Is Microsoft tinkering with Live Search results?
Summary: Is Microsoft filtering out from its Live Search results those it considers "undesirable" for the company? That's one one tipster has suggested with some interesting proof, involving a blog known as "Shipping Seven."
Is Microsoft filtering out from its Live Search results those it considers "undesirable" for the company?
That's what one of my tipsters has suggested with some interesting evidence, involving a blog known as "Shipping Seven."
Shipping Seven is penned anonymously by someone who has said s/he is part of the Windows 7 team at Microsoft. As one might assume, given Microsoft management's decision to be less transparent about its future plans, Microsoft is not too fond of the Shipping Seven blog. Company officials have declined to comment in any way on the blog, as well as on Windows 7, the version of Windows expected in 2009 or 2010.
Try this. Go to Live Search (www.live.com) and type in "'Shipping Seven' blog." The results? Lots of blogs and news sites talking about the Shipping Seven blog. But no link to the Shipping Seven blog itself (at least not in the first several pages of results I examined).
Now try the same query in Google search. The direct link to the Shipping Seven blog is the fourth link. On Yahoo Search , the same search yields as result No. 1 the actual Shipping Seven blog link.
Coincidence? Crack down? Microsoft's statement, delivered via a company spokesman:
"Results in Live Search are based solely on our algorithms and the frequency in which the engine crawls a particular site, we don't editorialize the organic results of search queries."
Seems like somebody needs to tweak an algorithm over on the Live Search team....
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Just goes to show you why no one uses Live Search
Current (global) Search Engine Rankings
12.46% - Yahoo
5.9% - Combined MSN and Microsoft Live Search
2.12 - AOL
1.38 - Ask
0.24 - other
Source: [url=http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=4#]Search Engine Market Share for December, 2007 [/url]
Google should prepare themselves for monopoly status and start implementing
Ummmm....monopolies aren't illegal.
There's a BIG difference between the two.
BUT, monopolis MUST abide by another set of rules. I suggest that Google
Yes, the evil G$$gle...
The evil is G$$gle, we must UNITE to stop the beast master Sergey and the equally despicable Larry from taking over the world.
Your words, not mine. I think that Google is a great competitor that has
Who are "WE"?
Google has millions of desktops indexed and added to one of many databases in their possession. Add to this their ability to buy and sell databases with little to no government or consumer oversight, and the risks multiply.
Additionally, Google has archived tons of old web content and outdated information. This allows them to compile dossiers on people's past activities which may no longer accurately portray their current status or interests. Companies like Google who gather data and sell it are used regularly by governments world wide to avoid needing to comply with certain aspects of existing privacy law in the USA and in Europe.
In short, governments world wide publicly cry against big corporations like Google, but secretly, they love them because the governments get to circumvent certain regulations by buying data versus collecting it directly.
Yeah, it's a little bit "Conspiracy Theory", I admit, but it is true. How can you call the government in to fix a problem which benefits the government?
Good luck with that.
If I were a drug dealer I might be worried. The "we" is individuals,
What DB negelects to mention is the reason google
They do give out info when it is in their best interest, though.
http://www.betanews.com/article/print/Google_Called_Hostile_to_Privacy/1181578659
http://torch.cs.dal.ca/~christia/dbb.php?http://www.boingboing.net/2007/03/21/google-replies-to-re.html
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=07/11/27/2235251
But the fact that they have/are giving information to various other governments would lead one to believe that in the end they may have given the US government the info they requested, just not publicly, in order to avoid any further stain to their reputation.
XiTi Monitor's search engine barometer
Henri
10% of "nobody" uses Live Search
And as if Google doesn't take a few links off their results...
Nothing is beneath Microsoft.
For anyone to think MS is anything but a corporate entity that values anything but its own future they are naive. Like it or not, this how corporations function. As with any corporation, anything they do has to be looked at in that light.
Sure there is something beneath Microsoft....the competition. ha ha <nt>
Sorry but you're way off
No, he's about right
Thus when dealing with MS, people have to look after their own interests and not rely on statements by MS executives which are absolutely guaranteed to be self-serving.
You underestimate the bottom
bottom falls out............ all the suckers
who fell for Microsoft's bait.
But on the brighter side...
You have never used Google? Talk about filtering
And with Google or any search engine, sites with links, for some reason, often rank higher. I've gone through pages before finding the "official" site i was looking for numerous times. This is so common. <br>
Additionally, i only use LIVE for microsoft related troubleshooting due to Google's filtering that takes many search terms i've used for years, and loads the pages up with ALTERNATIVES to the product i'm troubleshooting, rather than the links to troubleshooting sites it used to bring up. <br>
I've gone as far as reporting this and have noticed it change a bit now. I'm assuming a lot of people complained. <br>
However, if it's something someone else has done against Microsoft, it's apparently just and not blogged about. <br>
Finally, Google hits are for sale. So maybe it's the same with LIVE NOw?
Message has been deleted.