81–90 of 130 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? I did not notice any ambiguity. Can you give an example?
I could not figure out "(Don't be evil, was a joke?)".
My level of frustration Redmond has reached epic levels. My company spends thousands of dollars a week managing advertising campaigns on Adcenter. They have an API which has been nothing but issues, but given the breadth of our advertising base it's absolutely necessary that we use it.
Today we have entered day number FIVE of an outage in which the API (at least one critical portion of it) simply errors out no matter what call you make. So for five days we've been unable to pause campaigns, change bid prices, or otherwise do anything to effectively manage our campaigns.
It's nuts. This is the second major outage in the last couple of weeks. The part that KILLS me is that nobody in Redmond seems to give a damn. They announced that they had a problem two days after I brought it to their attention. They are apparently working on some sort of fix that may or may not be pushed sometime in the last three days.
Meanwhile we are absolutely blowing through cash because of the things that we can't adjust. We're tens of thousands of keywords spread out over more than a thousand campaigns. We don't employ anybody to manage these by hand...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to add a couple ideas to your post: > I don't know that Bing has "failed" yet Microsoft doesn't either. I have no doubt Google's search will be superseded by an even more competent product. I just doubt Microsoft is able to deliver such thing. To go against Google you either need infinitely deep pockets or a technology so disruptive that it effectively neutralizes the size advantage Google has or turns into a di…
> "I have no doubt Google's search will be superseded by an even more competent product" I don't think it will be a matter of technical competence, but of economic competence. The achilles heal of Google's model is it's dependence on advertising and the incentive such dependence creates to skew search results and engage in "creepy" behavior with respect to individual privacy. The way in which Google monetizes search…
It is a nice place for a niche player (like DDG) to come in and fill tho.
The definition of a startup is company with a limited operating history and a company is an organization aimed at making profits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's one of the objectives of this article; provide that alternate perspective. I thought that Bing was the true turning point as well, but I never gave Live Search a fair chance then, and I don't think many others did either. To me, it looks like the author saw Bing/Live Search as something truly transformational within Microsoft. Public perception was that Live was a failure. But if I understand currently…
> Public perception was that Live was a failure. At that time I was paying a lot of attention to search results, from two perspectives: 1) I had some slightly unusual / difficult searches I performed regularly, and 2) examining search terms that brought people to some sites I ran. For case 1, Google simply wiped the floor with Live. Note that Live had the most relevant results in their index, but they'd be way down o…
I didn't intend to say people's perspectives weren't, rather that from an insider's perspective, Live was very much approaching success.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. I remembered Bing's decision engine commercials when looking for a plane ticket. Turns out that Bing is way better for flights than Google is, by far. Just try typing New York City to Los Angeles into both search engines. Bing finds what you are after and Google does not.
I prefer how Google handles that search query. If you're looking for a flight does entering 'fly' after your two destinations really hurt that much? 'to' is -more often than not - a pretty meaningless keyword, and I'm pretty sure most people don't want half of what's above the fold to be taken up by flight information if all they enter is a very general 'New York City to Los Angeles'.
Perhaps a bit OT, but... The post seemed to be riddled with formatting and grammar errors. This rubbed my old-school English sensibilities at first, but then I began to enjoy its rough feel. After all, it's a post about how people who worked tirelessly to bring a product to market were shipping things while the rest of Microsoft slept. The story very clearly describes a dichotomy in Microsoft's culture between proces…
I assume English is not his first language, as he also just made a job posting ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2422799 ) which has the same errors such as "din't".
Furthermore, even though it's good form to read over a message you're sending and remove the typoes, grammar-os and other such issues, it doesn't always happen :)
Birth and Death of Jellyfish.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's one of the objectives of this article; provide that alternate perspective. I thought that Bing was the true turning point as well, but I never gave Live Search a fair chance then, and I don't think many others did either. To me, it looks like the author saw Bing/Live Search as something truly transformational within Microsoft. Public perception was that Live was a failure. But if I understand currently…
> Public perception was that Live was a failure. At that time I was paying a lot of attention to search results, from two perspectives: 1) I had some slightly unusual / difficult searches I performed regularly, and 2) examining search terms that brought people to some sites I ran. For case 1, Google simply wiped the floor with Live. Note that Live had the most relevant results in their index, but they'd be way down o…
"They [Bing] had weekly release cycles - faster than Google back then" Hmm. I'm gonna have to disagree with that part. :)