iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Cuil: The Latest, Baddest AntiGoogle Looks Like A Magazine

MICHAEL LIEDTKE | July 28, 2008 06:45 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It

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, 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.

Cuil had kept a low profile while Patterson, her husband, Tom Costello, and two other former Google engineers _ Russell Power and Louis Monier _ searched for better ways to search.

Now, it's boasting time.

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

Patterson believes that's at least three times the size of Google's index, although there is no way to know for certain. Google stopped publicly quantifying its index's breadth nearly three years ago when the catalog spanned 8.2 billion Web pages.

Cuil won't divulge the formula it has developed to cover a wider swath of the Web with far fewer computers than Google. And Google isn't ceding the point: Spokeswoman Katie Watson said her company still believes its index is the largest.

After getting inquiries about Cuil, Google asserted on its blog Friday that it regularly scans through 1 trillion unique Web links. But Google said it doesn't index them all because they either point to similar content or would diminish the quality of its search results in some other way. The posting didn't quantify the size of Google's index.

A search index's scope is important because information, pictures and content can't be found unless they're stored in a database. But Cuil believes it will outshine Google in several other ways, including its method for identifying and displaying pertinent results.

Rather than trying to mimic Google's method of ranking the quantity and quality of links to Web sites, Patterson says Cuil's technology drills into the actual content of a page. And Cuil's results will be presented in a more magazine-like format instead of just a vertical stack of Web links. Cuil's results are displayed with more photos spread horizontally across the page and include sidebars that can be clicked on to learn more about topics related to the original search request.

Finally, Cuil is hoping to attract traffic by promising not to retain information about its users' search histories or surfing patterns _ something that Google does, much to the consternation of privacy watchdogs.

After making so many bold promises, Cuil got off to a rocky start Monday as its computers were overwhelmed by curious Web surfers. As of late Monday afternoon, even simple search requests were still being greeted with this message: "No results because of high load."

Cuil is just the latest in a long line of Google challengers.

The list includes swaggering startups like Teoma (whose technology became the backbone of Ask.com), Vivisimo, Snap, Mahalo and, most recently, Powerset, which was acquired by Microsoft Corp. this month.

Even after investing hundreds of millions of dollars on search, both Microsoft and Yahoo Inc. have been losing ground to Google. Through May, Google held a 62 percent share of the U.S. search market followed by Yahoo at 21 percent and Microsoft at 8.5 percent, according to comScore Inc.

Google has become so synonymous with Internet search that it may no longer matter how good Cuil or any other challenger is, said Gartner Inc. analyst Allen Weiner.

"Search has become as much about branding as anything else," Weiner said. "I doubt (Cuil) will be keeping anyone at Google awake at night."

Google welcomed Cuil to the fray with its usual mantra about its rivals. "Having great competitors is a huge benefit to us and everyone in the search space," Watson said. "It makes us all work harder, and at the end of the day our users benefit from that."

But this will be the first time that Google has battled a general-purpose search engine created by its own alumni. It probably won't be the last time, given that Google now has nearly 20,000 employees.

Patterson joined Google in 2004 after she built and sold Recall, a search index that probed old Web sites for the Internet Archive. She and Power worked on the same team at Google.

Although he also worked for Google for a short time, Monier is best known as the former chief technology officer of AltaVista, which was considered the best search engine before Google came along in 1998. Monier also helped build the search engine on eBay's online auction site.

The trio of former Googlers are teaming up with Patterson's husband, Costello, who built a once-promising search engine called Xift in the late 1990s. He later joined IBM Corp., where he worked on an "analytic engine" called WebFountain.

Costello's Irish heritage inspired Cuil's odd name. It was derived from a character named Finn McCuill in Celtic folklore.

Patterson enjoyed her time at Google, but became disenchanted with the company's approach to search. "Google has looked pretty much the same for 10 years now," she said, "and I can guarantee it will look the same a year from now."

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 ...
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 ...
Filed by Dave Burdick  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 174
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
11:26 PM on 08/01/2008
Interestingly, Cuil's return results have a 3-column format, with a picture associated with each return result.

I think they've copied the Huffington Post, in the layout, look and feel department... Except you can't talk back to Cuil.

and big drawback with Cuil. No wagadog.

arf arf!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:48 AM on 07/31/2008
Cuil seems to have the same scattershot approach that the other search engines have. It returns lots of irrelevant poop when fed a specific search term. Or maybe I don't know what quote marks are supposed to do. If I put in "Joe Smith," I don't want stuff about Joes or stuff about Smiths, or stuff where the words Joe and Smith appear several pages apart. I want stuff about Smiths named Joe.
04:00 AM on 07/31/2008
Not "COOL" At All...

Actually, cuil sucks. It reports inaccurate and misleading information. Lots of problems. Try this: search for dog stew (2 words). In the first results, you will see a logo I designed for a small Portland, Oregon company called Dog Stew (www.dogstew.net). The logo is accompanying a *completely unrelated* company called Merrick Working Dog Stew. This logo is trademarked for the Portland Dog Stew company. It has no association with Merrick. So WHY are they connected?

This is but one small example of LOTS of related errors with www.cuil.com. Many other searches give mediocre, if not inferior, results when compared to Google.
03:03 AM on 07/31/2008
I tried searching for porn with Cuil. I was not satisfied.
11:46 PM on 07/30/2008
It's bad alrighty -- real bad. One of my queries netted 100 hits on Google -- zero on Cuil. That is, of course, when I wasn't getting an overload message from Cuil -- I guess they had a major crash on the first day. Not so impressive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StephenJK
All your consciousness are belong to us
07:40 PM on 07/30/2008
Everyone just Cuil it, OK?
07:21 PM on 07/30/2008
Tried a search with multiple words and got zero results (Google gave plenty of results).

CUIL won't be killing Google anytime soon.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:11 PM on 07/30/2008
It was down nearly the entire first 2 days of operation.
Results are sporadic and inaccurate.
Not a good way to start. Not the Google-killer they said it would be.
05:22 PM on 07/30/2008
I tried Cuil and I WAS VERY MUCH LESS THAN IMPRESSED. The results were no more helpful than those I get from Google although not as outright commercial! While the first page or two of Google results are mostly commercial sites, e-bay, etc. trying to direct one to buy something rather than provide useful information, the Cuil layout is interesting; but if the responses are less than helpful it doesn't matter how pretty they are. Personally I get more useful information from Dogpile.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
andvoodoo2
My micro-bio is teeming with biodiversity.
04:57 PM on 07/30/2008
I just tried Cuil.
When I Google my name, in quotes, I get many results (I'm a writer). Cuil produced no results for my name and I know there are other people out there with my same name and middle initial.
When I tried my teenage kid's name on Cuil, I got more than 20,000 results! (The results for her were only listed on 3 pages.) Her last name is different than mine and very odd. Google produces many accurate hits for her (she's a musician).
I am less than impressed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
gulopartisan
My micro-bio is still empty.
12:54 PM on 07/30/2008
Just did a quick test of Cuil, and I was not impressed. I got 240K hits on my own name (unlikely), and in the first 20 pages, they were around 25% duplicates. More than half were obsolete information, and a huge percentage were false hits (links to searches that found the same info Cuil had found directly, and hits to blog pages that the reference had expired from).

I ran a search on a uniquely named historic personage (Salome), and the first five pages of hits were simply worthless. Also discovered that I couldn't use +Salome +Strauss to refine the search. No refining allowed, apparently.

All in all, not impressive. Google's strength is not their index's size, but how intelligently they can pull things from it. If a library doesn't have ways to find the books, the bigger it is, the LESS useful.
11:27 AM on 07/30/2008
I'll give it a few weeks to smooth out just for the privacy aspect of it (assuming they stick to that).

Calm down, people. I've been in software for 30 years and it's amazing that ANYthing works anymore it has become so freakin' complex.
01:00 AM on 07/30/2008
It's really funny. When I search for "cuil" it doesn't return the link to www.cuil.com. If I search for "Cuil", with a capital letter, it does. Another thing that is missing is a "Did you mean?" feature. Searched for "mississipi" (only one p) and, nope, it didn't suggest the correct version.

However, it's a brand new search engine and I'm willing to wait before I declare it DoA.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Mario Almonte
11:54 PM on 07/29/2008
I also tried this, but was annoyed that it doesn't attempt to at least return results chronologically.
There doesn't seem to be much logic to what it returns.
09:02 PM on 07/29/2008
I just went and tried this so called search engine again. What a waste of time. They really ought to just shut this thing down until it works properly; otherwise the founders are guaranteed to have a complete dud on their hands.