Nearly 12 months later, let's address just that...
'Cuil' is a search engine, much like Google, Yahoo, Bing, and several others. And, like those several others, it suffers from the travesty of seeming practically irrelevant next to Google's market share. So, equipped with a unique algorithm, Cuil looked to differentiate itself from the typical expectations of search engines.Is Cuil worth a shot? Sure. I couldn't pretend to be in the search engine optimization business if I didn't think so. However, the real question is, does Cuil have what it takes to gain a significant market share on Google, which stands as the measuring bar of the search engine industry? That is worth exploring, and leads us to the next part of the initial question: should Google be afraid of Cuil? While this type of headline provokes an eyebrow raise and quick glance (at minimum) the answer, simply, is "no." At least, not yet.
Google has nothing to worry about. While Google does have some recently-chatted-about shortcomings in the real-time versus historical-based search engine algorithm debate, Cuil has not yet shown much that Google can, or should learn from.
The article I previously cited notes:
"Unlike Google, Cuil ranks web pages according to a unique relevance algorithm. Google, on the other hand, places a great deal of importance on the link popularity of a specific web page, and minimizes the relevance of terms used on the actual page. The end result is that a search on Cuil will reveal different, and often more interesting results than a standard Google query."
It's no secret that links are an important part of Google's algorithm. But make no mistake about it - links play second fiddle to content. Google has done a commendable job ridding top SERPs (search engine results pages) of "link farms."
But let's be honest. Saying Cuil will reveal "different" results than a standard Google query is a legitimate statement. Saying that Cuil will produce "more interesting" results than a standard query...well, "more interesting" is in the eye of the beholder.
On multiple test phrase searches, Cuil certainly provided some "more interesting" results than Google. But don't mistake "interesting" with "better." I found myself on a few occasions baffled at how Cuil provided the results it did, and not in a good way. On one occasion, Cuil provided me with a link to a blog entry that never once mentioned the name or anything about the topic that I searched, and that was a page two result.
If Cuil wants to compete with Google it will need to show relevance in its search queries, which Google has done a very good job delivering. If it wants to create the search algorithm of tomorrow, it should target real-time search, which Twitter and Collecta are doing a remarkable, yet limited, job of providing.
Questions? Comments? Feel free to leave them here. Looking for real estate search engine optimization? Contact Delta Media Group's Sean Cutright at scutright@deltagroup.com.
Posts
