Is Qwiki the future of search?

Since the 'alpha' launch I have been playing around with Qwiki, and am pretty impressed overall. Given that search has not changed much since it's inception (things became really serious when Google launched in 1998 and went public in 2004), the space is really wide open for improvement from challengers of all kinds. While search was primarily focused on the best algorithm to serve up the most relevant results, Google changed that when it built a better system to analyze the relationships between websites in order to improve relevancy of those results.

Most recently, innovation around user experience has gained traction for challengers such as Microsoft who have seen fairly large gains with Bing adoption. Bing's success (outside of a huge marketing spend by Microsoft) has primarily been driven by relevancy supported UI design. Just as we are inundated with choice when walking down a supermarket isle, we need design and differentiation of packaging along with clean navigation to help point the way.  Search is no different.

Enter Qwiki. Qwiki's strategy is primarily based upon the fact that we have no time to wade through pages of information in order to piece together what is most relevant to what we are looking for. Put another way, we are lazy. To combat this, Qwiki is working on technology that can compile a relevant 'story' out of all items related to our primary search in order to deliver a succinct narrative.

Now, Qwiki is no Google, but it is not trying to be and not all searches yield results. Qwiki focuses on compiling results based upon popular searches vs. organizing the world's information all in one go...but it can get there eventually. Think of it as a Hollywood version of Wikipedia.org. A living Encyclopedia. An entertained form of Wikipedia for kids and those of us that would prefer a more animated solution to educate and entertain vs. a dry text-book delivery. It's not perfect (reminder: it is still in Alpha), but it is a great step towards evolving the space and challenging the big boys.

Posted via email from Jared Hendler

Is Google falling behind in search as it gets ambushed by Facebook and Microsoft?

They have the best algorithm, many of us have made money on their stock on multiple occasions throughout the years, they truly want to make a difference in the world, and they aren't evil - but is the darling of search about to get it's ass kicked?

Social relevancy isn't everything but it sure counts for a lot these days as we struggle through pages of irrelevant search results. As Microsoft's Bing partners with Facebook to deliver a simple and elegant social search solution it becomes clear that we could all use a little help from our friends. I've even started using Ping on iTunes with suprising results.

Now the #2 and fastest growing search engine (Bing) partners with the #1 in social networking to deliver what may end up being the most powerful combination in search. Facebook already counts for more click-throughs than Google when it comes to media links and you can bet that Microsoft is betting that the same strategy will work for them too. The ability to 'Like' a link as well as share or email search finds directly with your friends on Facebook is a huge plus. Zuckerberg was very accurate when he pointed out this morning during the press conference that search UI has not changed in years and Bing has made great strides in evolving this.

Now, I don't like to see anyone fail, and like everyone else, I am a BIG Google fan.  However this is sure to be a big wakeup call for Google to get their Buzz on...and fast.

Microsoft stock is starting to look a whole lot more interesting.

For details on the features that are launching take a look at the links below.

The Bing Social Layer

Social Layer Features

Posted via email from Jared Hendler

IPTV is finally here...

All of a sudden the technology and GUI experience of being able to watch TV via the internet is upon us. I'm not talking about YouTube or the multitude of UGC sites with a small video window and endless amounts of mindless (yet often entertaining) content.

I'm talking about the fact that most of the major networks hit shows are available to stream online whenever we want to see them. Most are also able to do so in a full screen format.

Accompanying the networks are technologies from both new and veteran technology companies. They are doing deals with all of the major networks and are able to stream this content via the web and serve it up in an on-demand model, full screen and over a standard internet connection. They are like virtual versions of the cable companies that we know of today.

...EXCEPT, they're FREE!

Now don't get too excited, because all that FREE stuff means we still have to watch commercials as someone has to pay for the content. But SO WHAT, we watch commercials now and that is not about to change. What will change is the shape and form in which these sponsorship messages arrive. Some of these new services come with DVR-like capabilities, allowing you to...skip commercials.

But all this is great news. It means we are getting closer to a true on-demand content model. One that may bypass out traditional cable operators, and one that will push brands and their marketing agencies to get off their asses and create compelling content that their clients customers actually want to watch.

Now, most of this content will also be pushed out to multiple devices which will also revolutionize the ad model as we know it. Technologies like Visible World will enable advertisers to push out different versions of a commercial on-the-fly depending on what device is being served at the time.
http://www.visibleworld.com/homepage.php

While things are moving faster than any one of us in the industry imagined, true adoption won't take place until the traditional networks can more easily push their content out to the web, and web content creators are able push to their content to the big screen.

There are also major hurdles for the IPTV delivery companies as they try to figure out what their business model moving forward will be. They face major competition from new entries into this marketplace as the barrier to entry is low given the fact that, unlike the traditional cable companies, there are no infrastructure costs into the home & no licenses to acquire. Basically, anyone with access to money can develop a similar solution and get it up in a fairly short period of time, as Joost found out after the release of Veoh's full-screen player. Many of these companies rely on hosted solutions as their bread and butter money, but peer to peer has proven that this is not the most efficient way to serve video and the costs soon outweigh what you can charge.

What will set these companies apart is content and their ability to quickly sign up the best of the networks in order to get the best following. The problem here is that the networks will NOT be giving exclusivity to anyone. The only option left for them at the end of the day will be to start to create and own their own content as the emerging, traditional networks had to do. Without this, they are purely a commodity play.

For more information or to sign up to be part of the Beta Testing programs of some of these IPTV companies:

Joost: On-DemandTV from major networks on your computer-full screen. (http://www.joost.com)
Veoh: On-DemandTV from major networks on your computer-full screen. (http://www.veoh.com/veohTV/veohTvIntro.html)
Microsoft's LiveStation: On-DemandTV from major networks with the added ability to actually display live TV on your computer-full screen. (http://beta.livestation.com/)

If you want a more in-depth view at how quickly this has been evolving, read two blogs that I wrote within the past year on related subjects:

The death of the networks...and what is a channel anyway?
http://web.mac.com/jaredhendler/iWeb/smashtube/smashblog/2DF1DDEB-1160-45DD-AE83-E0EBD17617B3.html
The New Syndicators...Googled again?
http://web.mac.com/jaredhendler/iWeb/smashtube/smashblog/F0E3EA09-4E3B-43F2-9AC0-393D1542422F.html