The Importance of Search

Here's a thought-provoking prediction: More than two centuries will elapse before we have artificially intelligent search functionality that can match the intuitive capabilities of the average human reference librarian of today. That sobering comment is from Craig Silverstein, technology director of Internet search-engine leader Google Inc, in a recent interview. And if you need further corroboration, here it is: “We think the sun has not set on even the first day of the search opportunity.” That’s from Yusuf Mehdi, a Microsoft vice president responsible for the company’s MSN portal.

As the information explosion continues unabated on the Internet, and personal and corporate repositories of data continue to grow, one needs increasingly sophisticated search tools to enable accurate and speedy retrieval of relevant information to suit an individual user’s needs. And when one moves from the Internet to the desktop, the problem is exacerbated by the presence of myriad file formats, differing authorisation and security levels, and a host of other technical issues. All of which make for such a high level of complexity, that no one has thus far succeeded in providing a comprehensive search tool that can seamlessly sift through all the data files on a system.

That search is a killer app is quite evident from the huge success of Google, which is streets ahead of everyone else when it comes to Internet search. The buzz and hype surrounding its imminent initial public offering, while heightened by the theatrics of its founders, has its basis in the company’s unquestionably impressive financials. Make no mistake, Google is sizzling hot at the moment.

But could Google’s sizzle fizzle? Signs that the transition from geeky start-up to hardy corporate is not going to be an easy one have already begun to show up. Google has always unleashed its new offerings and innovations (such as News, Orkut and Froogle) as beta versions, improving them over a period of time with feedback from the testing public. Yet, it would have done well not to shoot its mouth off on April 1, telling of its soon-to-be-launched Gmail free e-mail service offering 1 GB storage but displaying contextual ads corresponding to keywords within the text of the mail. While privacy groups have been up in arms protesting against the implications of ads linked to e-mail content, the competition has been quick to call Google’s bluff, and we now have at least four free services with significantly enhanced storage. Two of them, Rediff and Spymac have matched the 1 GB offer; and two others, MSN Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail, have quietly bunged in a comprehensive search option along with other enhancements to their e-mail service.

With these unfettered feature-rich alternatives, a testy public, miffed by the flippant reactions of Google’s honchos to its legitimate privacy concerns, is now unlikely to switch over in droves to Gmail whenever it does become fully operational—its nifty search and threading features notwithstanding. Google’s premature Gmail announcement naiveté could well go down as one of the most foolish strategic blunders in corporate history.

But Google is still the leader of search on the Net. More important than its superior search technology is the fact that the company has been able to monetise Net search and dominate the market for keyword-related ads (although the ‘sponsored-search’ idea first came from Overture, now a part of Yahoo). Standard & Poor estimates that in 2003, of the total US online ad-sales pie, keyword search accounted for $2.5 billion, equivalent to a whopping 35 percent. This will grow to 41 percent by 2005, they say.

Will Google’s domination continue then? In terms of algorithmic search capabilities, Yahoo is quickly closing the gap, after its acquisition of AltaVista, Inktomi and Overture. And keyword-search advertising will inevitably get more precisely targeted than it is today, once it is combined with profile-based advertising.

Tiny companies like Tacoda Systems, Kanoodle, Revenue Science and 24/7 Media are staking their claim for a piece of this new pie of behaviourally targeted, demographic-specific advertising. In this area, Google, which so far knows precious little about its search users, remains at a disadvantage to portals such as Yahoo, which has far greater depth and breadth of services on offer and also has collected detailed information on millions of users at the time of registration.

Then there’s always Microsoft to reckon with. Search was another “little something” it missed out on in the Internet world. Until now, that is. Microsoft engineers have been working furiously to correct this anomaly. MSN Blogbot, MSN Newsbot, and MSN Answerbot are all in the pipeline. And the just-launched search.msn.com engine simply rocks. But what is likely to really tip the search scales in Microsoft’s favour is the next version of Windows—code-named Longhorn—which will have search functionality deeply embedded within the operating system. Even if that technology doesn’t turn out to be the best, Microsoft could still win with it, given the sheer reach of Windows and the perennial lethargy of most consumers that ensures they don’t bother venturing beyond the installed defaults.

The catch? Longhorn is expected only in 2006. So Google has a good 16-20 months to surge ahead and expand its search leadership to the desktop as well. It’s going to take a lot of huffin’and Puffin’, but maybe Google just might make it to the finish line first. Then again, could it be that we’re going to witness a Microsoft v/s Netscape kind of annihilation all over again? Search me!

Val Souza, Editor
valsouza@expresscomputeronline.com