Re: Altavista better than Google for genealogy searches

On Tue, 20 May 2008 11:41:11 +0100, John Prentice
<john.prentice@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> sharpened a new quill and
scratched:

>Renia wrote:
>> John Prentice wrote:
>>> A good search engine won't just present you with 10,000 hits in random

>>> order, it will give you what it "thinks" is the best order for you. If

>>> it does it both honestly (putting the commercially-interesting ones 
>>> first is what killed Altavista) and accurately, it's a far more useful

>>> engine, even if another engine gives you 12,000.
>> 
>> Quite. You have to know how to manipulate your search engine.
>
>Now, I'd argue quite the opposite! A really well-designed, 
>well-implemented search engine shouldn't need manipulation - it should 
>give you what you need, when you want it, without having to be tweaked 
>and prodded and its normal behaviour cir***vented.

Yep, and we'll get that soon enough when the 'powers for good' have
the population microchipped as standard. At least we'll be able to
dispense with keyboards then though LOL

Kay

(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.