Ex-Google engineers launch ‘Cuil’, the first results
Story byJoop
Business development manager in Shanghai, always up to play with shiny gadgets, firecrackers or eat Shabu shabu. (Japanese hotpot)(show all)Business development manager in Shanghai, always up to play with shiny gadgets, firecrackers or eat Shabu shabu. (Japanese hotpot) • Check outjoop.in• Got Twitter? ♥ ->@Joop
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.
Also tagged with
Related Articles
More TNW
About TNW
Yet another search engine?
Not really. Cuil (pronounced ‘cool’), is backed with VC investments of $33 million dollars (€21 million). The search engine not only applies link analysis and traffic ranking, but analyzes context and displays similar results in groups and categories. With help of The Internet Archive, Cuil is supposed to have the biggest index of the web. “Cuil searches more pages on the Web than anyone else—three times as many as Google and ten times as many as Microsoft.”
Cuil’s Key features
The team
The technology was designed by a team with a lot of experience in search, as stated: Anna Patterson has worked at Google as a search engine architect and leader of the page ranking team. She leads the Cuil team together with her husband, Mr. Costello, who researched and developed search engines at Stanford and IBM. They founded Cuil together with Russell Power, Anna’s former colleague from Google.
First impressions; amount of search results
Results turn out to be not really relevant, but we have to keep in mind that the site has been released just a few hours ago. An example is when we searched for “the next web”, we couldn’t find any results, however “next web” gave relevant results.
The picture you see here is a relative measurement of search results. The red bar is Google, blue is Cuil. When looking at the number of search results, we find that Google’s results are much, much moreextensive. I want to emphasize that its not about the amount of the index, but the relevant results. So far, Cuil does not seem to be relevant in its results. Let’s give it a bit more time, and measure its effectiveness in a month or so.
(read more)
