and I’m in San Francisco, I probably mean to indicate that street in SF or nearby, not somewhere in Minnesota. Since most of us don’t have zip codes handy when we’re doing directions, it’s a lot faster and easier to type [555 myhomestreet 94112 to 123 mission st] than [555 myhomestreet 94112 to 123 mission st, san francisco, ca].

    Lastly, I understand that sometimes requests ARE ambiguous (maybe I meant mission street in a nearby city, not SF, despite failing to specify it)… so the services should always preface the results on such ambiguous requests with something like this:\

    NOTE: We assumed you’re traveling to 123 mission street in San Francisco, CA. If this isn’t right, please retype your request and specify the city and state.

    And heck, for that matter, why can’t I type [1531 19th ave to 99 valencia st] and have it assume I mean San Francisco (based upon my signin, my past searches, my IP address, whatever)?

    Am I on target here, or would such assumption-makings on the part of the engines be more trouble than they’re worth?

  • $1 will cure the Blogspot splog problem (and related problems)

    THE PROBLEM
    As Chris Pirillo and others have noted, doing a search on practically anything nowadays returns a deluge of spam blogs, or “splogs,” that are comprised of a bunch of randomly scraped-together sentences automatically stolen from around the Web. Typically, the sploggers create these blogspot blogs just so they can slap AdSense ads on them and earn cash from unwitting surfers who land there, see that all the content is crap, and then get away by clicking on one of the ads on the page.

    Sounds stupid? It is. But sadly it’s actually lucrative for the sploggers. And Google’s caught in the middle because — while, yes, they’re earning money as well out of the deal — their search index is becoming less and less useful… and that can undoubtedly hurt the company’s long-term viability. Say what you will about Google, but they are nothing if not forward thinking… so this is a problem that they are certainly seriously tackling in the background.

    THE SOLUTION
    But I have an idea that’d solve the issue faster. It’s not entirely ‘democratic.’ It also risks some ‘friendly fire’. And initially, it’ll be a major pain in the ass for Google and a minor pain in the ass for anyone wanting to set up a blog. But hear me out… 🙂

    Google should require a $1 credit card, ACH bank payment, or paper check payment from any blogger who wants his or her blog to be indexed.

    But note that…
    – Anyone could still create a blog for free.
    If you wanted to have a blog to communicate with your friends or family or workgroup or whatever, no sweat. You’d just give ’em the URL, let them subscribe to your RSS feed, etc., no payment required.

    – Google would create a special subdomain for the paid blogs.
    blogspotgold.com or whatnot… so that other search engines could easily filter out anything in the blogspot domain.

    – Google would allow any current blogspot user to ‘upgrade’ for $1 and would automatically redirect their URL permanently.

    WHY THIS’D WORK
    – It would likely no longer be economically feasible for spammers to create 10,000 disposable splogs.
    – Even if the economics worked out, Google could limit the number of blogs created per credit card number or bank account.
    – Google’s creating its own payment processing solution anyway, so they’ll soon have the payments part covered.

    WHAT WILL HAMPER THIS SOLUTION
    – Sploggers could use stolen credit cards, though I think it’d be difficult to do this in bulk.
    – But most critically, there’s the frustrating issue that even a $1 payment could end up publicly silencing voices that should be heard.

    MORE ABOUT THE SILENCING-VOICES PROBLEM
    While I’m all for accountability and taking personal responsibility for one’s communications, I also recognize that there are instances in which folks desire — and often should be accorded — anonymity.

    For instance, what about Chinese dissidents who may want to blog about their feelings and experiences or even blog about upcoming protests? Is it inconceivable that the Chinese government could pressure Google into handing over identity information gleaned from a dissident’s $1 blogspot payment? Even if Google takes pains to sincerely insist that it will *NEVER* do such a thing, will everyone trust this promise? And what about whistleblowers?

    Or what about those people — particularly in non-industrialized countries — who may not have a bank account or credit card but still want to blog?

    A POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO THE SILENCED-VOICES PROBLEM
    Perhaps, instead of denying indexing to all non-paid blogs, Google could simply — upon request — pre-screen all such blogs for indexing consideration. For instance, something like the following:
    1) Person sets up free blog and blogs a minimum number of substantive (non-sploggy) posts over a minimum period of time.
    2) They then submit this blog for indexing consideration to Google.
    3) If Google determines it to be non-sploggy, they then elevate it to blogspotgold, and provide a free redirect from the old URL.

    Admittedly, though, sploggers could retaliate in this context by submitting bazillions of obvious-crap blogs just to clog up the reviewing queue. However, if it were impossible to submit a blog for consideration until it had been around, say, 3 months or 6 months… that would make it harder to do a mass-submit “DOS” [denial of service style] attack. Spammers are not patient people.

    * * *

    So I’m curious… what do you think about all of this?
    1) Would a $1 payment really prevent most or even all splog from getting into the indexes of Google, Y!, and all other major players?
    2) Would there be bad ‘collateral damage’… or could this be reasonably minimized by the ideas I’ve specified or through other means?
    3) Know of any anti-splog options that are better than my $1 idea? (hint: capchas alone aren’t the answer)

    * * *

    UPDATE at 9:00PM PST, 10/16/2005:
    People have pointed out to me that children and young teens typically don’t have credit cards or even bank accounts, and that it seems unfair to single them out for a waiting period. So here are some other ideas (with the first two stolen from current Gmail policies :D)

    – Get a blogspotgold account via text message.
    True, this requires a phone… or a friend’s phone.

    – Get a blogspotgold account via invite from current member.
    Allow each current member to hand out up to 10 tokens a month, and if more than 2 of them are used to create splogs, then don’t give that member any more tokens for a year.

    – Distribute blogspotgold tokens via schools (administrators, teachers, whatever)

    * * *

    UPDATE, 10/18/2005 at 1:45AM PST:
    Ah, Google responds to the outcry! I had no doubt that they’d be taking all of this seriously (I know that the Blogger folks are sincerely passionate about blogging!), but it’s nice to see their public acknowledgment of the problem nonetheless.

    Also, the prolific geek, Chris Pirillo (of Lockergnome fame) has proposed his own top ten list of Blogspot anti-splog solutions.

  • Bloglines, Newzcrawler… and the new Google Reader

    A few weeks ago, I already started transitioning all of my feeds off of Bloglines. Why?
    – It’s slow.
    – It’s down too often.
    – Reorganizing feeds (moving them to different folders, etc.) is worse than being stuck in a closet with Vanna White. Night after night after night after night.
    – It’s similarly painful to mark just a few articles in a feed as read or unread.

    I’ve moved over to Newzcrawler, a stellar newsreader app for Windows. Beyond just tons of cool power features, it also lets me pretty easily sync my feeds between my desktop and laptop using an external FTP site (okay, geeky, I know).

    * * *

    With that said, I’ve still been hoping to see some vast improvements in the online-reader front. Rojo seems to be getting better. And I’ve heard rumblings over other cool services as well. When I learned today that Google had entered this space, I was extremely excited. Please, I thought, give us another Gmail. Or Maps! 😀 If not for me, at least for my less-geeky friends whom I’m dying to get into feed reading.

    So far, alas, I’m rather disappointed in the Google Reader. I know it’ll get better, but for now, Googlers…

    1) It’s too cluttered and overwhelming.
    Hide some stuff. I know that sounds counterintuitive, but blog text blends into all the other text and I find it just tiring to spend more than a few minutes in Reader.

    2) No mouseovers?!

    3) Ambiguities
    Is “Read items” a description or an action? Okay, admittedly this is rather a nitpick, but it is a top-line link ;-).

    4) Search what?!
    When I see a search box at the top of the page, I expect to be able to search the content-in-context. In other words, if I’m in my Gmail account, I expect to search my mail. If I’m in Reader, I expect to search for a string in my read and/or unread feed items. From an expected user-action standpoint, what’s likely to be more common: adding new feeds, or working with the feeds one already has?

    5) Save me from overload!
    There’s no way to mark an entire feed as read. Or group of feeds.

    6) Why the weird quasi-breadcrumbs in center focus?!
    Why do I want to see “New Subscription” “New Subscription” article article article… Just show me new articles. If I want to see what I’m subscribed to, I’ll go to the Your Subscriptions tab! 🙂

    * * *

    Other quick suggestions/observations:
    – Add a space in “Subscriptions(#)” to make it “Subscriptions (#)”
    – Include a shortcut key to go to the pulldown menus. Actually, quit using HTML-style pulldown menus as action-triggers. It’s not good UI, IMHO, and it’s confusing when more than one says “More actions…” (plus with more than one on a page, that sort of makes it hard to use a keyboard shortcut)
    – Allow for the multi-selection (and from there, tagging) of feeds.
    – Include a feedback link directly on the Reader page.
    – Enable us to see ALL articles from a given feed in one fell swoop (ala Bloglines)
    – Let us easily sort, reposition, edit, and delete labels and sets of labels.
    – BUG: I unsubscribed from a feed, it’s outta my list, but I’m still seeing items for it.
    – Gimme feed icons, please! When I have 200+ feeds, it’s how I can most easily spot some of my favs 🙂
    – Dim links if they’re not applicable (e.g., dim the Page Up link if I’m already at the top)
    – I tagged an entry. How do I search for it by tag now? (I only see how I can filter feed tags)

    * * *

    Okay, let me be a LITTLE less of a jerk here and note what I *DO* like about Reader:
    – Keyboard shortcuts! 🙂
    – Ease of adding new feeds (by keyword, by title, by URL… very flexible!)
    – Nice how the filter narrows as I type! (but it’d be even nicer if ESC cleared it)
    – Pretty fast (excepting the short time earlier today when it was first released)

    * * *

    Anyway, I’ll keep my fingers crossed that Google rapidly works on this beta, giving it top resources… rotating in seasoned PMs / APMs, providing needed equipment for scalability and so on. For now, though, I’ll happily stick with Newzcrawler, and — admittedly grudgingly — suggest that my newbie friends start off with Bloglines for now.

  • Google Desktop Search — A review via an EXCLUSIVE interview!

    I was able to score an exclusive interview with Adam Lasnik, supreme geek, Google connoisseur, and Google Desktop Search expert, and I’m very pleased to offer the full transcript below.

    Adam, thanks for coming today. To start, why don’t you give us a quick overview of what Google Desktop Search (“GDS”) does?

    It’s delightful to be here!

    Well, GDS enables any personal and business user to search their computer’s hard drive much as they would search Google… typing in a search term using Google’s general search syntax and getting a results page in under one second.

    Specifically, GDS searches both the filenames and contents of the following: Outlook and Outlook Express e-mail, AOL instant messages, Internet Explorer (Web page history), text files, and also files from Microsoft Word, Excel, and Powerpoint.

    Do note that GDS only works on Windows XP and 2000 at this time.

    So is this all pretty easy to use, or is it a tool just for geeks?

    Perhaps unsurprisingly, GDS is quite user-friendly from end-to-end. It installs very quickly (it’s 400K) and it politely uninstalls just as easily. And actually using the tool is a snap: When you click on the GDS icon in your system tray, a browser window opens; you simply type in a search query, and BOOM, Google lists results are shown, formatted very similarly to regular Google searches.

    Whoa… regular Google searches… does this mean other people can search my hard drive? Or can Google see what I’m searching for or what’s on my hard drive? I better start removing those porn…er, confidential business plan documents!

    No, no… unlike with Google Web Search, the index of your files remains on your computer. While you have the OPTION to let Google learn about your search stats (not terms!), Google doesn’t peek into your hard drive contents or examine what you’re personal searching for. So if you’re looking for a big ass barbeque to grill a fluffy bunny, you don’t have to worry about Google notifying the ASPCA (I
    hear rabbit meat is tasty, though… but I digress). In a nutshell, Google’s GDS privacy policy should make you feel better.

    Okay, so GDS is easy to use and it’s not going to get me in trouble. So far so good. How about a few more techie details?

    You got it! First, let me say that — while GDS isn’t a power tool yet — it performs well on machines of power users like myself.

    I have a decent rig (2.4 ghz Pentium with 512 megs of RAM), but it’s loaded down with other file indexing programs, numerous Outlook plugins, more than a dozen apps in the systray, two routers (one wireless, one phone adaptor), a firewall (XP SP2-based), a virus checker (AVG), and many general programs running concurrently (Trillian, Dreamweaver, Outlook, and so on… and GDS has worked flawlessly. No install problems, and no noticeable slowdown of the system during indexing. Furthermore, searching with GDS is LIGHTNING FAST… both on my rig, and on the machine of a less-geeky friend of mine who’s sadly cursed an older machine. The downside of that, understandably, is that GDS is pretty conservative. It initially indexes quite slowly in the background (you’ll need to leave this puppy on overnight to get a full index!), and overall the product doesn’t try to do too many things for too many people.

    Hmm… well, tell us a bit more about the limitations of GDS, then

    GDS provides ease-of-use at the expense of power-tool complexity. Whether in the interest of not overwhelming non-geeks or simply due to the fact that this is still a version 1 (0.9?) beta release, Google has chosen not to offer much functionality customization or ANY UI customization.

    In some cases, this is a mere minor annoyance. We can’t opt to have the system go into a turbo mode (using more processor cycles) to get everything indexed quickly.

    There’s no way that I can see to have the system wholly refresh the index without doing an uninstall and reinstall.

    Some holes are a bit more frustrating. GDS doesn’t monitor e-mails and files after it indexes them, which can result in an inability to pull up items, or a duplication of listings in search results. Additionally, while you can tell GDS not to index certain sites or folders, you can’t block it from indexing specific Outlook folders. Luckily, it does ignore (perceived) spam folders by default.

    From a UI perspective, GDS is generally streamlined and will please folks who are looking for an experience that matches what they’re used to with general Google search results. Power users, though, may be a bit disappointed.

    The key issue is that GDS doesn’t yet offer search results in a contextual way. For instance, when you’re searching for an image on your hard drive, you probably want to see image thumbnails. When you’re searching for a particular e-mail, you likely want an easy-to-scan list of mail-related headers. However, GDS treats all search results alike, except for a little icon next to each search listing. In a way, this is understandable. In order to offer more strongly contextual search results, GDS would have to do one of the following:

    1) Show only one type of results per screen, which would require extra navigational clicks.
    2) Divide up results by column (e.g., e-mail results on the left, image results on the right), which could be problematic when there are more than 2 file types returned or when someone’s browser window space is limited.
    3) Limit search queries to one file type at a time.

    As you can see, none of these options are particularly desireable. Furthermore, many folks might find it disconcerting to see a shifting UI with search results.

    Therefore, it’s not surprising that Google has decided to go with a more generic but consistent results UI at this point.

    So GDS is sounding like a useful and effective, if not revolutionary product. How does it compare to existing desktop search solutions?

    It’s easier to install, it behaves more nicely, and it returns results faster than any other desktop search program I’ve seen.

    And speaking of other solutions, here’s a list of other desktop search programs I know about, with an asterisk by those I’ve tried:

    – X1*

    Seemingly one of the most popular desktop search tools, X1 distinguishes itself in several ways: it displays search results as you type each letter, it shows previews of documents, it offers special fields for different searches, and it supports a ton of different file formats. Downside? It’s pricey, it can be a resource hog. [See license giveaway; still some left as of 10/15/04 2:46pm PST]

    – LookOut*

    Recently bought out by Microsoft, this program integrates into Outlook, but searches many different types of files. It’s more flexible and powerful than GDS, but it’s not as fast… and it’s not useful for those who don’t have Outlook.

    – Enfish*

    Big, pricey, and highly customizeable, with an especially useful saved-searches feature and decent integration with ones Outlook data overall.

    – Copernic
    – dtSearch
    – 80/20
    – Superior Search
    – Wilbur

    Wow, that’s a lot of competition for Google. So what makes GDS so special and important, then?

    Several things:

    1) Speed, stability, and ease of use.
    2) The trusted and liked Google brand.
    3) Integration with Google Web searches (you can configure the program to show desktop search results when you do a general Web search)
    4) Potential later integration with existing popular Google tools (toolbar, Gmail, etc.)
    5) Perhaps somewhat controversial… but there’s also the possibility that Google could — at the user’s option — use desktop search fingerprinting to steer or filter that individual’s Web results.

    Okay, I can see why GDS may be particularly noteworthy for consumers, but what does it mean for Google?

    It will enable Google to take over the world, though not all at once.

    But seriously, folks… I think GDS suggests several significant ramifications for Google (and yes, its shareholders):

    1) This may increase the frequency and quantity of Google Web (or integrated Web + GDS) searches, thus augmenting ad revenues.

    2) As many others have noted, it’s a clear strike-ahead at Microsoft, who is building desktop search capabilities into their future operating system. Why does this matter from a revenue standpoint? GDS will help insure that more people remain loyal to Google (and its advertisers), instead of defecting towards the possibly-OS-default MSN search feature.

    3) Each foray into Windows tools allows Google to build up an aggregate competency in this area, strengthening not only each individual tool, but the broad set of desktop-based tools overall (Picasa, Deskbar, etc.).

    Well, I’m pretty sold on Google Desktop Search at this point, I must admit. But how do I know if it’s right for me?

    I’d suggest that you simply give the tool a try. But if you’re really gung-ho about this space and have some extra time, you may want to give the other desktop search program a look-see as well. It’s notable that all of them are either free or offer free trials, so you have little to lose. Just remember to fully un-install any desktop search programs you decide not to use to insure that their likely-sizable indexes aren’t continuing to clutter up your hard drive.

    And in the meantime, here’s my humble list of what to look for in a desktop search tool:

    1) Ease of install (and, indeed, uninstall!)
    2) Comprehensiveness of indexing (how many different file types does it support?)
    3) Speed of indexing (initial and ongoing)
    4) Load on computer (during initial indexing, ongoing indexing, searching)
    5) Speed of searching (how long does it take for it to deliver search results?)
    6) Power of searching (Boolean expression support? Ability to search particular fields?…)
    7) Usefulness of search results (relevance, completeness, formatting)
    8) Cost of program
    9) Support from company (FAQs, e-mail support. etc.)
    10) And I almost forgot the most important thing — does it work on your system (platform, necessary specs, etc.)

    Adam, thanks so much for all of this information and for taking the time to stop by here today

    Absolutely a pleasure. It’s always been my dream to appear on BLADAM, and I thank you for the opportunity to address your wonderful, smart, and attractive readers who will no doubt eagerly link to this page and share it with all their friends. But tell me one thing: Why has it been more than four months since you posted anything in this blog?

    Ahem… um… well, I was in the process of changing blog software, but never got around to actually finishing the transition, plus I started two new jobs recently and…

    Ah, no worries! Just glad to see BLADAM back up, even temporarily.

    :blushing: It’s nice to be back.

    —

    Relevant and cool links:
    – A Net Takeway examination of the desktop search space
    – Excellent overview of GDS from SearchEngineWatch
    – SearchEngineWatch – Privacy and Google Desktop Search
    – John Battelle’s take on GDS

    —

    Edits: (Times are Pacific Standard Time)
    – 10/14/04, 21:45: Actually linked to the product. What a revolutionary idea, eh? [smacks head]
    – 10/15/04, 14:46: Added x1 license giveaway link (not likely to be applicable for long!)

    —

    [P.S. — Please feel free to leave a comment with any corrections, or suggest any additional aspects of GDS to cover. Thanks!]

  • Got a Gmail account? Here are a few interesting tricks ‘n’ tidbits

    [In case you didn’t already notice, I wrote a pretty detailed review of Gmail earlier, in which I also noted that I’m unfortunately unable to procure accounts for folks. Sorry! For those who already have accounts, I hope the tips below are useful and/or fun 🙂 – Adam]

    So, you’re one of the Gmail testers and you want more bang for the buck, eh? Try these tips on for size:

    SENDING & SHORTCUTS
    – Send mail to fellow Gmail’er by just entering their username in the TO, CC, or BCC spot. No need to include @gmail.com 🙂

    – Did you reserve .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) and now wish you had left out the darn period? It’s not too late! For whatever reason, Gmail treats that e-mail address the same as one without a period (and visa versa), so .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) works just as well as .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). As you may have guessed, Gmail is flexible with regards to capitalizations, too!

    – Using the handy-dandy spell-checker and want to quickly Resume Checking without using the mouse? Just hit ‘R’, an undocumented shortcut key in this context.

    SEARCHING
    – “or” is not the same as “OR.” Only the capitalized version (sans quotes, by the way) will work with searches. So if you want to find mail from your friend Jen, you can use this in search: FROM: (jen OR jenny OR jennifer). Note, by the way, that the actual search terms are not case-sensitive. “jen” works just as good as “Jen.”

    – But, using the same Jen example, it’s important to realize that the search engine of Gmail (and Google, for the most part) does not search partial words. So “jen” will not find “Jennifer.”

    PERFORMING ACTIONS ON A GROUP OF E-MAILS
    – Let’s say you have 150 e-mails, listed over two pages (100 max per page), and you want to archive all of them. I initially made the mistake of clicking ALL, then hitting ARCHIVE and thinking that this would do the trick. Nope. Commands — whether TRASH or ARCHIVE or LABEL — only affect those items that are both selected and on the page you’re currently viewing.

    – And speaking of groupings… don’t forget that when you archive or label e-mail, you’re affecting the entire Conversation of e-mails by default. If you want to trash just one of the e-mails in a Conversation, you can do this by expanding that particular e-mail, clicking on MORE OPTIONS, and then clicking on TRASH THIS MESSAGE.

    ALL THIS *PLUS* A LITTLE BIT MORE
    Gmail supports “plus” addressing, which means that if your address is .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), you can receive e-mail at maryhadda+littlelamb@gmail.com or maryhadda+longaddress@gmail.com, etc. Why is this useful? Well, Mary (or you!) could use one, er, I’ll call it a “plussing,” for mailing lists (“maryhadda+lists”), and another for shopping online (“maryhadda+shopping”) and so on, and then create filters to put useful labels on the different types of mail.

    Some have suggested that this could also be a useful spam deterrent (e.g., using maryhadda+2004q2 and then discarding e-mail sent to this address the following quarter), but I think this suffers from two key flaws:
    1) Spammers are probably smart enough to start stripping off the plussing :(.
    2) After a while, you’d have to create a LOT of filters, and — at least for the moment — we only get an allotment of 20 filters total. It’d be a shame to use those all up in a (likely futile) attempt to thwart spamjerks.

    *** Edited 4/30/04:
    Some folks had expressed concern that plussing was seemingly not working for them. However, I’ve worked with them to track down the cause: Due to the way Gmail handles discussion list mails — not showing one’s own contributions in the Inbox to avoid duplicate views — people who were testing the plussing feature by mailing themselves via Gmail wrongly assumed the mail was ‘lost’. As it turns out, the mail was indeed received, but — since it appeared to be part of a ‘discussion list’ — was not shown in the Inbox, which is what caused the confusion.

    THE BOTTOM LINE: Plussing works; just don’t try sending tests to yourself FROM your Gmail account TO your same Gmail account :D.

    * * *

    Well, that’s pretty much everything off the top of my head for now! How about you? Got some cool Gmail tips or tricks? Speak up below, or feel free to contact me 🙂

    * * *

    *** Added 4/21/04
    Uh oh! I have competition! 😀 It’s been pointed out to me that there’s already a blog dedicated to Gmail tips and tricks, called Gmail Gems. Definitely worth checking out.

    *** Added 10/11/05
    Want to read more stuff about Gmail and Google? Check out the BLADAM Google category! and don’t forget to subscribe to this blog! (see the options in the top menu!)

    src=”http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js”>