Ex-Google engineers debut 'Cuil' way to search

SAN FRANCISCO - Anna Patterson's last Internet search engine was so impressive that industry leader Google Inc. bought the technology in 2004 to upgrade its own system

She believes her latest invention is even more valuable — only this time it's not for sale.

Patterson instead intends to upstage  Google ">http://www.google.com/"> which she quit in 2006 to develop a more comprehensive and efficient way to scour the Internet.

The end result is Cuil, pronounced "cool." Backed by $33 million in venture capital, the search engine plans to begin processing requests for the first time Monday

Continue Yahoo News

Cuil

Article said:

For starters, Cuil's search index spans 120 billion Web pages.

Article said:

promising not to retain information about its users' search histories or surfing patterns - something that Google does, much to the consternation of privacy watchdogs.

Sounds kewl to me.

http://www.cuil.com/

Microcuil!!! (time to buy this - results are displayed nicely and the index is probably more than what Live search does anyways )

keeron said:

Microcuil!!! (time to buy this - results are displayed nicely and the index is probably more than what Live search does anyways )

Looks and works good,.. maybe even better then google, certainly better then live.

Interesting results though.

Google is definately finding more results, but how releveant the results are is unknown.

Here are the results of the same query from both.

cuil said:

http://www.cuil.com/search?q=tonya+harding

132,683 results for tonya harding

google said:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGLL%2CGGLL%3A2008-24%2CGGLL%3Aen&q=tonya+harding

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,200,000 for tonya ">http://www.answers.com/harding%26r%3D67&usg=AFQjCNEqvJaZPr-S3DRVRbKiidKudRCLQA"> harding. (0.13 seconds) 

phreaks said:

Interesting results though.

Google is definately finding more results, but how releveant the results are is unknown.

Here are the results of the same query from both.

cuil said:

*snip*

Google -> 0,13 seconds
Cuil -> tens of seconds
Live -> just as fast as google,.. half of the results,..

But like you said, what's the relevence,..

phreaks said:

Interesting results though.

Google is definately finding more results, but how releveant the results are is unknown.

Here are the results of the same query from both.

cuil said:

*snip*

I find their use of Wikipedia extracts as the description text for some results interesting (search for Channel 9 if you haven't seen what I'm talking about:  almost every result on the first page of search results has a Wikipedia extract rather than an extract from the page itself).

I think the site is being overwhelmed at the moment because it's impossibly slow.
I like the layout but it needs to show more results per page. I don't like having to hit 2,3, 4 juts to get as many results as I would in one google page.

I searched for Leo Houlding and it also suggested other British climbers in the Explore By Category box so I guess that's useful.

Maddus Mattus said:

phreaks said:

*snip*

Google -> 0,13 seconds
Cuil -> tens of seconds
Live -> just as fast as google,.. half of the results,..

But like you said, what's the relevence,..

Apparently, I'm not a very safe subject. The first thing I always search for to test a new search engine is of course my own name (who hasn't done that). I type in Tommy Carlier and I get 0 results (even though the auto-complete suggested Tommy Carlier). I turn off Safe Search and I get 6029 results. Ergo, my name is not very safe.

TommyCarlier said:

Maddus Mattus said:

*snip*

Apparently, I'm not a very safe subject. The first thing I always search for to test a new search engine is of course my own name (who hasn't done that). I type in Tommy Carlier and I get 0 results (even though the auto-complete suggested Tommy Carlier). I turn off Safe Search and I get 6029 results. Ergo, my name is not very safe.

It looks interesting and is quite quick although not as quick as Google. 

I like the grouping of types of results into tabs e.g. the company I work for is also the name of a product and it picked up on this and split it.

I am unsure about the order of some of the results it returns e.g. the more relevant stuff "seems" to be on the right.

The inclusion of the pics works quite well although I think I would prefer to have more on one screen.

Windows live search lol

alexmac said:

TommyCarlier said:

*snip*

It looks interesting and is quite quick although not as quick as Google. 

I like the grouping of types of results into tabs e.g. the company I work for is also the name of a product and it picked up on this and split it.

I am unsure about the order of some of the results it returns e.g. the more relevant stuff "seems" to be on the right.

The inclusion of the pics works quite well although I think I would prefer to have more on one screen.

Windows live search lol

alexmac said:

The inclusion of the pics works quite well although I think I would prefer to have more on one screen.

Yeah, it's cool, but cuil seems to mess that up sometimes.

I searched for my name, and it has a link to one of my pro articles on asp101, but with another guys picture in front of it.

TommyCarlier said:

Maddus Mattus said:

*snip*

Apparently, I'm not a very safe subject. The first thing I always search for to test a new search engine is of course my own name (who hasn't done that). I type in Tommy Carlier and I get 0 results (even though the auto-complete suggested Tommy Carlier). I turn off Safe Search and I get 6029 results. Ergo, my name is not very safe.

have you tried putting quotes around your name?

Maddus Mattus said:

TommyCarlier said:

*snip*

have you tried putting quotes around your name?

I have now

Much better. Although I don't see why it would be necessary. Putting quotes around it should be a lot more restrictive.

TommyCarlier said:

Maddus Mattus said:

*snip*

I have now

Much better. Although I don't see why it would be necessary. Putting quotes around it should be a lot more restrictive.

Sucks, its slow and it puts seemingly random images next to results? I also searched for Microsoft and it said it couldnt find any results.. its either buggy or hates microsoft.