tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9818962.post5776636605589850201..comments2024-03-20T13:10:11.477+05:30Comments on nanopolitan: Google, book search, copyright lawsAbihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06790560045313883673noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9818962.post-81575585274181711922007-01-30T03:59:00.000+05:302007-01-30T03:59:00.000+05:30>>“Google didn’t get video search right—YouTube di...>>“Google didn’t get video search right—YouTube did,” Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School, said. (Google solved that problem by buying YouTube last year for $1.6 billion.) “Google didn’t get blog search right—technorati.com did,” Wu went on.<br /><br />I find Wu's comment amusing. Google's core strength is in Search and adverising. None of the search engine companies/video sites got video search right. There is no big difference between YouTube video search and Google video search. YouTube was bought over by Google because it had a community not because of the search power. According to <a href="http://weblogs.hitwise.com/leeann-prescott/2006/12/google_blog_search_surpasses_t.html">Hitwise</a>, Google Blog Search traffic over took Technorati's traffic in December.<br /><br />I am with Google on this one. Although Google scans whole the book, it shows only a small section to the user that matches the user's search criteria. Without scanning the whole book, Google can not do a search. Ultimately publishers is going to benefit on this through increased sales. They are not getting internet ruSaravanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10672229591024932593noreply@blogger.com