Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

buildcontext.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–27 of 27 posts

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#21

Post by danilocampos »

anorwell wrote: post #11

The tone of this article bothers me. There are some smart people working at Microsoft. The level of discussion is higher than "Hey, google made a thing, we need the same thing." Like the article points out, Microsoft has no shortage of utterances due to their acquisition of Tellme. Why, then, do they need to mine utterances with Bing 411? (Assuming they don't--I'm sure they do.) Bing 411 is a genuinely useful service…

> The tone of this article bothers me.

I stopped at being presented with a dictionary definition for the word parable, down to the syllable guide thingie.

Come on, now. Respect your audience's intelligence a little bit.

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#22

Post by sixcorners »

indygreg2 wrote: post #16

I was working at Microsoft/Tellme at the time Bing411 was launched and would like to state a few facts: - When launched, Bing411 was essentially a re-branding of Tellme's 1-800-555-TELL service. - 1-800-555-TELL has been running since 2000 or something like that. I attended the 10th anniversary party, which I believe was in 2010. - Microsoft didn't need to launch a Microsoft-branded 411 to collect utterances, for the…

Don't all those points fit into the story in that blog entry? No one is saying that Microsoft needed voice data. From e40's comment: "I think the point of the article is that they don't need to mine utterences with Bing 411, and that they merely did the service to compete with Google, without knowing why Google made the service in the first place." Isn't the speculation about Microsoft's reaction the heart of the issue? If Microsoft did buy Tellme's service so that they could compete with Google's that would explain how Microsoft wasn't playing the same game Google was. Edit: I do agree that the blog post is all speculation. I'm just saying that I don't think those points prove that it is wrong.

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#23

Post by anorwell »

sixcorners wrote: post #22
indygreg2 wrote: post #16

I was working at Microsoft/Tellme at the time Bing411 was launched and would like to state a few facts: - When launched, Bing411 was essentially a re-branding of Tellme's 1-800-555-TELL service. - 1-800-555-TELL has been running since 2000 or something like that. I attended the 10th anniversary party, which I believe was in 2010. - Microsoft didn't need to launch a Microsoft-branded 411 to collect utterances, for the…

Don't all those points fit into the story in that blog entry? No one is saying that Microsoft needed voice data. From e40's comment: "I think the point of the article is that they don't need to mine utterences with Bing 411, and that they merely did the service to compete with Google, without knowing why Google made the service in the first place." Isn't the speculation about Microsoft's reaction the heart of the iss…

Microsoft bought Tellme (of which 555-TELL was a very small part) in March 2007 [1]. GOOG-411 was announced in April 2007. [2]

[1] http://techcrunch.com/2007/03/14/microsoft-acquires-tellme/

[2] http://techcrunch.com/2007/04/06/google-launches-free-411-bu...

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#24

Post by sixcorners »

anorwell wrote: post #23
sixcorners wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't all those points fit into the story in that blog entry? No one is saying that Microsoft needed voice data. From e40's comment: "I think the point of the article is that they don't need to mine utterences with Bing 411, and that they merely did the service to compete with Google, without knowing why Google made the service in the first place." Isn't the speculation about Microsoft's reaction the heart of the iss…

Microsoft bought Tellme (of which 555-TELL was a very small part) in March 2007 [1]. GOOG-411 was announced in April 2007. [2] [1] http://techcrunch.com/2007/03/14/microsoft-acquires-tellme/ [2] http://techcrunch.com/2007/04/06/google-launches-free-411-bu...

From that article: "This is actually a product that Google’s been testing in various formats for some time. Steve Poland (a regular contributor here) is pointing me to some posts (and here) by Greg Sterling from last year that discuss this. The earliest reports on this are from October 2006, and the service may be from an acquisition of 1-877-520-FIND. More information here." Again though.. Pure speculation.. It's not implausible because big companies do keep tabs on their competition. Also not sure if Microsoft's history with their product goes back even further.

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#25

Post by indygreg2 »

sixcorners wrote: post #22
indygreg2 wrote: post #16

I was working at Microsoft/Tellme at the time Bing411 was launched and would like to state a few facts: - When launched, Bing411 was essentially a re-branding of Tellme's 1-800-555-TELL service. - 1-800-555-TELL has been running since 2000 or something like that. I attended the 10th anniversary party, which I believe was in 2010. - Microsoft didn't need to launch a Microsoft-branded 411 to collect utterances, for the…

Don't all those points fit into the story in that blog entry? No one is saying that Microsoft needed voice data. From e40's comment: "I think the point of the article is that they don't need to mine utterences with Bing 411, and that they merely did the service to compete with Google, without knowing why Google made the service in the first place." Isn't the speculation about Microsoft's reaction the heart of the iss…

If I were the product manager of a search engine and our chief competitor had an offering (411) that we didn't (at least branded in our name) and the cost to deploy said offering was cheap (because we already had one very similar due to a recent acquisition), wouldn't it be worth the relatively trivial investment (from a large company's perspective) to deploy said offering? Even if it were for reasons of "me too," so what? I believe most brand managers would reach the same conclusion, especially if the costs were low.

Furthermore, does the track record not show that Microsoft re-brands (assimilates) its acquisitions eventually? How do you (or the author of the linked post) know that the deployment of a Microsoft-branded 411 service was not part of this process?

Finally, everyone in the speech recognition industry knows that it requires a large sample set (utterances) to refine a speech recognition engine. If you are building one from scratch (Google), you will do anything and everything in your power to collect utterances. To think that Microsoft and everyone else in the industry did not recognize what Google was doing with GOOG-411 is preposterous.

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#26

Post by contextfree »

Even if we accept the very dubious premise that Bing411 was motivated entirely by a misunderstanding of Google's aims for Goog411, so what? A good cautionary tale needs to demonstrate the dire consequences of whatever you're cautioning against, but you haven't actually showed anything bad happening to Bing or Microsoft as a result of their alleged confusion. Really not the best vehicle for your moral.

Re: "The 411 Parable": Goog411 vs Bing411 - Make sure you are playing the same game.

#27

Post by sixcorners »

indygreg2 wrote: post #25
sixcorners wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't all those points fit into the story in that blog entry? No one is saying that Microsoft needed voice data. From e40's comment: "I think the point of the article is that they don't need to mine utterences with Bing 411, and that they merely did the service to compete with Google, without knowing why Google made the service in the first place." Isn't the speculation about Microsoft's reaction the heart of the iss…

If I were the product manager of a search engine and our chief competitor had an offering (411) that we didn't (at least branded in our name) and the cost to deploy said offering was cheap (because we already had one very similar due to a recent acquisition), wouldn't it be worth the relatively trivial investment (from a large company's perspective) to deploy said offering? Even if it were for reasons of "me too," so…

Given the article that someone cited in their reply to me on this comments page that said that Google has been launching it's product in many forms since October 2006, it still seems possible that they made the decision to buy that company because of Google's actions. As far as everyone knowing what Google was doing, I don't think that is true. Didn't a lot of people think that they were really just trying to get into the 411 business? I mean before they actually launched the product in their labs thing and stated their intention.
Post reply on HN