Search Results

Search found 16682 results on 668 pages for 'search engines'.

Page 5/668 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Personal search – the future of search

    - by jamiet
    [Four months ago I wrote a meandering blog post on another blogging site entitled Personal search – the future of search. The points I made therein are becoming more relevant to what I'm reading about and hoping to get involved in in the future so I'm re-posting here to a wider audience to hopefully get some more feedback and guage reaction to it. This has been prompted by the book Pull by David Siegel that is forming my current holiday reading (recommended to me by a commenter on my previous post Interesting things – Twitter annotations and your phone as a web server) and in particular by Siegel's notion of us all in the future having a personal online data vault.] My one-time colleague Paul Dawson recently wrote an article called The Future of Search and in it he proposed some interesting ideas. Some choice quotes: The growth of Chinese search giant Baidu is an indicator that fully localised and tailored content and offerings have great traction with local audiences This trend is already driving an increase in the use of specialist searches … Look at how Farecast is now integrated into Bing for example, or how Flightstats is now integrated into Google. Search does not necessarily have to begin with a keyword, but could start instead with a click or a touch. Take a look at Retrievr. Start drawing a picture in the box and see what happens. This is certainly search without the need for typing in keywords search technology has advanced greatly in recent years. The recent launch of Microsoft Live Labs’ Pivot has given us a taste of what we can expect to see in the future This really got me thinking about where search might go in the future and as my mind wandered I realised that as the amount of data that we collect about ourselves increases so too will the need and the desire to search it. The amount of electronic data that exists about each and every person is increasing and in the near future I fully expect that we are going to be able to store personal data such as: A history of our location (in fact Google Latitude already offers this facility) Recordings of all our phone conversations Health information history (weight, blood pressure etc…) Energy usage Spending history What films we watch, what radio stations we listen to Voting history Of course, most of this stuff is already stored somewhere but crucially we don’t have easy access to it. My utilities supplier knows how much electricity I’m using but if I want to know for myself I have to go and dig through my statements (assuming I have kept them). Similarly my doctor probably has ready access to all of my health records, my bank knows exactly what I have spent my money on, my cable supplier knows what I watch on TV and my mobile phone supplier probably knows exactly where I am and where I’ve been for the past few years. Strange then that none of this electronic information is available to me in a way that I can really make use of it; after all, its MY information. Its MY data. I created it. That is set to change. As technologies mature and customers become more technically cognizant they will demand more access to the data that companies hold about them. The companies themselves will realise the benefit that they derive from giving users what they want and will embrace ways of providing it. As a result the amount of data that we store about ourselves is going to increase exponentially and the desire to search and derive value from that data is going to grow with it; we are about to enter the era of the “personal datastore” and we will want, and need, to search through it in order to make sense of it all. Its interesting then that today when we think of search we think of search engines and yet in these personal datastores we’re referring to data that search engines can’t touch because WE own it and we (hopefully) choose to keep it private. Someone, I know not who, is going to lead in this space by making it easy for us to search our data and retrieve information that we have either forgotten or maybe didn’t even know in the first place. We will learn new things about ourselves and about our habits; we will share these findings with whomever we choose; we will compare what we discover with others; we will collaborate for mutual benefit and, most of all, we will educate ourselves as to how to live our lives better. Search will be the means to that end, it will enable us to make sense of the wealth of information that we will collect day in day out. The future of search is personal, why would we be interested in anything else? @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Personal search – the future of search

    - by jamiet
    [Four months ago I wrote a meandering blog post on another blogging site entitled Personal search – the future of search. The points I made therein are becoming more relevant to what I'm reading about and hoping to get involved in in the future so I'm re-posting here to a wider audience to hopefully get some more feedback and guage reaction to it. This has been prompted by the book Pull by David Siegel that is forming my current holiday reading (recommended to me by a commenter on my previous post Interesting things – Twitter annotations and your phone as a web server) and in particular by Siegel's notion of us all in the future having a personal online data vault.] My one-time colleague Paul Dawson recently wrote an article called The Future of Search and in it he proposed some interesting ideas. Some choice quotes: The growth of Chinese search giant Baidu is an indicator that fully localised and tailored content and offerings have great traction with local audiences This trend is already driving an increase in the use of specialist searches … Look at how Farecast is now integrated into Bing for example, or how Flightstats is now integrated into Google. Search does not necessarily have to begin with a keyword, but could start instead with a click or a touch. Take a look at Retrievr. Start drawing a picture in the box and see what happens. This is certainly search without the need for typing in keywords search technology has advanced greatly in recent years. The recent launch of Microsoft Live Labs’ Pivot has given us a taste of what we can expect to see in the future This really got me thinking about where search might go in the future and as my mind wandered I realised that as the amount of data that we collect about ourselves increases so too will the need and the desire to search it. The amount of electronic data that exists about each and every person is increasing and in the near future I fully expect that we are going to be able to store personal data such as: A history of our location (in fact Google Latitude already offers this facility) Recordings of all our phone conversations Health information history (weight, blood pressure etc…) Energy usage Spending history What films we watch, what radio stations we listen to Voting history Of course, most of this stuff is already stored somewhere but crucially we don’t have easy access to it. My utilities supplier knows how much electricity I’m using but if I want to know for myself I have to go and dig through my statements (assuming I have kept them). Similarly my doctor probably has ready access to all of my health records, my bank knows exactly what I have spent my money on, my cable supplier knows what I watch on TV and my mobile phone supplier probably knows exactly where I am and where I’ve been for the past few years. Strange then that none of this electronic information is available to me in a way that I can really make use of it; after all, its MY information. Its MY data. I created it. That is set to change. As technologies mature and customers become more technically cognizant they will demand more access to the data that companies hold about them. The companies themselves will realise the benefit that they derive from giving users what they want and will embrace ways of providing it. As a result the amount of data that we store about ourselves is going to increase exponentially and the desire to search and derive value from that data is going to grow with it; we are about to enter the era of the “personal datastore” and we will want, and need, to search through it in order to make sense of it all. Its interesting then that today when we think of search we think of search engines and yet in these personal datastores we’re referring to data that search engines can’t touch because WE own it and we (hopefully) choose to keep it private. Someone, I know not who, is going to lead in this space by making it easy for us to search our data and retrieve information that we have either forgotten or maybe didn’t even know in the first place. We will learn new things about ourselves and about our habits; we will share these findings with whomever we choose; we will compare what we discover with others; we will collaborate for mutual benefit and, most of all, we will educate ourselves as to how to live our lives better. Search will be the means to that end, it will enable us to make sense of the wealth of information that we will collect day in day out. The future of search is personal, why would we be interested in anything else? @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Odd Search resaults

    - by Alex
    It was brought to my attention that if you search for the name of one of our directors (with the intent to find there profile page on our site) They come up as the first link in most search engines as you would expect but the link text is just pure spam. the three search string I have tested on Google, Bing, Ask, and Yahoo have all returned similar results. Here is a list of the search strings: Paolo rossi futex Mark rossi futex Marco rossi futex Dan Goldberg futex Any idea what might be causing this I have searched through as much of the sites code as I can and cant find anything wrong with it.

    Read the article

  • Small Business Server 2008 - Microsoft Windows Search or Microsoft Search Server 2020 Express

    - by Christopher Edwards
    See Also - Small (Business) Server - Microsoft Windows Search or Microsoft Search Server 2008 Express Can anyone tell me if they have Search Server Express 2010 Beta working on Small Business Server 2010, or indeed if it is supported. The only reference I can find is here, but given how scant it is I'm not sure I should trust it:- http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/sharepoint2010setup/thread/12cf9846-b940-4441-9fc1-30016ea87e5c

    Read the article

  • Search for files after a relative date using Windows search

    - by Zoredache
    I am looking for a way to save a search that includes a relative date. Specifically I am looking for a way to save a search that matches files that have a modification date that is 7 days ago. I have read the Windows Search Advanced Query Syntax document and I am not seeing a way to say 7 days ago. The numbers and ranges section does mention that relative dates are possible. The problem is that the relative dates described there do not fit the criteria I need. The lastweek almost looks like what I want except if I run a query like after:lastweek on a Monday it will only show my file that have been modified since Sunday at 12:00. The lastweek/lastmonth seem to relative to the start of the week/month which is not what I need. Multi-word relative dates: week, next month, last week, past month, or coming year. The values can also be entered contracted, as follows: thisweek, nextmonth, lastweek, pastmonth, comingyear. One nice thing about saved searches is that they are stored as an XML document and the file format is documented. I am not seeing how to form a correct value for a datetime. If I was able to understand this format, I suspect I could use a text editor and created a saved search that does what I want. Fragment from the examples: <conditions> <condition type="leafCondition" valuetype="System.StructuredQueryType.DateTime" property="System.DateModified" operator="imp" value="R00UUUUUUUUZZXD-30NU" propertyType="wstr" /> </conditions> To summarize I am looking for an answer to one or both of these questions How do I make a query for '7 days ago' using the standard syntax? How is the DateTime stored in a saved search?

    Read the article

  • Adding arbitrary search URLs to Firefox search bar

    - by Matthew
    New-ish versions of Firefox (I'm currently on 3.6) have the nifty "search bookmark" feature, which allows you to create searches in the location bar with custom URLs, e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%s. This is really great, but when trying to mange the engines in the search bar, I was dismayed at the lack of customisability there. It looks like the two search methods are entirely distinct. Is there a way to put custom URLs in my search bar, or do I have to just hope that whatever I want is on the long but finite list of plugins at mycroft? Thanks UPDATE: done a bit more research, posting my own answer

    Read the article

  • problem showing my website correctly in search engines

    - by dinbrca
    Hello guys, I have a website which i have indexed on google for example (like 15 days ago). some of my pages pass arguments like: http://www.bla.com/products.php?pro=bla&page=view suddently i saw that passing arguments like this isn't good for SEO purposes and started using htaccess rewrite. and changed the arguments to like this: http://www.bla.com/products/bla/*view*/ now my site on google still shows as i showed at link number 1 what should i do? i thought i should wait for the search engine to crawl my site again but nothing happened. thanks in advanced, Din

    Read the article

  • How can I search in transcluded categories?

    - by Wikis
    I want to add functionality to a MediaWiki wiki to search in specific categories: Platform 1 Platform 2 etc. So I created a template which, based on a certain field, assigns pages to those categories. The template was already included on most of these pages. So now most pages are in either: Category:Platform 1 or Category:Platform 2 Then I thought I just need to add incategory to the search and I'm done, as described on the Wikipedia page. But then I reread it and to my horror discovered: incategory: – using the incategory: parameter returns pages in a given category (as long as the pages are directly categorized, and not transcluded through templates). Eeeek! Is there any other way to search even in transcluded templates? Or any other way of resolving this?

    Read the article

  • Is there a search engine that indexes source code of a web-page?

    - by Dexter
    I need to search the web for sites that are in our industry that use the same Adwords management company, to ensure that the said company is not violating our contract, as they have been accused of doing. They use a tracking code in the template of every page which has a certain domain in the URL, and I'm wondering if it's possible "Google" the source code using some bot that crawls the code rather than the content? For example, I bought an unlimited license for an image gallery, and I was asked to type the license number in a comment just before the script. I thought it was just so a human could look at the source and find out if someone paid, but it turned out that it was actually that they had a crawler looking for their source code and that comment. If it ran across the code on your site, it would look for the comment, and if it found one, it would check to see if it was an existing one. If not, it would first notify you of your noncompliance, and then notify the owner of the script. Edit: I'm looking to index HTML and JavaScript only, not the server-side languages or Java.

    Read the article

  • Firefox - order of search engines reverts (toolbar)

    - by Victor78
    When I change the order of the search engines (Toolbar - Manage Search Engines - Move up / down - Ok) it changes the order, until I close and reopen the browser. I can't imagine that's the way it's supposed to work. I want it to stay in the order I select. I have no add-ons installed that have anything to do with search engines, nor that add any toolbars. I am not using a customized theme. Apparently this problem is rare, as Googling [ "manage search engine list" ("order reverts" OR "order changes") ] return 0 results. Firefox 3.6.12; Windows XP Pro SP3.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 search - sucky?

    - by Scott Evernden
    Is there an alternative to trying to remember all the advanced search options? Like an actual GUI as we had for windows XP? As powerful as Windows Search apparently is, I cannot possibly remember all the options available. How is a mere mortal like my Dad supposed to understand and retain all this? I get the shakes every time i need to find something on Win 7. Anyone have some relief?

    Read the article

  • How to search inside files in Windows 7?

    - by Revolter
    In Windows XP we can search for files witch contains a defined keyword (inside all files types) Windows 7 can look inside files for a keywords, okay, but only for text files. (*.doc,*.txt, *.inf, ...), not (*.conf, *.dat, *.*, ...) Microsoft search filters don't contain any filter I can use for this. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Google Custom Search Engine not giving the expected search result.

    - by iecut
    Hi, I have been trying to create a new google custom search engine, but when I try some query,the search engine it is not giving me the expected search result.On some queries it is working fine, but on other queries, it says"no result". I tried adding the URL of the website that I wanted to search for, but there are certain pages and keywords that are not coming up in the search result when I try to search for the keyword of that page. I tired adding both the main page URL and the URL of the sub page that I want to search for, but nothing is working. There are some sub pages to the main URL that are coming in the search result.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 search does not return results from indexed folders

    - by Dilbert
    I am experiencing this issue over and over again and I just cannot seem to find the answer. It doesn't make sense, but search simply does not return results from folders that certainly have these files inside. It's weird that this technology exists for more than 5 years now (it could be added to Windows XP as an addon), and they still haven't got it right. My folder contains 10 image files with .png extensions. Two scenarios: Scenario 1: I exclude the folder using Indexing options. Search works. Scenario 2: I turn on indexing for this folder. Search does not work. Of course, Agent Ransack returns results every time. When I check Advanced options for the Indexing options inside control panel, .png files are checked in the File Types tab, using the "File Properties filter". What's the deal with this? [Edit] To clarify, this doesn't happen with all folders, but does with more than one. For the "problematic" folders, even *.* doesn't return a single result. I found some advice to clear the archive and readonly attributes for all files (doesn't make sense, but hey), but it didn't work. Indexing status in Control panel is: Indexing complete. 100,000 items indexed. Folder is included in the list. File types list contains the .png extension (although it doesn't work with any filter, not even *.*).

    Read the article

  • best/simplest way to inform search engine of sitemap location

    - by Don
    AFAIK, there are 2 ways to make search engines aware of a sitemap's location: Include an absolute link to it in robots.txt Submit it to them directly. The relevant URLs are: http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/ping?sitemap=SITEMAP_URL http://www.bing.com/webmaster/ping.aspx?sitemap=SITEMAP_URL Where SITEMAP_URL is the absolute URL of the sitemap. Currently, I do both. Regarding (2), I have a job that runs automatically every day which submits the sitemap to Bing and Google. I don't think there's any reason to do (1) and (2), but I'm paranoid, so I do. I imagine you can avoid both (1) and (2) if you just make your sitemap accessible at a conventional URL (like robots.txt). What's the simplest and most reliable way to ensure that search engines can find your sitemap?

    Read the article

  • What is the ideal self hosted search engine?

    - by Tim Post
    I have an internal (intranet) site that is comprised of several blogs and forums, hundreds of static pages, lots of PDF files and several other document types. Its been glued together loosely over the last couple of years and now its my job to maintain it. I'm looking for a search engine that I can host myself that ideally: Allows for searching the Blog / Forum databases directly if given the database information and tables to search. Handles most text documents (PDF/DOC/ODF) Is open source, or allows access to the source code once purchased It doesn't matter to me what language or platform it is written in. Normally, I'd just use Google site search, but that's not an option for an intranet.

    Read the article

  • Search engine bots accessing strange URLs

    - by casasoft
    We have ELMAH enabled on our site and get errors whenever a Page Not Found error is triggered on the website. We have recently redesigned a new website and so we understand that search engine robots might have previously indexed pages which they try to access and result in a Page Not Found errors. For this reason, we have set up permanent redirects for such previously indexed pages to the respective new pages. The website in mention is www.chambercollege.com and for example, a previously indexed URL was www.chambercollege.com/special-offers.aspx. This page is no longer accessible so we have created the necessary permanent redirect to redirect to the respective page on www.chambercollege.com/en/content/special-offers-161/. Now we are starting to receive Page Not Found errors of search engine bots (e.g. MSN bot) trying to access the URL www.chambercollege.com/special-offers.aspx/images/shadow_right.jpg/. Any idea how could a search engine make up that strange URL and whether you have any suggestions of what to do best?

    Read the article

  • How can one keep an ecommerce site active?

    - by Mantorok
    So, you build an e-commerce site, all your products are on there, but then very little changes which obviously causes your site to become less active, and ultimately not ranking as highly in search engines. Is there anything that can be done to keep it active? I'm aware that inbound links are important and I guess these come over time, are there any other recommended means of keeping the site active?

    Read the article

  • Mysterious subdomains to my site indexed by Google

    - by shouren
    Stackers, We have an issue with strange subdomains pointing to (pages on) our site such as: www2.example.com 2.example.com anothersite.com.example.com A few things are perplexing: who created them? why they do that? why Google index them and made them appear in the search results when clicking them gets a 5xx error. how can we get rid of them? It seems some type of scams that hurt our site's free search and experience. Anyone had similar experience and knows the answers? Really appreciate it!

    Read the article

  • Implementing Google Search Appliance results into website

    - by Adam Jenkin
    I’m interested to hear peoples preferred methods or approaches to implementing the search results from a Google Search Appliance into an existing website. More specifically how do people prefer to implement/embed the search results into their existing site and persist the surrounding website elements (menus, membership etc) around the search results. As far as I am aware there are 3 different approaches. Sub-domain, handle everything in the xslt – create a search.mysite.com which is completely handled by google xslt and embed surround site components in xslt. Embed search results into existing site using an iframe – Use the existing website and just use an iframe to import results into page. Embed results into existing site by using server side processing – This is how I have previously integrated search into a site using a combination of bespoke dev and the GSALib project. I would be interested to hear if anyone has other suggestions, and were people have benefited or regretted using the above approaches.

    Read the article

  • Search Form in Responsive Design - Remove Search button on Mobile

    - by Kevin
    I'm working with a search box in the header of a responsive website. On desktop/tablet widths, there's a search input field and a styled 'search' button to the right. You can type in a search term and either click 'SEARCH' button or just hit enter on the keyboard with the same result. When you scale down to mobile widths, the search input field fills the width of the screen. The submit button falls below it. On a desktop, clicking the button or hitting enter activate the search. On an actual iphone phone, you can hit the 'SEARCH' button, but the native mobile keyboard that rises from the bottom of the screen has a search button where the enter/return key would normally be. It seems to know I'm in a form and the keyboard automatically gives me the option to kick off the search by basically hitting the ENTER key location....but it says SEARCH. So far so good. I figure I don't need the button in the header on mobile since it's already in the keyboard. Therefore, I'll hide the button on mobile widths and everything will be tighter and look better. So I added this to my CSS to hide it in mobile: #search-button {display: none;} But now the search doesn't work at all. On mobile, I don't get the option in the keyboard that showed up before and if I just hit enter, it doesn't work at all. On desktop at mobile width, hitting enter also not longer works. So clearly by hiding the submit/search button, the phone no longer gave me the native option to run the search. In addition, on the desktop at mobile width, even hitting enter inside the search input box also fails to launch the the search. Here's my search box: <form id="search-form" method="get" accept-charset="UTF-8, utf-8" action="search.php"> <fieldset> <div id="search-wrapper"> <label id="search-label" for="search">Item:</label> <input id="search" class="placeholder-color" name="item" type="text" placeholder="Item Number or Description" /> <button id="search-button" title="Go" type="submit"><span class="search-icon"></span></button> </div> </fieldset> </form> Here's what my CSS looks like: #search-wrapper { float: left; display: inline-block; position: relative; white-space: nowrap; } #search-button { display: inline-block; cursor: pointer; vertical-align: top; height: 30px; width: 40px; } @media only screen and (max-width: 639px) { #search-wrapper { display: block; margin-bottom: 7px; } #search-button { /* this didn't work....it hid the button but the search failed to load */ display: none;*/ } } So.....how can I hide this submit button when I'm on a mobile screen, but still let the search run from the mobile keyboard or just run by hitting enter when in the search input box. I was sure that putting display:none on the search button at mobile width would do the trick, but apparently not. Thanks...

    Read the article

  • Can you Trust Search?

    - by David Dorf
    An awful lot of referrals to e-commerce sites come from web searches. Retailers rely on search engine optimization (SEO) to correctly position their website so they can be found. Search on "blue jeans" and the results are determined by a semi-secret algorithm -- in my case Levi.com, Banana Republic, and ShopStyle show up. The NY Times recently uncovered a situation where JCPenney, via third-parties hired to help with SEO, was caught manipulating search results so they were erroneously higher in page rankings. No doubt this helped drive additional sales during this part Christmas. The article, The Dirty Little Secrets of Search, is well worth reading. My friend Ron Kleinman started an interesting discussion at the ARTS Linkedin forum. He posed the question: The ability of a single company to "punish" any retailer (by significantly impacting their on-line sales volume) who does not play by their rules ... is this a good thing or a bad thing? Clearly JCP was in the wrong and needed to be punished, but should that decision lie with Google alone? Don't get me wrong -- I'm certainly not advocating we create a Department of Search where bureaucrats think of ways to spend money, but Google wields an awful lot of power in this situation, and it makes me feel uncomfortable. Now Google is incorporating more social aspects into their search results. For example, when Google knows its me (i.e. I'm logged in when using Google) search results will be influenced by my Twitter network. In an effort to increase relevance, the blogs and re-tweeted articles from my network will be higher in the search results than they otherwise would be. So in the case of product searches, things discussed in my network will rise to the top. Continuing my blue jean example, if someone in my network had been discussing Macy's perhaps they would now be higher in the result set. soapbox: I already have lots of spammers posting bogus comments to this blog in an effort to create additional links to their sites and thus increase their search ranking. Should I expect a similar situation in Twitter and eventually Facebook? Now retailers need to expand their SEO efforts to incorporate social media as well, but do us all a favor and please don't cheat.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >