
Cuil Launches -- Can This Search Start-Up Really Best Google? - nickb
http://searchengineland.com/080728-000100.php
======
tss
I'm not impressed so far. A search for "linux find and replace multiple files"
returned zero results. On google it returns 280,000. Further reducing the
query to "find and replace multiple files" and "find replace multiple files"
still return zero results.

------
timcederman
Hah, I also used the vanity search test and Cuil failed pretty badly. I have
an extremely unique name too - <http://www.cederman.com/?p=97>

------
tdavis
The relevance is completely awful. I did a search in Cuil and ended up with a
serp where 6 of 10 results were for the _same site_ and the rest were
comprised completely of ridiculous sites like one-page sales-pitches.

------
Hexstream
At the outset, I'm wary of any company whose primary claim is that they'll
beat <current market leader>. If they're truly in a class apart, why would
they need to rely on a stunt like that? "Look, we're related to <current
market leader>: we'll be the ones to beat them. We'll do exactly what they do
except better."

I think that's just a bad way to frame a company's mission. It looks arrogant
and defensive. Show, don't tell.

------
geuis
I have a personal litmus test for new search engines - a vanity search on
myself. I know my own content across the web better than anyone else's. By
far, Google still rates far and above for returning the fullest and most
pertinent set of results than any others. Cuil fails at this.

More generally, I compared common searches I do regularly relating to things
like "javascript framework" and "css" and the results were poor.

Its not _only_ about who has the biggest index. Its about retrieving the most
relevant data from that index.

To be more crude, its not about the size of your <guess>, its about how you
use it.

~~~
babul
Google has had a lot of time and resource to index your content. So it is not
a fair compariosn yet. Give Cuil time to develop/index and then see the
results.

On a side note, Cuil takes forever to load compared to Google, and search
results aside, that is a major issue they need to address asap.

~~~
TFrancis
I don't think we ought to excuse Cuil and provide them more time before we
judge the search engine. They've had all the time they needed and put out a
press release saying so.

------
coffeeaddicted
It seems they are rather restrictive with their results. I tried it with "what
is cuil?" and didn't get a single answer.

Also I don't really expect to get that much improvement from the typical one-
shot-editbox searchengines anymore. There's only so much information you can
get out of a handful of words (that is unless they start to actually
understand the intend of questions and content of pages).

I suppose results could improve if the searchengines would enter a session or
dialog after the first try. Some way to make clear that you're still searching
the same stuff, only trying other words because the first result haven't been
good enough. I think when I fire off several searches in a row far more than
half the time the reason is that I'm trying to improve my results. Cuil's
categories are a step in that direction.

------
illume
these are bad: \- relevance of search results \- colors \- layout of search
results \- specialisation for different types of search results is no where
near where google is. \- some searches for things I know about returned 0
results.

Also... frames?

If they think google hasn't been updating their search engine for ages they
are kidding themselves. Google has done very well to keep the design
consistent for about a decade, but things are changing all the time.

------
schtog
The ranking is unclear, top left is 1 I guess but then middle top or left
middle?

More important, results are not impressive.

Why is it that this would beat Google?

------
petercooper
My first search resulted in a 404 page several seconds later. Then.. it went
totally down for a few minutes. Now, it redirects everything to
<http://www.cuil.com/info/unavailable.html>

Interesting first impression! Google didn't have this trouble, but then back
in 1999 we didn't have billions of Webheads flocking to whatever was new and
shiny... that was the investors' job ;-)

------
xenoterracide
interesting... I think the columns make it hard to read though... kinda poor
ui there. otherwise it looks good.

------
EricFriedman
Vanity searches can work well for a test but I do not think the index is big
enough yet for a real comparison. I would say wait to see what happens once
they are 1 week, 1 month, etc... out of the launch gates.

------
deepster
1) Make the search box on main page bigger and move it up a little bit.

2) I want larger navigation page numbers and icons. Center it once again.
Maybe put page numbers on top as well.

3) Make safe search on/off a toggle switch. I don't want to go to another page
and then hit save etc.

4) black/blue motif just hurts my eyes.

5) Ditto with the font

It's amazing how ingrained searching Google is for me. When I want to advance
the search page, I instinctively move my cursor to the bottom right of my
screen. Whenever I search on Yahoo or Live the presentation of the results
just seem visually painful.

------
Oompa
[http://www.cuil.com/search?q=os%20x&sl=long](http://www.cuil.com/search?q=os%20x&sl=long)

Seriously?

------
greyman
Let's give them some more time so they can prove themselves.

------
osi
cuil fails my vanity test as well.

